THE POLITICAL ARENA!!! Political Gladiators Inside!!

Moderators: Ron, Jim Price

Locked
User avatar
lonewolf
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 6249
Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
Location: Anywhere, Earth
Contact:

Post by lonewolf »

Hawk wrote: Proving a point that I have tried to make more than once. For the most part, the conservatives on RP are intelligent people. You (and the rest of the right wing conservatives) can't understand why all people aren't as smart as you. You judge less intelligent people as though they ARE as smart as you, but they are just lazy, or they don't care.


Some might be lazy, but some can only achieve a given level of success that's not up to YOUR personal standards. I think some successful, intelligent people don't give themselves enough credit for the success they have achieved and that leaves them with the silly notion that, hey, If I can do it anyone and everyone can do it.

Some people can only handle simple jobs and that's a fact. And those jobs don't pay enough to provide for a family and health care. So either charity or government needs to help out. That's what a decent society would / should do.
Yeah, I know...its tough being a 1 percenter. :wink:

1st of all, I did a RP search to see where I used the term LAZY. There were 4 instances of the term LAZY in my posts:

1. I said that ALL VOCALISTS ARE LAZY. I'm sticking to my guns on that one. :lol:
2. I disagreed with somebody who wrote that welfare poor are lazy. I said that they are comfortable, not lazy.
3. The other two were quoted from somebody else.

What? Do you think I'm stupid or something? I don't expect for a second that anybody live up to my standards. I realize that there are all levels of intelligence, ambition, sacrifice, fortitude, discipline and perseverance. It takes a certain amount of all of these to be successful...mostly ambition and fortitude--not brains.

People who cannot fend for themselves is one thing. I don't have a problem subsidizing them. However, I strongly object to providing a living for what I call "professional freeloaders."

I observed this new profession first hand as a landlord when their schemes and methods were literally my business. They do everything to milk the system, squander what little they have and let their children suffer. The only way these people deserve a government subsidy is from a jail cell. Unfortunately, I found out first hand that the government does not consider this fraud.

This is not the exception anymore. Its the rule and it has become a widespread profession. Don't think for a moment that these people are stupid or can't work...on the contrary, they are extremely clever and know every angle and every loophole to secure the maximum income for their free living. It has become generational as mothers teach it to their daughters.

This is not my opinion. This is a first hand observation and I often had to discuss "business" with them. I seriously doubt that you get to see any of this as you do not come in contact with the poor nearly as much as I did during those 10 years.

On the other hand, I know many people who worked hard all their lives and suddenly had misfortune. They were refused government aid because they did not know how to milk the system. These are the people the system was designed to help and the system failed them.

The welfare poor are not lazy at all. They are, in fact, very good at their profession.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
Hawk
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 5332
Joined: Friday Mar 12, 2004
Location: Central PA

Post by Hawk »

lonewolf wrote:
Hawk wrote: Proving a point that I have tried to make more than once. For the most part, the conservatives on RP are intelligent people. You (and the rest of the right wing conservatives) can't understand why all people aren't as smart as you. You judge less intelligent people as though they ARE as smart as you, but they are just lazy, or they don't care.


Some might be lazy, but some can only achieve a given level of success that's not up to YOUR personal standards. I think some successful, intelligent people don't give themselves enough credit for the success they have achieved and that leaves them with the silly notion that, hey, If I can do it anyone and everyone can do it.

Some people can only handle simple jobs and that's a fact. And those jobs don't pay enough to provide for a family and health care. So either charity or government needs to help out. That's what a decent society would / should do.
Yeah, I know...its tough being a 1 percenter. :wink:

1st of all, I did a RP search to see where I used the term LAZY. There were 4 instances of the term LAZY in my posts:

1. I said that ALL VOCALISTS ARE LAZY. I'm sticking to my guns on that one. :lol:
2. I disagreed with somebody who wrote that welfare poor are lazy. I said that they are comfortable, not lazy.
3. The other two were quoted from somebody else.

What? Do you think I'm stupid or something? I don't expect for a second that anybody live up to my standards. I realize that there are all levels of intelligence, ambition, sacrifice, fortitude, discipline and perseverance. It takes a certain amount of all of these to be successful...mostly ambition and fortitude--not brains.

People who cannot fend for themselves is one thing. I don't have a problem subsidizing them. However, I strongly object to providing a living for what I call "professional freeloaders."

I observed this new profession first hand as a landlord when their schemes and methods were literally my business. They do everything to milk the system, squander what little they have and let their children suffer. The only way these people deserve a government subsidy is from a jail cell. Unfortunately, I found out first hand that the government does not consider this fraud.

This is not the exception anymore. Its the rule and it has become a widespread profession. Don't think for a moment that these people are stupid or can't work...on the contrary, they are extremely clever and know every angle and every loophole to secure the maximum income for their free living. It has become generational as mothers teach it to their daughters.

This is not my opinion. This is a first hand observation and I often had to discuss "business" with them. I seriously doubt that you get to see any of this as you do not come in contact with the poor nearly as much as I did during those 10 years.

On the other hand, I know many people who worked hard all their lives and suddenly had misfortune. They were refused government aid because they did not know how to milk the system. These are the people the system was designed to help and the system failed them.

The welfare poor are not lazy at all. They are, in fact, very good at their profession.
While I quoted you I used the word "you" in a plural way. Sorry about the confusion as it was my fault. While not everyone used the word "lazy" it is often implied.

We both agree (who wouldn't) that the freeloaders as you described ARE a problem and I don't believe anyone on the right or the left want to give them the free ride they have mastered.

Unfortunately they get lumped in with the people who do need assistance. I see most right wing posts so dedicated to taking down the freeloaders that they would take down (even though I doubt they really want to) those who need help, whether temporarily or permanently.

I very much care about the people who need assistance (like people who have achieved their highest possible success at a minimum wage job).

How do we take down the freeloaders without increasing bureaucracy ? Obviously, if it could be done, everyone would be for it.
www.showtimesoundllc.com
Flashpoint!
SKYE 2.0
Triple Threat
User avatar
songsmith
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 6108
Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
Location: The Wood of Bells

Post by songsmith »

Whatever happened to the Clinton "Work-Fare" idea? He decreased the welfare rolls more than any other president, in some states more than any 3 administrations. As soon as they had to get up for work everyday anyway, they started climbing the ladder, and gov't assistance became more of a burden to them than an income stream.
I've always advocated the "Red Cross Store" idea of the pre-FDR days: No cash involved. You don't get food-stamps, you get a bag of groceries. No soda-pop or pre-made food, if you're really in dire straits, you'll be fine eating brussel sprouts and cabbage from local growers, if not, you're just not hungry. We have to find a way not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, to get services to the elderly and especially children, whose only crime is being born to people who can't or don't support them.
I haven't forgotten the original point that the rightwing media demonizes the poor/lionizes the rich, either. The cons are effective at covering complex problems with overly simplistic labels and catch-phrases. It's cute and easy to chew, but it solves nothing.
User avatar
lonewolf
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 6249
Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
Location: Anywhere, Earth
Contact:

Post by lonewolf »

The first thing would be to dismiss the findings of psychologists who couldn't find their ass with their hands in their back pocket.

I deleted "BIPOLAR MY ASS" from the previous post cuz i didn't expect anybody to know what I was talking about.

BIPOLAR MY ASS

The 1st thing a professional freeloader has to do is get certified as partially or fully disabled. Its all downhill from there.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
Hawk
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 5332
Joined: Friday Mar 12, 2004
Location: Central PA

Post by Hawk »

songsmith wrote:Whatever happened to the Clinton "Work-Fare" idea? He decreased the welfare rolls more than any other president, in some states more than any 3 administrations. As soon as they had to get up for work everyday anyway, they started climbing the ladder, and gov't assistance became more of a burden to them than an income stream.
I've always advocated the "Red Cross Store" idea of the pre-FDR days: No cash involved. You don't get food-stamps, you get a bag of groceries. No soda-pop or pre-made food, if you're really in dire straits, you'll be fine eating brussel sprouts and cabbage from local growers, if not, you're just not hungry. We have to find a way not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, to get services to the elderly and especially children, whose only crime is being born to people who can't or don't support them.
I haven't forgotten the original point that the rightwing media demonizes the poor/lionizes the rich, either. The cons are effective at covering complex problems with overly simplistic labels and catch-phrases. It's cute and easy to chew, but it solves nothing.
Given that a conservative says this...
lonewolf wrote:
People who cannot fend for themselves is one thing. I don't have a problem subsidizing them. However, I strongly object to providing a living for what I call "professional freeloaders."
...we at least have some common ground. I totally agree with Jeff in that statement.

Now for a psychological discussion. Are traits like fortitude, passion and ambition equal in all people ? Are these traits like intelligence in that some people are born without strong ambition ?

Yes, all freeloaders have a strong desire, passion and fortitude to beat the system. We do need to take them down. But some people who only achieve minimum wage jobs likely don't have the same passion to do what it takes to be successful in a monetarily wealthy way, yet may be wealthy in other ways. (People who are happy with a lot of good friends are wealthy beyond anything money could buy.)
www.showtimesoundllc.com
Flashpoint!
SKYE 2.0
Triple Threat
User avatar
lonewolf
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 6249
Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
Location: Anywhere, Earth
Contact:

Post by lonewolf »

songsmith wrote:Whatever happened to the Clinton "Work-Fare" idea? He decreased the welfare rolls more than any other president, in some states more than any 3 administrations. As soon as they had to get up for work everyday anyway, they started climbing the ladder, and gov't assistance became more of a burden to them than an income stream.
It took a few years for the professional freeloaders to find their way around that one.

The result? Disabled Professional Freeloader with BI-POLAR syndrome.

They started milking SSI which, in turn, exempted them from work requirements.

Nothing like a government solution, eh Johnny?
Last edited by lonewolf on Saturday Oct 15, 2011, edited 1 time in total.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
Hawk
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 5332
Joined: Friday Mar 12, 2004
Location: Central PA

Post by Hawk »

lonewolf wrote:
songsmith wrote:Whatever happened to the Clinton "Work-Fare" idea? He decreased the welfare rolls more than any other president, in some states more than any 3 administrations. As soon as they had to get up for work everyday anyway, they started climbing the ladder, and gov't assistance became more of a burden to them than an income stream.
It took a few years for the professional freeloaders to find there way around that one.

The result? Disabled Professional Freeloader with BI-POLAR syndrome.

They started milking SSI which, in turn, exempted them from work requirements.

Nothing like a government solution, eh Johnny?
I don't doubt that some people suffer from bi-polar and can't hold a job, truly mentally sick people. While many freeloader fake some disability. How do we seperate them ?
www.showtimesoundllc.com
Flashpoint!
SKYE 2.0
Triple Threat
User avatar
lonewolf
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 6249
Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
Location: Anywhere, Earth
Contact:

Post by lonewolf »

Hawk wrote: Given that a conservative says this...
lonewolf wrote:
People who cannot fend for themselves is one thing. I don't have a problem subsidizing them. However, I strongly object to providing a living for what I call "professional freeloaders."
...we at least have some common ground. I totally agree with Jeff in that statement.

Now for a psychological discussion. Are traits like fortitude, passion and ambition equal in all people ? Are these traits like intelligence in that some people are born without strong ambition ?

Yes, all freeloaders have a strong desire, passion and fortitude to beat the system. We do need to take them down. But some people who only achieve minimum wage jobs likely don't have the same passion to do what it takes to be successful in a monetarily wealthy way, yet may be wealthy in other ways. (People who are happy with a lot of good friends are wealthy beyond anything money could buy.)
I am not a conservative...I am a pragmatic libertarian. Thats not right or left...its NORTH! It just so happens that many conservative fiscal beliefs happen to coincide with libertarian beliefs as do a few liberal social beliefs like personal freedom.

Unfortunately, neither the left nor the right practices what they preach.

The only difference between UC Joe and me is that Joe wants pure libertarianism and I am pragmatic enough to realize that is not possible.

A perfect world would need no government. Let me know when you find one.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
Hawk
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 5332
Joined: Friday Mar 12, 2004
Location: Central PA

Post by Hawk »

lonewolf wrote:
Hawk wrote: Given that a conservative says this...
lonewolf wrote:
People who cannot fend for themselves is one thing. I don't have a problem subsidizing them. However, I strongly object to providing a living for what I call "professional freeloaders."
...we at least have some common ground. I totally agree with Jeff in that statement.

Now for a psychological discussion. Are traits like fortitude, passion and ambition equal in all people ? Are these traits like intelligence in that some people are born without strong ambition ?

Yes, all freeloaders have a strong desire, passion and fortitude to beat the system. We do need to take them down. But some people who only achieve minimum wage jobs likely don't have the same passion to do what it takes to be successful in a monetarily wealthy way, yet may be wealthy in other ways. (People who are happy with a lot of good friends are wealthy beyond anything money could buy.)
I am not a conservative...I am a pragmatic libertarian. Thats not right or left...its NORTH! It just so happens that many conservative fiscal beliefs happen to coincide with libertarian beliefs as do a few liberal social beliefs like personal freedom.

Unfortunately, neither the left nor the right practices what they preach.

The only difference between UC Joe and me is that Joe wants pure libertarianism and I am pragmatic enough to realize that is not possible.

A perfect world would need no government. Let me know when you find one.
Given that you are a supporter of conservative political policies (at least as far as I see it) you are by definition a conservative.

However a Libertarian who calls himself pragmatic seems to imply that you recognise some flaws that Joe does not recognize with pure Libertarianism ? BTW I have fun pointing out some of those flaws to Joe.
www.showtimesoundllc.com
Flashpoint!
SKYE 2.0
Triple Threat
User avatar
lonewolf
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 6249
Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
Location: Anywhere, Earth
Contact:

Post by lonewolf »

Hawk wrote:Given that you are a supporter of conservative political policies (at least as far as I see it) you are by definition a conservative.
Your definition as seen thru the eyes of a liberal...I already explained that FISCAL ones are in common. I do not subscribe to the conservative cold war mentality on defense. I also believe that marriage is religious and has no place in government for any reason. You wanna get married? Fine, don't make me pay for it.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
Banned
Posts: 0
Joined: Thursday Jul 18, 2024

Post by Banned »

Hawk wrote:
However a Libertarian who calls himself pragmatic seems to imply that you recognise some flaws that Joe does not recognize with pure Libertarianism ? BTW I have fun pointing out some of those flaws to Joe.
Try opening your eyes to the endless flaws in your government once in a while. The only flaws you think you see are those your tainted by your liberal, limited mind. You think people keeping their money and making their own decisions is a flaw. I see that as approaching utopia.

@ Lonewolf. I do realize that there will never be a libertarian world in my lifetime. Any movement towards economic and personal freedom is a positive.
User avatar
songsmith
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 6108
Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
Location: The Wood of Bells

Post by songsmith »

Joe, we'll do that when you see the flaws in the utopian fantasy-world of laissez-faire economics. When you figure out that obscene executive salaries cost you money personally, and looking the other direction only allows business to pull from your personal pocket. When you realize that social conservatism is elitism defined, and there is no way you can simply do anything you want without affecting someone. The shortest, quickest route to anywhere is right down the middle.
Banned
Posts: 0
Joined: Thursday Jul 18, 2024

Post by Banned »

songsmith wrote:Joe, we'll do that when you see the flaws in the utopian fantasy-world of laissez-faire economics. When you figure out that obscene executive salaries cost you money personally, and looking the other direction only allows business to pull from your personal pocket. When you realize that social conservatism is elitism defined, and there is no way you can simply do anything you want without affecting someone. The shortest, quickest route to anywhere is right down the middle.
Wow, a Marxist pointing out flaws in laissez-faire economics. How insightful.

When will you see that extreme authoritarian government costs all of us, who pay taxes, money? And much more that any corporation.

Why are you telling me about social conservatism? Where have you ever noticed that I am social conservative? By my religious lifestyle? ha ha Where do you make this up from? Or does lying just come that easy to you?

If you are worried about doing something that affects people, Libertarianism does less of it than any other form of government, especially this authoritarian, nanny state government. (that your defend at every breath)
User avatar
songsmith
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 6108
Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
Location: The Wood of Bells

Post by songsmith »

undercoverjoe wrote: Wow, a Marxist pointing out flaws in laissez-faire economics. How insightful.

When will you see that extreme authoritarian government costs all of us, who pay taxes, money? And much more that any corporation.

If you are worried about doing something that affects people, Libertarianism does less of it than any other form of government, especially this authoritarian, nanny state government. (that your defend at every breath)
Where do you get that I'm Marxist, joe, other than my not believing every sick-ass word that comes out of your mouth? It just comes easy for you doesn't it? 8)
I don't see that extreme authoritarian government that you do, because it doesn't exist, except on the rightwing media, and in your mushy mind.
Finally, Libertarianism affects the MOST people, because we live in a SOCIETY whether Libertoons like it or not, and you cannot live the effed-up life you choose without affecting someone else. It's a fantastical pipe-dream, an outright impossibility, and a fictional state, born of paranoid delusion, and fed by other delusional paranoids. And those who make money selling delusions to paranoids.
Banned
Posts: 0
Joined: Thursday Jul 18, 2024

Post by Banned »

Of course you don't see this government as anything but perfect. You worship it like a religion. It has become your religion, you see this government having the answers to all needs and concerns.

We are $14.8 Trillion in Debt and the powers that be in DC are not talking about balancing the budget. That is just a start, they need to reduce spending way more than revenues to start paying down that debt. No, all they want is to spend more and more. (Invest and support is their new catch word).

There is nothing more delusional than having a $14.8 Trillion Debt and doing nothing to change it.

Oh, you thinking you post anything beyond total bullshit is more delusional.
f.sciarrillo
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thursday Oct 28, 2004
Location: Not here ..

Post by f.sciarrillo »

Johnny isn't a Marxist, sheesh, he claims to be an independent, but we all know that is a bunch of crap. :lol: That is a joke, Johnny, so don't get your feathers all ruffled :)

I think of this way, things for the left aren't looking too good. Then they aren't looking too good for the right either. But the way it looks, the left might be in a lot of trouble come 2012. Even Obama knows that he might not get re-elected. And the left is trying everything they can to demagogue the right and anyone who is involved with the right.

Even though it doesn't really mean anything right now: The latest poll results show that Romney is within two points of Obama. If the election was held right now, they are saying that Romney would beat him. I still don't believe it. I heard a couple of megaphones for the right say that Romney is the only candidate Obama fears. How true is that? I haven't heard it from Obama's mouth, so I won't believe it. But I did hear Obama say that his chances for re-election will be a titanic kind of undertaking. Of course we will have to see.
Music Rocks!
Banned
Posts: 0
Joined: Thursday Jul 18, 2024

Post by Banned »

"The first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

Joe Biden
User avatar
onegunguitar
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 2080
Joined: Wednesday Aug 10, 2005
Contact:

Post by onegunguitar »

undercoverjoe wrote:"The first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

Joe Biden
You know what I'm sick off hearing? The blacks(most anyways) always gotta say that they're "African-Americans". If they were born in the USA then that makes them Americans,period!!! I don't go around saying I'm an Irish-American!!! Yea,we all know their ancestors came from Africa,so what... :twisted: :twisted: Anyways,back to your regularly scheduled political arguments. :lol: :lol: :lol:
http://www.myspace.com/musicnaildriver
get on your knees and bow
or learn a lesson in violence
User avatar
songsmith
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 6108
Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
Location: The Wood of Bells

Post by songsmith »

undercoverjoe wrote:Of course you don't see this government as anything but perfect. You worship it like a religion. It has become your religion, you see this government having the answers to all needs and concerns.

We are $14.8 Trillion in Debt and the powers that be in DC are not talking about balancing the budget. That is just a start, they need to reduce spending way more than revenues to start paying down that debt. No, all they want is to spend more and more. (Invest and support is their new catch word).

There is nothing more delusional than having a $14.8 Trillion Debt and doing nothing to change it.

Oh, you thinking you post anything beyond total bullshit is more delusional.
Funny... I don't ever recall saying or even sort of say that government is perfect. I do, however, constantly say that it's better than all the paranoia coming from your keyboard.
To wit: You yammer on and on about the debt as if it's just the worst problem facing the country today. This is very telling. I can surmise alot about you from this stance. The house is burned to the ground, your children were inside, everything's gone.... and you're worried about how you're going to pay the insurance company. You never talk about jobs, except to parrot the talkshows..."Oh, we have to give the people who f**ked us more money, more tax breaks, more, more, MORE! so they can grace us with some low-paying jobs. It's the only moral thing to do!"
We all get that you need somebody to blame, and that you refuse to allow everyone else the same "freedom" you reserve for yourself, this is the Libertarian extremist way to think.
I like that you used the word, "delusional" in your post, it shows that you might know what it means, if not that it applies to you. I can trade barbs with you all day and night, it's not at all difficult for me. You're as predictable as you are crazy, and never seem to notice that I'm drawing you further down Looney Street with every reply. Occasionally you cross the line and try to affect my personal life, but in every case, the person you try to turn against me has laughed about it with me instead. Your actions speak for themselves. Obama & I will never be your worst enemy, we all know who that is. :roll:
User avatar
lonewolf
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 6249
Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
Location: Anywhere, Earth
Contact:

Post by lonewolf »

songsmith wrote:You never talk about jobs, except to parrot the talkshows..."Oh, we have to give the people who f**ked us more money, more tax breaks, more, more, MORE! so they can grace us with some low-paying jobs. It's the only moral thing to do!"
They don't have to grace anybody with jack shit, low paying or not. Since when has providing jobs become an obligation? In a free society, it is not an obligation and never has been.

The politicians know this. Bitch at them for giving preferential treatment, but don't blame companies because politicians bought them a beer and they drank it.

The only way to stop it is to eliminate ALL business related subsidies and programs from the federal budget. Not just the ones the left wants and not just the ones the right wants, but ALL OF THEM. Eliminate all the programs the neocons say will "create jobs" and all the programs the neoprogs say will "create jobs".

"Create jobs". What an effing joke. Politicians must think they're playing SimCity or something. I laugh my ass off and mock them with my Nixon voice every time I hear one of them say "create jobs" or "the American people".
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
User avatar
songsmith
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 6108
Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
Location: The Wood of Bells

Post by songsmith »

lonewolf wrote:
songsmith wrote:You never talk about jobs, except to parrot the talkshows..."Oh, we have to give the people who f**ked us more money, more tax breaks, more, more, MORE! so they can grace us with some low-paying jobs. It's the only moral thing to do!"
They don't have to grace anybody with jack shit, low paying or not. Since when has providing jobs become an obligation? In a free society, it is not an obligation and never has been.
Providing jobs became an obligation when the right started handing out tax breaks to "JOB CREATORS." They got the cake, but created the jobs ELSEWHERE. Conservatives respond diametrically differently when asked if business deserves a perk, than when asked if business has a responsibility. More elitism. One class grinds the flour, one class gets the gravy.
Since when has enriching the elite become an obligation?
User avatar
lonewolf
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 6249
Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
Location: Anywhere, Earth
Contact:

Post by lonewolf »

songsmith wrote:
lonewolf wrote:
songsmith wrote:You never talk about jobs, except to parrot the talkshows..."Oh, we have to give the people who f**ked us more money, more tax breaks, more, more, MORE! so they can grace us with some low-paying jobs. It's the only moral thing to do!"
They don't have to grace anybody with jack shit, low paying or not. Since when has providing jobs become an obligation? In a free society, it is not an obligation and never has been.
Providing jobs became an obligation when the right started handing out tax breaks to "JOB CREATORS." They got the cake, but created the jobs ELSEWHERE. Conservatives respond diametrically differently when asked if business deserves a perk, than when asked if business has a responsibility. More elitism. One class grinds the flour, one class gets the gravy.
Since when has enriching the elite become an obligation?
Thats exactly why I added the next two paragraphs that you conveniently snipped out.

I, in a much more concise and neutral manner, pointed out the folly of government on both sides of the spectrum, whereas you, in a somewhat less concise manner, pointed out the folly of one side of the spectrum as viewed from the uber-left populist side.

Down the middle, eh? I don't think so. Marxist? Nah...its not coherent and structured enough for that. How does populist-statist sound?

EDIT: Show me in the 2' thick tax code (or anywhere else) where they made it an obligation for companies to provide jobs.
Last edited by lonewolf on Saturday Oct 15, 2011, edited 1 time in total.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
Banned
Posts: 0
Joined: Thursday Jul 18, 2024

Post by Banned »

Who is giving billions to these green solar panel companies to create green jobs? The left. Who is keeping the billions of our tax dollars when the companies file for bankruptcy? The CEOs who happen to be Democrat money cats for Obama. Occupy Wallstreet (Occupy Hypocrisy) should be in front Solyndra and the White House.

How he can talk about the right connections to corporations when these Solyndra and SolarPower scandals are being investigated is the definition of delusion. :roll: :roll:
f.sciarrillo
Diamond Member
Diamond Member
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thursday Oct 28, 2004
Location: Not here ..

Post by f.sciarrillo »

Image
Music Rocks!
User avatar
songsmith
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 6108
Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
Location: The Wood of Bells

Post by songsmith »

lonewolf wrote:[
Down the middle, eh? I don't think so. Marxist? Nah...its not coherent and structured enough for that. How does populist-statist sound?

EDIT: Show me in the 2' thick tax code (or anywhere else) where they made it an obligation for companies to provide jobs.
Yes, down the middle. That is my assessment, and my political stance. You may attempt to define me, but it carries no water outside your own little world. I make my definitions, as I have stated many, many times, and I will never accept hard-right definitions of anything from constitutionality to whether the sky is up. From way over there on the right, the middle looks like the left.Now, in the same 2-feet-thick tax code, show me where it says more wealth equals less taxation, yet that is indeed, the case. Show me where it says that CEO's should receive their pay in whatever way is taxed the least, but labor should not. Show me where it specifically says the bulk of the tax burden should be on the middle-class. Where the tax code says the secretary in the steno-pool should pay a larger percentage than Warren Buffett?
Yeah, I didn't think so.
Locked