Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 10:11am PT
|
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 10:33am PT
|
the only way to make us all financially equal is to makes us all POOR
of course, even in noko and cuba and china, the party leaders live lives of luxury while the majority of people are virtually destitute
but it's the capitalist rich who are evil?
|
|
nature
climber
Tuscon Again! India! India! Hawaii! LA?!?!
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 10:35am PT
|
minus the top 2% we're well on our way to having just exactly that, BW.
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 10:45am PT
|
do you mean we're on our way to having party leaders oppress us, nature? does that include barry, et al?
you think the capitalist rich are going to give everything they've created to the gov or do you think the gov is going to take it? can you think of any reason the capitalists would give their riches to the gov? do you think the gov would be better managers of all that wealth and that we would all get our "fair share"? do you think the gov would be able to increase that wealth (and i don't mean printing more money)?
do you really think we're close to being destitute? you think our standard of living (even in detroit) approaches cuba or noko or rural china?
or do you think the capitalists want us to be destitute, which would mean we wouldn't have any money to buy 'stuff' they make, which, in turn, would mean they couldn't make any more money?
please explain, nature or anybody who thinks similarly
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 10:49am PT
|
Nothing sucks more than that moment during a argument when you realize you're wrong.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 10:53am PT
|
bookworm, why are you such a pessimist. Why can't we all be rich? What if we got to keep the fruit of our hard work, rather than having it siphoned off to the parasites on Wall Street?
Why do you buy into their line of self-serving bullsh#t?
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 11:20am PT
|
FROM POWERLINE BLOG TODAY:
"House Democrats, most of whom were infuriated by the tax deal that President Obama struck with Republicans, have given up on their threatened efforts to block the compromise. The Hill reports: "For House Democrats, fight over tax cuts is now about saving face." Maybe it always was:
House Democratic efforts to block President Obama's tax bill have dwindled into a battle to save face as they come to the realization they will have little opportunity to rework the bipartisan compromise.
Party leaders were debating on Tuesday whether to bring up amendments to the bill for a vote even as Democrats acknowledged the overwhelming Senate support for the tax deal created an "urgency" to get legislation to the president's desk.
The House Democratic Caucus approved a non-binding resolution last week to reject the Obama-GOP compromise "in its current form." But in the days since, with little support from the White House and none from Republicans for changing the framework, House leaders have backed off suggestions they would block the tax bill from coming to a vote. And one liberal critic of the plan said Democrats were resigned to the fact the deal would go forward largely intact."
My first reaction when word of the compromise emerged was that the Democrats had, in effect, admitted that the Republicans were right all along. The Dems have railed against the Bush-era tax cuts for years, yet they have controlled Congress for four years without lifting a finger to change them. Now, when the issue finally can't be avoided any longer, what did they do? They meekly agreed to an extension of all the tax rates of the 2000s, because doing otherwise would devastate the economy. QED.
While there are elements of the compromise that conservatives don't like, let's not lose sight of the broader principle: for the Democrats to admit, after all these years, that their attacks on President Bush's "tax cuts for the rich" were nothing but political posturing and that higher rates will indeed damage the economy, is a huge victory of which conservatives should be proud.
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 11:31am PT
|
"What if we got to keep the fruit of our hard work, rather than having it siphoned off to the parasites on Wall Street?"
seriously, gary? that's your understanding of capitalism?
the guys on wall street can get our money only if we give it to them...if somebody on wall street is "siphoning off" your money without your consent, then they're stealing, which is against the law...if you don't like what bank 1 does with your money, then you are FREE to give it to bank 2 or bank 3 or stuff it under your mattress...big oil/pharma/etc can't take your money, either; they can only persuade you to give it to them
the gov, on the other hand...
|
|
Douglas Rhiner
Mountain climber
Truckee , CA
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 11:40am PT
|
^^^^
That is more like Bookworms version of heaven.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 11:52am PT
|
the guys on wall street can get our money only if we give it to them...
Bingo!!!! Winner, winner, chicken dinner!
So why do you insist we let them take our money? If some welfare chiseler gets busted and put on Fox News, y'all will scream to high heaven to kill off welfare. But when mega-corps like Wal-Mart take in millions and millions in welfare year after year, you call it their just due.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 11:53am PT
|
Wall St, although having many flaws, has brought you cell phones, computers, medicines, airplanes, etc. It is an allocator of capital, always chasing the newest idea with the highest possible return, Google, Facebook, Supertopo all brought to you by Wall St.
Bullsh#t. All they produce is paper and politicians to sanction their thievery.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 11:56am PT
|
A big question for all ye libs -- To which party did the vast majority of campaign contributions from Wall St. go in the last few years? Anyone? Buehler?
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 11:58am PT
|
RADLEY BALKO: An honest question for lefties: “If your answer is no, that is, that the Constitution puts no real restraints on the federal government at all, why do you suppose they [i.e., the Founders] bothered writing and passing one in the first place?”
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 11:59am PT
|
MEGAN MCARDLE:
I have been reading a lot of well-meaning liberals who are befuddled by the notion that conservatives are going after the mandate, when that runs the risk of bringing on single payer. Personally, I kind of doubt that, but this is completely beside the point. On a reading of the commerce clause that allows the government to force you to buy insurance from a private company, what can’t the government force you to do?
This doesn’t seem to be a question that interests progressives; they just aren’t very excited about economic liberty beyond maybe the freedom to operate a food truck. And so they seem genuinely bewildered by a reading of the commerce clause that narrows its scope, or an attempt to overturn the mandate even though this might lead us into a single payer system.
INSTAPUNDIT: When unconstitutional is a synonym for things I don’t like, it seems preposterous that something you do like could ever be unconstitutional . . . .
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 12:09pm PT
|
"You can't prove anything to a mind that is made up."
Skip, that sounds funny coming from you.
People elect their officials by what they see on TV. That is scary. And now, corporations can fund elections...
To me this has the appearance of a Death Spiral for the bottom 98% of Americans (although the Rebugs won't realize it until the water boils, and then they won't admit they were taken in as fools).
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 12:17pm PT
|
"They LOAN it back out at 20% interest on credit cards right now."
using a credit card is a VOLUNTARY act...nobody can make you use their or anyone else's card...i know many people who NEVER use credit cards or only in emergencies...i pay off my balance in full every month BEFORE the interest kicks in...why is it the banks' fault that people can't manage their own money? and do you know why they charge 20%? 1)to cover their losses...think about it, somebody steals our card and we expect the bank to eat the loss; i love the system, but it's an obscenely expensive system for the banks...and 2) because they CAN; if everybody stopped using credit cards, the rates would drop--fast
"Goldman Sachs CREATED the "bubble that burst". They knew EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DOING."
oh, they knew what they were doing alright...trying to maximize profits for their shareholders--imagine, a business trying to make a profit! that's evuuuuuuuuuuul...and did they do anything illegal? i don't think so...investment is, after all, a risk...did they create the mess? no, it was created by well-intentioned but ill-conceived gov regulations...the gov said to give mortgages to people who can't afford mortgage, or else
"They CREATED a debit card structure that bleeds (skims) a few percent off EVERY minor personal business TRANSACTION that occurs in everyday commerce in the WORLD for just running the computers that count the bills!"
um, whom do you think pays for the computers, the electricity to run them, the buildings to house them, the people to maintain them? or do you think that all happens magically (black magic, i'm sure you would say)? and AGAIN, nobody can force you to use a debit card; i never have (i prefer the credit card because i get miles) and only started using an atm two years ago and only about once a month...see, i figured out that cash doesn't last very long in my pocket, so a grande latte may be a tasty idea, but i'm not going to charge $4 on my card and if i don't have money in my pocket, i keep on driving
"Lets go back to CASH. CASH transactions are FREE of that hidden business owned and operated taxation"
you can do that anytime you want...don't blame the banks for promoting a perfectly legal system for making a profit...of course, i have a feeling that the first time you get mugged--because the thugs have figured out that everybody's carrying cash, now--you'll blame the cops for not being around when needed or the gun makers for promoting crime or the banks for making us all use cash
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 12:19pm PT
|
Every time you quote yourself, God kills a kitten and it leads to blindness.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 12:36pm PT
|
Skip -- the GOP is an embarassment, and I trust them just barely more than the Dems. The TEA party movement is the best thing that has happened to the GOP, and possibly the worst thing as well. It is the best thing since it carried the GOP to takeover the House, but potentially the worst since the TEA party base will go third party if the GOP caves too much.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2010 - 12:43pm PT
|
Another result of brilliant GOP foreign policy. Thanks, Republicans, just what we needed in the middle-east, another Islamic Republic.
When America intervened to overthrow Saddam Hussein, Iraq's Christians — mostly Chaldeans and Assyrians — numbered about 1.4 million, or about 3% of the population. Over the last seven years, more than half have fled the country and, as the New York Times reported this week, a wave of targeted killings — including the Oct. 31 slaying of 51 worshipers and two priests during Mass at one of Baghdad's largest churches — has sent many more Christians fleeing. Despite Prime Minister Nouri Maliki promises to increase security, many believe the Christians are being targeted not only by Al Qaeda in Iraq, which has instructed its fighters "to kill Christians wherever they can reach them," but also by complicit elements within the government's security services.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-1215-rutten-20101215,0,373641.column
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!