PDA

View Full Version : Quote of the Day...a greater truth has hardly ever been said



OnePimpTiger
01-24-2011, 09:59 PM
I've been reading, listening, spewing, and regurgitating about politics for quite a while now and rarely is there something that gives me the Gru "light bulb" any more...but this did:


I think there needs to be nobody in the society who has nothing to lose when the government wastes money.

From Thomas Sowell, a great economic mind. I've always thought everyone should earn their keep and pay their fair share (and if your fair share is 0, you better not be breathing)...maybe it's just me, but this was a new way of looking at it.

habsheaven
01-25-2011, 08:30 AM
I would not want to live in a society where this applies ... "and if your fair share is 0, you better not be breathing" Societies such as these exist in the Third World.

The reality of our society today (Canada and the US) is that we have a very large class of people that are the "working poor". Not everyone can afford retirement funds, nor do they work for companies offering pension funds. Someone has to perform the minimum wage jobs.

What happens to these people in YOUR society? They end up old, homeless and hungry when they can no longer work, and eventually die on the street? We have enough of that going on now.

11chaos
01-25-2011, 11:22 AM
Sometimes the hugging has to stop.

sanfran22
01-25-2011, 11:56 AM
Thomas Sowell is great........And please point me to a homeless old person. I know alot of people rich and poor and have never met one. We here in these two countries have it alot better then anywhere else. Our poor would live like kings in many other countries. I think it's time to step back and appreciate how well we have it for once...

habsheaven
01-25-2011, 12:36 PM
You've never seen a homeless old person? Really? Try volunteering at a soup kitchen, you will see plenty.

"We here in these two countries have it alot better then anywhere else." That is the point I was getting at. If we changed our society to what OPT would like, we (not you or I) would no longer have it better than anywhere else.

sanfran22
01-25-2011, 12:49 PM
You've never seen a homeless old person? Really? Try volunteering at a soup kitchen, you will see plenty.

"We here in these two countries have it alot better then anywhere else." That is the point I was getting at. If we changed our society to what OPT would like, we (not you or I) would no longer have it better than anywhere else.
I think we have differing views of what that quote was meaning..... My point was the old, homeless and dying on the street is an extreme overexaggeration.

habsheaven
01-25-2011, 01:08 PM
I think we have differing views of what that quote was meaning..... My point was the old, homeless and dying on the street is an extreme overexaggeration.

Okay, if you think it is an exaggeration, tell me what would happen with the people "no longer able to earn their keep"? What do you think OPT has in mind for them?

BTW, I am not referring to the "quote". I am referring to OPT's interpretation of the quote. I think the quote means something entirely different, but I do not know enough about the man saying it to be confident in my interpretation of it.

gatorboymike
01-25-2011, 03:18 PM
I've always thought everyone should earn their keep and pay their fair share (and if your fair share is 0, you better not be breathing)...maybe it's just me, but this was a new way of looking at it.

Hmmm, that sounds familiar...where have I heard that before...oh yes.


From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

There's no old, poor, homeless people dying on the streets huh? Yeah, and you would be an expert on that, wouldn't you? "Well, I've looked over every square inch of my swanky country club and I didn't see a single homeless person anywhere! Bluh-huh-huh! These liberals are most unorthodox, wouldn't you say, Aloysius?"

Here's one of MY favorite quotes:

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin

sanfran22
01-25-2011, 03:23 PM
Hmmm, that sounds familiar...where have I heard that before...oh yes.



Here's one of MY favorite quotes:

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
You think that Marx quote says the same thing as Sowell?? Wow.
How many old, homeless, dying on the streets do you know?

gatorboymike
01-25-2011, 03:26 PM
You think that Marx quote says the same thing as Sowell?? Wow.
How many old, homeless, dying on the streets do you know?

Sunny Jim, I couldn't walk two blocks in any direction from the UF campus without running across 4 or 5 of them.

And no, I think that Marx quote says the same thing as OPT. You'd know that if you actually looked at who I was quoting.

sanfran22
01-25-2011, 03:27 PM
Sunny Jim, I couldn't walk two blocks in any direction from the UF campus without running across 4 or 5 of them.
I bet. I just did a quick google and the statistic said there are 45,000 homeless seniors in the US. You really don't get it....

gatorboymike
01-25-2011, 03:32 PM
And while we're comparing quotes...

"We're right, they're wrong...end of story!"
- sanfran22

"It shows 'us vs. them,' and I'm on the 'us' side."
- Dan Quayle

sanfran22
01-25-2011, 03:34 PM
And while we're comparing quotes...

"We're right, they're wrong...end of story!"
- sanfran22

"It shows 'us vs. them,' and I'm on the 'us' side."
- Dan Quayle
We when you are wrong, you are wrong (on just about everything). Enjoy being on that side Sunny Jim.

gatorboymike
01-25-2011, 03:36 PM
Case in point.

sanfran22
01-25-2011, 03:37 PM
Case in point.
Well , you are actually right on something in your life. You will probably grow up one day and figure it out. Until then, watch out for all the homeless seniors around Gator U.

habsheaven
01-25-2011, 03:42 PM
I bet. I just did a quick google and the statistic said there are 45,000 homeless seniors in the US. You really don't get it....

Again, I think you just don't get it. I am the one that brought up the "homeless seniors". I was talking about how many there WOULD be if we took OPT's approach, not how many there are now. Try to keep up with the conversation will ya.

BTW, 45,000 seems like a significant number but of course it is non-existant in your neighbourhood apparently.

sanfran22
01-25-2011, 03:46 PM
Again, I think you just don't get it. I am the one that brought up the "homeless seniors". I was talking about how many there WOULD be if we took OPT's approach, not how many there are now. Try to keep up with the conversation will ya.

BTW, 45,000 seems like a significant number but of course it is non-existant in your neighbourhood apparently.
So now you can see into the future. Awesome. 45,000 in a country of 300,000,000 plus. I think we have a few more things to attack first. Typical liberal philosophy. Anything else you'd like to blow out of proportion?

habsheaven
01-25-2011, 06:14 PM
So now you can see into the future. Awesome. 45,000 in a country of 300,000,000 plus. I think we have a few more things to attack first. Typical liberal philosophy. Anything else you'd like to blow out of proportion?

You would have to be blind to not see that future! Apparently you are! You are a waste of time.

sanfran22
01-25-2011, 07:29 PM
You would have to be blind to not see that future! Apparently you are! You are a waste of time.
Yeah, we are going to be a nation of homeless, starving seniors. That and the Healthcare bill will pay for itself or actually make money in a few years.....Just a bunch of liberal garbage. I see the future pretty clearly. If we continue to let the minority that think like you do influence our country, we are going to be in a sad state of affairs..Don't even know why we discuss this with canadians.:confused0024:

OnePimpTiger
01-25-2011, 09:14 PM
I would not want to live in a society where this applies ... "and if your fair share is 0, you better not be breathing" Societies such as these exist in the Third World.

The reality of our society today (Canada and the US) is that we have a very large class of people that are the "working poor". Not everyone can afford retirement funds, nor do they work for companies offering pension funds. Someone has to perform the minimum wage jobs.

What happens to these people in YOUR society? They end up old, homeless and hungry when they can no longer work, and eventually die on the street? We have enough of that going on now.

I have no clue what you're saying, but from what I can gather, you completely misinterpreted what I said. If you are alive, you should be paying taxes just like everyone else. There should be no free rides. If you need help, fine, ask for help. But giving nothing and asking for everything is not acceptable. Why do certain people have a "right" to something they have not earned? I do not want to live in a society where millions do not have a vested interest in how the country is ran.


Hmmm, that sounds familiar...where have I heard that before...oh yes.


Originally Posted by Karl Marx
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Actually, what I said is the exact opposite of that. Marxism says if you're rich, you should pay more and if you're poor, you shouldn't have to pay at all. I'm saying everyone should have to pay their own way. Marxism is what liberals want and exactly the opposite of what I want.

habsheaven
01-25-2011, 09:45 PM
Yeah, we are going to be a nation of homeless, starving seniors. That and the Healthcare bill will pay for itself or actually make money in a few years.....Just a bunch of liberal garbage. I see the future pretty clearly. If we continue to let the minority that think like you do influence our country, we are going to be in a sad state of affairs..Don't even know why we discuss this with canadians.:confused0024:

You began by arguing that there were no homeless seniors, then you do a google search and come up with a number in the tens of thousands. Now you downplay it by incorrectly claiming it is a small percentage of the entire population rather than the senior population. What's next?

Oh right! I know. Dismiss the CANADIAN. :sign0020:

habsheaven
01-25-2011, 09:50 PM
I have no clue what you're saying, but from what I can gather, you completely misinterpreted what I said. If you are alive, you should be paying taxes just like everyone else. There should be no free rides. If you need help, fine, ask for help. But giving nothing and asking for everything is not acceptable. Why do certain people have a "right" to something they have not earned? I do not want to live in a society where millions do not have a vested interest in how the country is ran.

I will try to make this more clear. What happens to the aged, who can no longer work and therefore can no longer pay taxes under your plan? Please don't tell me they have to ask YOU for charity!!

OnePimpTiger
01-25-2011, 10:09 PM
I will try to make this more clear. What happens to the aged, who can no longer work and therefore can no longer pay taxes under your plan? Please don't tell me they have to ask YOU for charity!!

Yeah, you didn't get it. If they have paid their share, then they will receive their share when that time comes. That's how life works, you're supposed to provide for yourself while you can for the time that you can't.

I will try to make this more clear. What right do you have to decide that you don't have to provide for yourself and force someone else to provide for you?

gatorboymike
01-25-2011, 10:53 PM
Actually, what I said is the exact opposite of that. Marxism says if you're rich, you should pay more and if you're poor, you shouldn't have to pay at all. I'm saying everyone should have to pay their own way. Marxism is what liberals want and exactly the opposite of what I want.

Ah yes, of course. What you want is for the poor to pay for everything and the rich to pay for nothing. You're right, that is the opposite of Marxism. It's also impractical. It's because of people like you that billionaire sports team owners can hold their cities hostage to build them fancy new arenas or else they'll take their team somewhere else, and where does the city get the money? From taxing people like me to death. And I know, because that's exactly what happened in my city. Meanwhile Rich Devos is up there on his brand new, $54 million yacht, drinking a cocktail that costs more than my annual salary and laughing about it, and you're standing at his side, asking him if he wants a foot massage or some violin music or an animal sacrifice or a graven image of himself.

If you want to call me a Marxist because I have not the first shred of compassion for this guy because paying more taxes means he has to save up for that new yacht for a few years, go right ahead, Sunny Jim. If it was up to me I'd have him shackled and pelted with rotten produce on the lawn of the White House, while his vast, vast fortunes went toward worthy causes. And to know that there are people like you stomping your feet and waving your fists and bleating "NO! YOU must be bled dry so that the revoltingly wealthy can continue their vulgar displays of opulence!" makes me want to vomit. I also have no compassion for apologists for corporate greed.

You were the one who said that people you judge to not be contributing to society (and gee, I wonder who you would say that is?) should be destroyed. That sounds like a certain ideology I won't bother to name. So it seems like you want a state that is simultaneously too small to be able to tax the wealthy, and large enough that it should be able to eliminate vast sectors of the population.

duane1969
01-25-2011, 11:53 PM
Again, I think you just don't get it. I am the one that brought up the "homeless seniors". I was talking about how many there WOULD be if we took OPT's approach, not how many there are now. Try to keep up with the conversation will ya.

BTW, 45,000 seems like a significant number but of course it is non-existant in your neighbourhood apparently.

I belive OPT and just about everyone is in favor of taking care of the elderly. Finding some miniscule aspect of welfare as an argument in favor of keeping a flawed system doesn't carry much weight.

I also belive that OPT feels the same way as I do which is that fat, lazy slobs who sit at home milking the system and finding excuses to not get a job are a detriment to society and need to be either forced to contribute to society or forced to get off of the teet of welfare and suffer the consquences of their laziness.

Need is the fertilizer of motivation. Take away the welfare check and food stamps and see how quickly they find employment.

You want to take care of the elderly? Here is a novel idea. Kick every person between the ages of 18 and 50 off of welfare and use the billions of surplus to provide free housing, food and care for the elderly. Now there is a plan that I can get behind.

duane1969
01-26-2011, 12:14 AM
Ah yes, of course. What you want is for the poor to pay for everything and the rich to pay for nothing. You're right, that is the opposite of Marxism. It's also impractical. It's because of people like you that billionaire sports team owners can hold their cities hostage to build them fancy new arenas or else they'll take their team somewhere else, and where does the city get the money? From taxing people like me to death. And I know, because that's exactly what happened in my city. Meanwhile Rich Devos is up there on his brand new, $54 million yacht, drinking a cocktail that costs more than my annual salary and laughing about it, and you're standing at his side, asking him if he wants a foot massage or some violin music or an animal sacrifice or a graven image of himself.

If you want to call me a Marxist because I have not the first shred of compassion for this guy because paying more taxes means he has to save up for that new yacht for a few years, go right ahead, Sunny Jim. If it was up to me I'd have him shackled and pelted with rotten produce on the lawn of the White House, while his vast, vast fortunes went toward worthy causes. And to know that there are people like you stomping your feet and waving your fists and bleating "NO! YOU must be bled dry so that the revoltingly wealthy can continue their vulgar displays of opulence!" makes me want to vomit. I also have no compassion for apologists for corporate greed.

You were the one who said that people you judge to not be contributing to society (and gee, I wonder who you would say that is?) should be destroyed. That sounds like a certain ideology I won't bother to name. So it seems like you want a state that is simultaneously too small to be able to tax the wealthy, and large enough that it should be able to eliminate vast sectors of the population.

So let me see if I get this. You think that wealthy people should be punished for being wealthy and have their wealth taken away from them, and then that wealth should be dumped into social programs and spread around to poor people, in essence a reward for being poor. So what happens when all of the wealthy have been bled dry and the career welfare recipients are still sitting at home waiting on the next welfare check to arrive? Who pays taxes then? Who finances those beloved social programs then?

In a country that was built on hard work and striving for greatness we actually have people like you who think that taking from those who have achieved wealth and giving to those who have achieved nothing is a good idea. Well Sunny Jim, it is not. When we stop expecting people to achieve and start propping them up and supporting them in their underachievment all we are doing is undermining them. They do not benefit from freebies. They benefit from motivation to achieve more. A monthly check and regular supply of food stamps does not motivate.

I have no issue with helping people who are trying to help themselves and have fallen on hard times. TANF is an acronym for Temporary Assistance of Needy Families. The operable word there is TEMPORARY. A welfare system that keeps people dependent on it is not assistance, it is a life support system.

gatorboymike
01-26-2011, 03:36 AM
Ppbbphph, to hear you talk, you'd think there are only two kinds of people in this country: multi-billionaire CEOs of multinational corporations and fat, lazy slobs who want to do nothing but avoid work and leech off the government. Well let me make this clear enough for a conservative to understand: I say anyone who can work but just doesn't want to can kiss off. Maybe we can let OPT feed them to the lions like he wants.

You talk about motivation this, motivation that. What a wafer-thin excuse. You really couldn't care less whether Bubba Bob the Fat, Lazy Slob is motivated or not. Because you know exactly what will happen if you take his welfare check away: he won't get a job, he'll either end up starving or turn to crime. He'll either be dead or in prison, and that's what you really want. Of course, if he's in prison, the state is still paying to house and feed him. Unless, as I suspect, you're one of those people who think the cops should be given free reign to shoot anyone they want, any time they want, and never be held accountable for it. There's your ticket to driving prison costs down, isn't it, Sunny Jim?

As for punishing the wealthy, sue me if I want revenge on the local scrooge for blackmailing and screwing over my city. If they're guilty of shady business practices, then you're darn right I say punish them. But you know what? Improvements to infrastructure, education, housing, environmental programs and social services benefit everyone. Of course, seeing as how you think the only two people in the entire country are Rich Uncle Pennybags and Bubba Bob the Fat, Lazy Slob, I can understand how you'd think any money taken from the former must necessarily go right into the hands of the latter.

And sue me if I think the $50 million Rich Uncle Pennybags spent on his new yacht would be better served cleaning up the miserable state of public education in the country. You want real motivation, start with the kids and the people who can get back on their feet after hard times, not with the guy who's already a success. He can afford a shot in the arm. They can't.

I know you worship at the altar of Ronald Reagan, but trickle-down economics doesn't work. You want to fix things, start from the bottom up. But you don't really care about that, do you? You have no concern for the well-being of your fellow man, do you? You don't care what happens to him as long as Rich Uncle Pennybags' factory keeps pumping out more hamburgers and jeans for you. You want to keep showering Rich Uncle Pennybags with luxury and opulence so he'll keep making those hamburgers and jeans for you, and it doesn't matter who gets hurt. "Don't care how, I want it now."

habsheaven
01-26-2011, 07:57 AM
Yeah, you didn't get it. If they have paid their share, then they will receive their share when that time comes. That's how life works, you're supposed to provide for yourself while you can for the time that you can't.

I will try to make this more clear. What right do you have to decide that you don't have to provide for yourself and force someone else to provide for you?

People should not have that right. I am referring to those in society that cannot (for whatever reasons beyond their control) provide for themselves in their retirement.

habsheaven
01-26-2011, 08:02 AM
I belive OPT and just about everyone is in favor of taking care of the elderly. Finding some miniscule aspect of welfare as an argument in favor of keeping a flawed system doesn't carry much weight.

I also believe that OPT feels the same way as I do which is that fat, lazy slobs who sit at home milking the system and finding excuses to not get a job are a detriment to society and need to be either forced to contribute to society or forced to get off of the teet of welfare and suffer the consquences of their laziness.

Need is the fertilizer of motivation. Take away the welfare check and food stamps and see how quickly they find employment.

You want to take care of the elderly? Here is a novel idea. Kick every person between the ages of 18 and 50 off of welfare and use the billions of surplus to provide free housing, food and care for the elderly. Now there is a plan that I can get behind.

I was using "caring for the elderly" as an example to point out that OPT's statement is a little to simplistic and unrealistic. I think we can all agree to the bolded portion of your comment.

sanfran22
01-26-2011, 08:16 AM
I belive OPT and just about everyone is in favor of taking care of the elderly. Finding some miniscule aspect of welfare as an argument in favor of keeping a flawed system doesn't carry much weight.

I also belive that OPT feels the same way as I do which is that fat, lazy slobs who sit at home milking the system and finding excuses to not get a job are a detriment to society and need to be either forced to contribute to society or forced to get off of the teet of welfare and suffer the consquences of their laziness.

Need is the fertilizer of motivation. Take away the welfare check and food stamps and see how quickly they find employment.

You want to take care of the elderly? Here is a novel idea. Kick every person between the ages of 18 and 50 off of welfare and use the billions of surplus to provide free housing, food and care for the elderly. Now there is a plan that I can get behind.
Well said.....

duane1969
01-26-2011, 09:34 AM
You talk about motivation this, motivation that. What a wafer-thin excuse. You really couldn't care less whether Bubba Bob the Fat, Lazy Slob is motivated or not. Because you know exactly what will happen if you take his welfare check away: he won't get a job, he'll either end up starving or turn to crime. He'll either be dead or in prison, and that's what you really want. Of course, if he's in prison, the state is still paying to house and feed him. Unless, as I suspect, you're one of those people who think the cops should be given free reign to shoot anyone they want, any time they want, and never be held accountable for it. There's your ticket to driving prison costs down, isn't it, Sunny Jim?

So your position is that everybody who is on welfare will either starve or become a criminal without the government handouts that they get? Wow, talk about a pesimistic perspective...

No, I don't want welfare recipients to be dead. That is ludicrous. I want people to be productive members of society. Every person that gets off of welfare, gets a job and has a decent life is proof of the wonderful opportunities that exist in my country. Every person that sits on welfare and for years and years and uses it as a souce of income rather than getting a job is proof that the current system is failing. A hand up is fine, a hand out is not.


As for punishing the wealthy, sue me if I want revenge on the local scrooge for blackmailing and screwing over my city. If they're guilty of shady business practices, then you're darn right I say punish them. But you know what? Improvements to infrastructure, education, housing, environmental programs and social services benefit everyone. Of course, seeing as how you think the only two people in the entire country are Rich Uncle Pennybags and Bubba Bob the Fat, Lazy Slob, I can understand how you'd think any money taken from the former must necessarily go right into the hands of the latter.

I obviously don't think there are only two kinds of people in America considering I am not part of either demographic. My family falls comfortably into the six-figure under $250k group that Obama falsely promised to not raise taxes on.

I am just not niave enough to think that once the "fat cats" are bled dry that people like you and I will not be next in line. When the billionaires and millionaires are gone then the middle class will be the next target. The middle class will become the "evil rich people" because we make $50k or $100k a year while the sad little poor people only make $15k.



And sue me if I think the $50 million Rich Uncle Pennybags spent on his new yacht would be better served cleaning up the miserable state of public education in the country. You want real motivation, start with the kids and the people who can get back on their feet after hard times, not with the guy who's already a success. He can afford a shot in the arm. They can't.

I am just baffled as to why you or anyone thinks that what a private citizen does with his/her money is anyones business. If you go out and buy a $30k car should you be attacked because you were excessive and should have bought a $15k car and gave the other $15k to community programs because you can get by with just a $15k car? Do you not have the right to a $30k car if you can afford it? If you go spend $30 on a pair of jeans should you be held up to ridicule because you would have been just fine with a $15 pair of jeans and the other $15 should have been given to a shelter to help clothe poor people?

The idea that what anyone does is anyones else's business is a joke. if we had a few more people in this world that grasp the concept of minding their own business then it would be a lot better place.



I know you worship at the altar of Ronald Reagan, but trickle-down economics doesn't work.

You better call your buddy Obama and tell him. I think he didn't get the memo. Last time I checked he is dumping trillions into banks, the auto industry, the housing industry and government programs all in the name of "creating jobs" and looking at the unemployment rate, it isn't working.

OnePimpTiger
01-26-2011, 12:10 PM
Ah yes, of course. What you want is for the poor to pay for everything and the rich to pay for nothing. You're right, that is the opposite of Marxism. It's also impractical. It's because of people like you that billionaire sports team owners can hold their cities hostage to build them fancy new arenas or else they'll take their team somewhere else, and where does the city get the money? From taxing people like me to death. And I know, because that's exactly what happened in my city. Meanwhile Rich Devos is up there on his brand new, $54 million yacht, drinking a cocktail that costs more than my annual salary and laughing about it, and you're standing at his side, asking him if he wants a foot massage or some violin music or an animal sacrifice or a graven image of himself.

If you want to call me a Marxist because I have not the first shred of compassion for this guy because paying more taxes means he has to save up for that new yacht for a few years, go right ahead, Sunny Jim. If it was up to me I'd have him shackled and pelted with rotten produce on the lawn of the White House, while his vast, vast fortunes went toward worthy causes. And to know that there are people like you stomping your feet and waving your fists and bleating "NO! YOU must be bled dry so that the revoltingly wealthy can continue their vulgar displays of opulence!" makes me want to vomit. I also have no compassion for apologists for corporate greed.

You were the one who said that people you judge to not be contributing to society (and gee, I wonder who you would say that is?) should be destroyed. That sounds like a certain ideology I won't bother to name. So it seems like you want a state that is simultaneously too small to be able to tax the wealthy, and large enough that it should be able to eliminate vast sectors of the population.

First, you say I'm a Marxist by misinterpreting what I said, then you say I'm not a Marxist by again misinterpreting what I said. Debates are a lot easier if you actually listen to and try to understand what the other person says before responding instead of ignoring them and responding based on your incorrect assumptions of their beliefs that are in no way based on anything they've actually said. It could save a lot of time and effort...for example, that whole rant could have been avoided, as it actually responds to not a single thing I've said.

gatorboymike
01-26-2011, 04:44 PM
So your position is that everybody who is on welfare will either starve or become a criminal without the government handouts that they get? Wow, talk about a pesimistic perspective...

No, I don't want welfare recipients to be dead. That is ludicrous. I want people to be productive members of society. Every person that gets off of welfare, gets a job and has a decent life is proof of the wonderful opportunities that exist in my country. Every person that sits on welfare and for years and years and uses it as a souce of income rather than getting a job is proof that the current system is failing. A hand up is fine, a hand out is not.

Seeing as how you're admittedly Sally Six-Figures, you wouldn't know. But I used to have a job that brought me into frequent, direct contact with your welfare-abusing arch nemeses. And you're right about one thing...they're the least-motivated people I've ever seen. They're hopeless, utterly, completely, irrevocably hopeless. Although I don't believe you when you talk about your own views, I agree on the handout principle, so there's nothing else to say on that point.


I obviously don't think there are only two kinds of people in America considering I am not part of either demographic. My family falls comfortably into the six-figure under $250k group that Obama falsely promised to not raise taxes on.

Well, that's Obama's fault, not mine. Take your argument up with him. Sorry, you don't get any sympathy from me.


I am just not niave enough to think that once the "fat cats" are bled dry that people like you and I will not be next in line. When the billionaires and millionaires are gone then the middle class will be the next target. The middle class will become the "evil rich people" because we make $50k or $100k a year while the sad little poor people only make $15k.

You really think Obama or anyone who shares his agenda could actually get so far as to strip all the assets from anyone who has a million dollars or more? Or is that just conservative catastrophizing? Is this your version of how wacko liberals talk about big corporations killing every tree in the world?


I am just baffled as to why you or anyone thinks that what a private citizen does with his/her money is anyones business. If you go out and buy a $30k car should you be attacked because you were excessive and should have bought a $15k car and gave the other $15k to community programs because you can get by with just a $15k car? Do you not have the right to a $30k car if you can afford it? If you go spend $30 on a pair of jeans should you be held up to ridicule because you would have been just fine with a $15 pair of jeans and the other $15 should have been given to a shelter to help clothe poor people?

The idea that what anyone does is anyones else's business is a joke. if we had a few more people in this world that grasp the concept of minding their own business then it would be a lot better place.

Oh sweet irony. Conservatives are quite happy to tell private citizens what they can do with their social lives in private ALL THE TIME. So what, then? You can't tell people what to do with their wallets, but you can tell them what to do with their bodies?

To answer the question, however, no, I don't think that. No one has any obligation to share the money they earn with anyone else (taxes are a separate issue). It's just a social injustice that so many have so little while so few have so much. I understand there's really nothing that can or should be done about this if one wants to stay true to the founding principles of this nation, but it still ticks me off, seeing Uncle Pennybags up there in his ivory tower while everyone around you is miserable.


You better call your buddy Obama and tell him. I think he didn't get the memo. Last time I checked he is dumping trillions into banks, the auto industry, the housing industry and government programs all in the name of "creating jobs" and looking at the unemployment rate, it isn't working.

He ain't my buddy, Sunny Jim. He doesn't care what I think any more than he cares what you think.

INTIMADATOR2007
01-26-2011, 08:35 PM
:pop2:

duane1969
01-26-2011, 08:53 PM
Seeing as how you're admittedly Sally Six-Figures, you wouldn't know.

Again you stand corrected. For the first 8 years of our marriage my wife and I received public assistance while working any job that we could find from delivering pizzas and waiting tables to washing dishes and mowing lawns. For years we didn't even have a car. We owe our "Sally Six-Figures" status to working hard, getting an education and striving for something better.

I have lived only having $5 to spend on my son for Christmas. I have lived having to roll pennies to buy diapers. I have lived wearing the same clothes for days because I didn't have $1 to wash them at the laundromat. I have lived seeing people give me dirty looks because I had to buy groceries with food stamps because my boss would only schedule me 20 hours a week.

And you know what else I lived? Working my rear off to see to it that my kids had something better. Working a full-time job while going to college so that my wife can buy a new coat without feeling bad for spending $100 on it. I lived working hard to see to it that everything that I have is mine because I earned it.

So yes, I know.

And I know that nobody has a right to take what I have worked hard to get just because someone else out there is not willing to work as hard as I did. Just because I have more does not make me a bad person, it makes me a success, and I am damn proud of it and damn tired of people like you acting like being a finacial success makes me greedy because I don't want to give away what I worked hard to get.

OnePimpTiger
01-26-2011, 09:36 PM
And I know that nobody has a right to take what I have worked hard to get just because someone else out there is not willing to work as hard as I did. Just because I have more does not make me a bad person, it makes me a success, and I am damn proud of it and damn tired of people like you acting like being a finacial success makes me greedy because I don't want to give away what I worked hard to get.

Well said. Unfortunately, those who haven't worked for it will never understand that.

sanfran22
01-26-2011, 10:01 PM
Again you stand corrected. For the first 8 years of our marriage my wife and I received public assistance while working any job that we could find from delivering pizzas and waiting tables to washing dishes and mowing lawns. For years we didn't even have a car. We owe our "Sally Six-Figures" status to working hard, getting an education and striving for something better.

I have lived only having $5 to spend on my son for Christmas. I have lived having to roll pennies to buy diapers. I have lived wearing the same clothes for days because I didn't have $1 to wash them at the laundromat. I have lived seeing people give me dirty looks because I had to buy groceries with food stamps because my boss would only schedule me 20 hours a week.

And you know what else I lived? Working my rear off to see to it that my kids had something better. Working a full-time job while going to college so that my wife can buy a new coat without feeling bad for spending $100 on it. I lived working hard to see to it that everything that I have is mine because I earned it.

So yes, I know.

And I know that nobody has a right to take what I have worked hard to get just because someone else out there is not willing to work as hard as I did. Just because I have more does not make me a bad person, it makes me a success, and I am damn proud of it and damn tired of people like you acting like being a finacial success makes me greedy because I don't want to give away what I worked hard to get.
Right freakin' on.....I am so tired of these anti American leftists....I know of a few leftist dreamlands across the pond. Maybe if we take up a collection. they can see how awesome it works...???:sign0020:

gatorboymike
01-26-2011, 10:33 PM
Again you stand corrected. For the first 8 years of our marriage my wife and I received public assistance while working any job that we could find from delivering pizzas and waiting tables to washing dishes and mowing lawns. For years we didn't even have a car. We owe our "Sally Six-Figures" status to working hard, getting an education and striving for something better.

Well whoopty doo for you. What do you want, a medal? A plaque? A 200-foot solid gold statue of yourself stomping the earth with one foot? Amazing how quickly someone who spent so long building himself up could develop such a sense of entitlement. What you want is for everyone else to say "Congratulations, you're a success, now please, treat us like dirt, give us life or death at your pleasure, because you deserve it." You look at those of us still climbing the ladder and think you have the right to kick us off because you feel like we threaten your position. Well, some of us will hang on by our teeth if our handholds are sabotaged.


And I know that nobody has a right to take what I have worked hard to get just because someone else out there is not willing to work as hard as I did. Just because I have more does not make me a bad person, it makes me a success, and I am damn proud of it and damn tired of people like you acting like being a finacial success makes me greedy because I don't want to give away what I worked hard to get.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Whatever you may once have been is of no concern to me at all. I see only what you are today. And I honestly I hope I don't become like you are, if I ever get to where you are. If I were to find out my future self had developed this attitude of "I've gone mine, so screw everyone else, they can all die for all I care," I think I'd rather starve.

INTIMADATOR2007
01-26-2011, 10:46 PM
Again you stand corrected. For the first 8 years of our marriage my wife and I received public assistance while working any job that we could find from delivering pizzas and waiting tables to washing dishes and mowing lawns. For years we didn't even have a car. We owe our "Sally Six-Figures" status to working hard, getting an education and striving for something better.

I have lived only having $5 to spend on my son for Christmas. I have lived having to roll pennies to buy diapers. I have lived wearing the same clothes for days because I didn't have $1 to wash them at the laundromat. I have lived seeing people give me dirty looks because I had to buy groceries with food stamps because my boss would only schedule me 20 hours a week.

And you know what else I lived? Working my rear off to see to it that my kids had something better. Working a full-time job while going to college so that my wife can buy a new coat without feeling bad for spending $100 on it. I lived working hard to see to it that everything that I have is mine because I earned it.

So yes, I know.

And I know that nobody has a right to take what I have worked hard to get just because someone else out there is not willing to work as hard as I did. Just because I have more does not make me a bad person, it makes me a success, and I am damn proud of it and damn tired of people like you acting like being a finacial success makes me greedy because I don't want to give away what I worked hard to get.
Freakin awesome !!
:winking0071:

sanfran22
01-26-2011, 10:55 PM
Well whoopty doo for you. What do you want, a medal? A plaque? A 200-foot solid gold statue of yourself stomping the earth with one foot? Amazing how quickly someone who spent so long building himself up could develop such a sense of entitlement. What you want is for everyone else to say "Congratulations, you're a success, now please, treat us like dirt, give us life or death at your pleasure, because you deserve it." You look at those of us still climbing the ladder and think you have the right to kick us off because you feel like we threaten your position. Well, some of us will hang on by our teeth if our handholds are sabotaged.



Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Whatever you may once have been is of no concern to me at all. I see only what you are today. And I honestly I hope I don't become like you are, if I ever get to where you are. If I were to find out my future self had developed this attitude of "I've gone mine, so screw everyone else, they can all die for all I care," I think I'd rather starve.
Technically you should never get to where he is because you obviously have a problem with it....

gatorboymike
01-26-2011, 11:06 PM
I have a problem with his attitude, not his success. As I said, I hope I wouldn't have the same attitude if I had the same success. I don't need a $30,000 car or an enormous house to feel good about myself.

I know what he thinks: "I never used to have stuff. Now I do have stuff. And now I'm utterly terrified of losing my stuff. Oh look, there's a guy who wants to take my stuff away. I will destroy him!"

I don't want to take your stuff away, Sunny Jim. I'm just disgusted. You would have been equally disgusted if your past self could have met your present self. What would your past self have thought if somebody said that to him?

duane1969
01-26-2011, 11:08 PM
Well whoopty doo for you. What do you want, a medal? A plaque? A 200-foot solid gold statue of yourself stomping the earth with one foot? Amazing how quickly someone who spent so long building himself up could develop such a sense of entitlement. What you want is for everyone else to say "Congratulations, you're a success, now please, treat us like dirt, give us life or death at your pleasure, because you deserve it." You look at those of us still climbing the ladder and think you have the right to kick us off because you feel like we threaten your position. Well, some of us will hang on by our teeth if our handholds are sabotaged.

Because I feel that I have a right to what I have worked hard to earn that makes me having a sense of entitlement? What a joke. Defending your opinion that you and your Socialist buddies have the right to take from the wealthy by accusing me of being entitled. I sense that you are reasonably intelligent so surely you can see the idiocy in that.



Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Whatever you may once have been is of no concern to me at all. I see only what you are today. And I honestly I hope I don't become like you are, if I ever get to where you are. If I were to find out my future self had developed this attitude of "I've gone mine, so screw everyone else, they can all die for all I care," I think I'd rather starve.

So first I am "Sally Six-Figure" and now you could care less what I have done to improve myself and hope you never become like me? Yet in your previous paragraph you say that you are "still climbing the ladder". Make up your mind. Your keep flip-flopping.

I get it. You hate the world. You hate anyone that isn't as angst filled as you. Is there anybody you don't hate and have anger towards? Seriously, you will argue any angle just to be arguing and expressing your hate. When I say my family earns six figures you criticize me for that. When I point out that I worked hard to get here you belittle that.

I have said it before and I went back on my word. I repeat it now. I am ignoring your post except to do my duties as staff at SCF. Your only goal is to try and demean and belittle people and I have no more time to waste getting pulled into you feeding your need to argue.

OnePimpTiger
01-26-2011, 11:08 PM
Well whoopty doo for you. What do you want, a medal? A plaque? A 200-foot solid gold statue of yourself stomping the earth with one foot? Amazing how quickly someone who spent so long building himself up could develop such a sense of entitlement.

Not quite as amazing as how someone who has done nothing to earn it has an even greater sense of entitlement. So let me make sure I get this straight: If you've actually worked to earn what you have, you have no right to it, but if you haven't worked to earn it, you do?


Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Whatever you may once have been is of no concern to me at all. I see only what you are today. And I honestly I hope I don't become like you are, if I ever get to where you are. If I were to find out my future self had developed this attitude of "I've gone mine, so screw everyone else, they can all die for all I care," I think I'd rather starve.

No you wouldn't, you'd rather the government force someone who has worked for what they have give it to you.

sanfran22
01-26-2011, 11:10 PM
I have a problem with his attitude, not his success. As I said, I hope I wouldn't have the same attitude if I had the same success. I don't need a $30,000 car or an enormous house to feel good about myself.

I know what he thinks: "I never used to have stuff. Now I do have stuff. And now I'm utterly terrified of losing my stuff. Oh look, there's a guy who wants to take my stuff away. I will destroy him!"

I don't want to take your stuff away, Sunny Jim. I'm just disgusted. You would have been equally disgusted if your past self could have met your present self. What would your past self have thought if somebody said that to him?
I think you are one of the few that gets that out of his statement. I don't read it like that at all, but I generally agree with him. I think most people would congratulate him on his success, including his past self. That is unless his past self were jelous or fealt that it wasn't fair.....It's like the sameol argument, "how much is enough". Enough is when you fell like it's enough. I don't begrudge anyone, anything and I am happy when I struggled just as I am happy now.

gatorboymike
01-26-2011, 11:16 PM
Not quite as amazing as how someone who has done nothing to earn it has an even greater sense of entitlement. So let me make sure I get this straight: If you've actually worked to earn what you have, you have no right to it, but if you haven't worked to earn it, you do?

This is seriously like trying to explain science to a creationist.


No you wouldn't, you'd rather the government force someone who has worked for what they have give it to you.

Wrong-ola. There were plenty of times I could have signed up for you-know-what but I never did. I consider it immoral to take when you haven't earned. I keep telling you that but you never listen because you're determined to stereotype everyone who doesn't agree with you as supporting the lazy slobs who don't want to work.


I think you are one of the few that gets that out of his statement. I don't read it like that at all, but I generally agree with him. I think most people would congratulate him on his success, including his past self. That is unless his past self were jelous or fealt that it wasn't fair.....It's like the sameol argument, "how much is enough". Enough is when you fell like it's enough. I don't begrudge anyone, anything and I am happy when I struggled just as I am happy now.

OK, I have no problem with that.

duane1969
01-26-2011, 11:20 PM
Wrong-ola. There were plenty of times I could have signed up for you-know-what but I never did. I consider it immoral to take when you haven't earned. I keep telling you that but you never listen because you're determined to stereotype everyone who doesn't agree with you as supporting the lazy slobs who don't want to work.


If it was up to me I'd have him shackled and pelted with rotten produce on the lawn of the White House, while his vast, vast fortunes went toward worthy causes.

Oops!!! Self-contradiction sucks doesn't it?

gatorboymike
01-26-2011, 11:22 PM
This is ignoring?

duane1969
01-26-2011, 11:31 PM
This is ignoring?

Sorry. When I see someone outright contradicting themselves I can't help myself.

gatorboymike
01-26-2011, 11:32 PM
Evidently the concept of figurative language is lost on you.

duane1969
01-26-2011, 11:59 PM
Evidently the concept of figurative language is lost on you.

I am an English/Language Arts major so no, I get it. Figurative language is describing one thing by comparing it to something else. You did not do that. So apparently it is lost on you.

DunkingDurant35
01-27-2011, 12:09 AM
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/1009/internet-arguments-warlocks-kites-fall-kids-submit-comment-demotivational-poster-1283648157.jpg

habsheaven
01-27-2011, 08:11 AM
Again you stand corrected. For the first 8 years of our marriage my wife and I received public assistance while working any job that we could find from delivering pizzas and waiting tables to washing dishes and mowing lawns. For years we didn't even have a car. We owe our "Sally Six-Figures" status to working hard, getting an education and striving for something better.

I have lived only having $5 to spend on my son for Christmas. I have lived having to roll pennies to buy diapers. I have lived wearing the same clothes for days because I didn't have $1 to wash them at the laundromat. I have lived seeing people give me dirty looks because I had to buy groceries with food stamps because my boss would only schedule me 20 hours a week.

And you know what else I lived? Working my rear off to see to it that my kids had something better. Working a full-time job while going to college so that my wife can buy a new coat without feeling bad for spending $100 on it. I lived working hard to see to it that everything that I have is mine because I earned it.

So yes, I know.

And I know that nobody has a right to take what I have worked hard to get just because someone else out there is not willing to work as hard as I did. Just because I have more does not make me a bad person, it makes me a success, and I am damn proud of it and damn tired of people like you acting like being a finacial success makes me greedy because I don't want to give away what I worked hard to get.

FWIW, I sincerely respect your achievements. My only contention is with the part of your statement I bolded. In our society, this is not entirely true. You may not like it, but it is the way most societies work. I think our only disagreement is on the level to which each of us is comfortable with being taxed.

duane1969
01-27-2011, 08:55 AM
FWIW, I sincerely respect your achievements. My only contention is with the part of your statement I bolded. In our society, this is not entirely true. You may not like it, but it is the way most societies work. I think our only disagreement is on the level to which each of us is comfortable with being taxed.

I was speaking moreso about individuals that governmental entities. No individual has the right to take what I have worked to achieve. I realize that omnipitent governments take what they want but even that has to have some limitations or civil unrest and revolt will occur.