PDA

View Full Version : Herman Cain - in case you were interested



AUTaxMan
10-06-2011, 07:08 PM
Here's his CV in case you were interested in learning a little more about him other than the fact that he's the pizza guy (and he "hates" Muslims). This was flead from elsewhere, and I'm pretty sure...

sanfran22
10-06-2011, 08:47 PM
A Romney/Cain ticket could be interesting....

pghin08
10-06-2011, 10:25 PM
He's had an impressive life, no doubt.

INTIMADATOR2007
10-06-2011, 10:28 PM
Go Herman , we are ruttin for ya '.

pghin08
10-06-2011, 10:31 PM
Seriously though, why can't the Republicans get their crap together? Three weeks ago, all I was hearing was "Oh thank goodness that Rick Perry is running! A true conservative! There's no way Obama can beat him!" Now all I hear is "Oh well Rick Perry can't win. How can we get Chris Christie to run?"

marekschwarz33
10-07-2011, 12:31 AM
No doubt he has some great accomplishments but that doesn't neccesarily equate to being a good presidential candidate in my opinion. A recent quote from Cain in response to the Occupy Wall Street protests:
"Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks," he continued. "If you don't have a job and you are not rich, blame yourself!"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20116087-503544.html

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 12:41 AM
No doubt he has some great accomplishments but that doesn't neccesarily equate to being a good presidential candidate in my opinion. A recent quote from Cain in response to the Occupy Wall Street protests:
"Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks," he continued. "If you don't have a job and you are not rich, blame yourself!"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20116087-503544.html

What's wrong with that quote?

marekschwarz33
10-07-2011, 12:48 AM
What's wrong with that quote?

While it may be true to some extent, not everyone who is unemployed should have the blame placed on themselves.

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 01:14 AM
While it may be true to some extent, not everyone who is unemployed should have the blame placed on themselves.

He was talking to the idiots protesting on wall street, not to everyone.

theonedru
10-07-2011, 01:59 AM
All those things mean squat to me, you want to impress me show me a politician who will stand behind what they promise. Until then who cares about his accomplishments, alot of politicians are accomplished and rich businesspeople but they get elected and scum they become.

texansrangerfan73
10-07-2011, 02:05 AM
<<<<<<<< Too scared to post but Godfathers pizza was a pretty good pizza back in the late 80s early 90s!!

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 09:24 AM
I have no problem with cain's business record. I have even stated on here that he would make a good economic advisor. As far as him becoming president I would vote for ronald mcdonald over him.

pghin08
10-07-2011, 10:06 AM
I have no problem with cain's business record. I have even stated on here that he would make a good economic advisor. As far as him becoming president I would vote for ronald mcdonald over him.

A dangerous proposition. Social Security checks will be replaced with Happy Meals. The Hamburgler will be his VP. Obesity will soar.

Actually, that's not too different from where we are now. McDonald in 2012!

ensbergcollector
10-07-2011, 10:21 AM
I have no problem with cain's business record. I have even stated on here that he would make a good economic advisor. As far as him becoming president I would vote for ronald mcdonald over him.

why? you stated in another thread that you would be voting for obama again because none of the republicans impress you. seeing as how we are over a year from the election, do you really feel you have given any of the republican candidates a chance? Or is it because you deem Cain an uncle tom?

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 10:43 AM
why? you stated in another thread that you would be voting for obama again because none of the republicans impress you. seeing as how we are over a year from the election, do you really feel you have given any of the republican candidates a chance? Or is it because you deem Cain an uncle tom?


Yes we are a year away and I am still unimpressed by any of the possible republican canidates. Is there some secret canidate that the republicans are hiding that they plan to announce? If so I would love to see him/her. And again cain does not have my vote because he only has the intrests of the elite at heart and not the common man (regardless of his race or religion) who is the backbone of this country. I hope that clears things up for you.

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 10:45 AM
Yes we are a year away and I am still unimpressed by any of the possible republican canidates. Is there some secret canidate that the republicans are hiding that they plan to announce? If so I would love to see him/her. And again cain does not have my vote because he only has the intrests of the elite at heart and not the common man (regardless of his race or religion) who is the backbone of this country. I hope that clears things up for you.

Explain that comment.....There would never be a Repub candidate that you would vote for, just admit it.

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 10:48 AM
Explain that comment.....There would never be a Repub candidate that you would vote for, just admit it.

I will admit that after you admit that you will never vote for a black canidate. And don't say what about herman cain. You and I both know that he has about the same chance as president obama of winning the republican nomination.

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 10:53 AM
This is the problem with you, you are so blinded that you do not listen. I would vote for Cain in a second. I've said many times he was one of my top picks. I'd vote for Allan West and Marco Rubio as...

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 11:00 AM
Sure you would if they really had a snowman's chance of getting nominated :lie:

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 11:05 AM
Sure you would if they really had a snowman's chance of getting nominated :lie:

Lol, I can't believe you "claim" to be educated.......

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 11:10 AM
There are several liberals who post in this forum with whom I routinely disagree, but I know I'm having a discussion with a reasonable, logical person. I think mrv has officially taken the step into GBM territory (although, for different reasons) where it is absolutely pointless to attempt to engage him in rational conversation. Mrv, you used to not be this way. I really do not understand your regression in recent months.

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 11:12 AM
There are several liberals who post in this forum with whom I routinely disagree, but I know I'm having a discussion with a reasonable, logical person. I think mrv has officially taken the step into GBM territory (although, for different reasons) where it is absolutely pointless to attempt to engage him in rational conversation. Mrv, you used to not be this way. I really do not understand your regression in recent months.

Yeah, I agree with you. I think the true colors have been shown. May be best to debate with the few rational libs on here instead of stooping to that level....

pghin08
10-07-2011, 11:26 AM
If he's a Marxist, he's the crappiest Marxist ever.

pghin08
10-07-2011, 11:27 AM
There are several liberals who post in this forum with whom I routinely disagree, but I know I'm having a discussion with a reasonable, logical person. I think mrv has officially taken the step into GBM territory (although, for different reasons) where it is absolutely pointless to attempt to engage him in rational conversation. Mrv, you used to not be this way. I really do not understand your regression in recent months.

You can reference me by name, I don't mind. :winking0071:

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 11:31 AM
If he's a Marxist, he's the crappiest Marxist ever.

He's a new Hybrid, lol. He's just setting the framework.....

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 11:33 AM
There are several liberals who post in this forum with whom I routinely disagree, but I know I'm having a discussion with a reasonable, logical person. I think mrv has officially taken the step into GBM territory (although, for different reasons) where it is absolutely pointless to attempt to engage him in rational conversation. Mrv, you used to not be this way. I really do not understand your regression in recent months.


Ok since I am outspoken about mines just like our good buddy GBM I am dismissed. It's too bad though I actually look forward to mixing it up with you, sanfran and duane when I go to work everyday :boxing:. I'm going to continue speaking my mind and if you ever feel up to the challange ya'll know where to find me.

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 11:36 AM
Ok since I am outspoken about mines just like our good buddy GBM I am dismissed. It's too bad though I actually look forward to mixing it up with you, sanfran and duane when I go to work everyday :boxing:. I'm going to continue speaking my mind and if you ever feel up to the challange ya'll know where to find me.

There is a difference between speaking your mind and making irrational judgments about what people believe. If I say, "the sun rises in the East," and you respond, "No, you really think the sun rises in the West :winking0071:," what kind of conversation do you think we are going to have?

pghin08
10-07-2011, 11:42 AM
He's a new Hybrid, lol. He's just setting the framework.....

I guess I just don't see it. The biggest issue I have with President Obama is that a lot of times his actions just don't match his words. By listening to him, I could understand how someone could think he'd have Marxist tendencies (though I should say, anyone who claims to "fight for the working class" almost inevitably says something that could be construed as Marxism). However, when it comes to actions, he hasn't exactly stuck it to the bourgeois. The only thing he's really done is the creation of the CFPB, which is hardly taking massive amounts of money out of the pockets of Wall Street.

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 11:44 AM
There is a difference between speaking your mind and making irrational judgments about what people believe. If I say, "the sun rises in the East," and you respond, "No, you really think the sun rises in the West :winking0071:," what kind of conversation do you think we are going to have?


You know we don't agree on that much if at all but I do enjoy debating with you. Some of my comments along with others on both sides of the fence may have been over the top but that's the nature of P/R. You can't take any of these people on here seriously. To be honest I believe that habs bought up that if there was a muslim claiming the same things that christians on here think he would debate against them too. I think that P/R needs some fresh blood besides the same old christians vs non christians or republicans vs democrats.

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 12:02 PM
I guess I just don't see it. The biggest issue I have with President Obama is that a lot of times his actions just don't match his words. By listening to him, I could understand how someone could think he'd have Marxist tendencies (though I should say, anyone who claims to "fight for the working class" almost inevitably says something that could be construed as Marxism). However, when it comes to actions, he hasn't exactly stuck it to the bourgeois. The only thing he's really done is the creation of the CFPB, which is hardly taking massive amounts of money out of the pockets of Wall Street.

Well here's what I see....
1- He attended a marxist church
2- endorsed socialist Bernie Sanders
3-His close friends are tied to communism or socialism, Ayers, Davis, Palmer ect.
4-He was endorsed by the socialist and communist parties of America (which I understand would probably be any dem)
5 He aligns himself with socialist type policies like progressive tax, natioanl healthcare, Gov't corporate takeovers.
6- He has stated he want's to turn the banks preferred stocks to common stocks controling flow of money.
7-GM
8-He's mentioned he wants to change the structure of gov't to be a simple majority rather then the 60% required to pass legislation.
9-He want's to remove private lending from student loans strengthening gov't control.
10- Just listen to him talk of fairness and justice.....

That's off the top of my head, I'm sure I could come up with alot more.

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 12:06 PM
Well here's what I see....
1- He attended a marxist church
2- endorsed socialist Bernie Sanders
3-His close friends are tied to communism or socialism, Ayers, Davis, Palmer ect.
4-He was endorsed by the socialist and communist parties of America (which I understand would probably be any dem)
5 He aligns himself with socialist type policies like progressive tax, natioanl healthcare, Gov't corporate takeovers.
6- He has stated he want's to turn the banks preferred stocks to common stocks controling flow of money.
7-GM
8-He's mentioned he wants to change the structure of gov't to be a simple majority rather then the 60% required to pass legislation.
9-He want's to remove private lending from student loans strengthening gov't control.
10- Just listen to him talk of fairness and justice.....

That's off the top of my head, I'm sure I could come up with alot more.


Links please.......

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 12:09 PM
Links please.......

Of what?

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 12:17 PM
Links please.......

2 - http://nalert.blogspot.com/2008/02/obamas-endorsement-of-socialist-bernie.html

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 12:19 PM
You can easily google all of those. I don't have time to do it for you.

pghin08
10-07-2011, 12:25 PM
Well here's what I see....
1- He attended a marxist church
2- endorsed socialist Bernie Sanders
3-His close friends are tied to communism or socialism, Ayers, Davis, Palmer ect.
4-He was endorsed by the socialist and communist parties of America (which I understand would probably be any dem)
5 He aligns himself with socialist type policies like progressive tax, natioanl healthcare, Gov't corporate takeovers.
6- He has stated he want's to turn the banks preferred stocks to common stocks controling flow of money.
7-GM
8-He's mentioned he wants to change the structure of gov't to be a simple majority rather then the 60% required to pass legislation.
9-He want's to remove private lending from student loans strengthening gov't control.
10- Just listen to him talk of fairness and justice.....

That's off the top of my head, I'm sure I could come up with alot more.

But none of what you listed is him ACTUALLY doing anything Marxist. That was my point. Like most politicians, he says one thing and does another.

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 12:30 PM
But none of what you listed is him ACTUALLY doing anything Marxist. That was my point. Like most politicians, he says one thing and does another.

Well , he did do GM and healthcare as well as several things in the works like the money and voting procedure. So he has done things in that vein. He hasn't gone full tilt yet but I would guess he would if he gets re-elected. Like I said, setting the framework. It's a slow death.
My question is why would you want someone in office that even talks it or has tendencies toward it??

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 12:30 PM
2 - http://nalert.blogspot.com/2008/02/obamas-endorsement-of-socialist-bernie.html


:smash:

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 12:31 PM
:smash:

What does that mean?

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 12:39 PM
What does that mean?


I:sign0202:

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 12:40 PM
I guess I don't speak code. I guess you disagree with it?

mrveggieman
10-07-2011, 12:49 PM
I guess I don't speak code. I guess you disagree with it?


Oh no, the site that you linked was 100% factual and completely objective and unbiased. :lie: Also breaking news green men have been discovered on mars.

pghin08
10-07-2011, 12:53 PM
Well , he did do GM and healthcare as well as several things in the works like the money and voting procedure. So he has done things in that vein. He hasn't gone full tilt yet but I would guess he would if he gets re-elected. Like I said, setting the framework. It's a slow death.
My question is why would you want someone in office that even talks it or has tendencies toward it??

Look at Obamacare and compare it to a country that has socialized medicine (Canada, most of Europe, etc), and you can see how different they really are. By saying that he's "setting the framework", I think you're copping out. If you really think he's setting the framework for socialism, you have to believe that he has the stones to fight for what he believes in. I don't think he's shown much of that. For most of his Presidency, and particularly the past year, he's been the Great Capitulator.

And why would I want someone in office that has tendencies towards it? That's a tricky question. I want someone in office who is willing to address the UNBELIEVABLE economic disparities in this country. That, in its own vein, is a Marxist thought. But the reason that I think it is because I care about this country, and don't want to see it fail. Empires that fail have one big thing in common: a vast discrepancy between the "haves" and the "have nots". When the system grossly favors a small minority, it inevitably collapses. Material wealth in our country hasn't increased in a long time. When I say that, I mean for the everyman. The ridiculously wealthy in our country have become even more ridiculously wealthy while a lot of the middle class lives paycheck to paycheck.

I'm not saying that we should adopt true socialism. But something needs to be done to save the middle class. I don't really buy into the Democrats plan of just taxing the holy hell out of the rich. I think that's a short-term fix, and those people will park their money elsewhere. I think we can save the middle class by putting people to work, and by actually starting to produce things again.

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 12:54 PM
:smash:

A - That is what is known as an endorsement. It was a QUOTE from Obama endorsing Sanders.
B - Bernie Sanders is a publicly-admitted Socialist with a capital "S". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders

http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=7b6eba9b-67f5-4d8f-bc75-ce63a07035d2

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 12:54 PM
Oh no, the site that you linked was 100% factual and completely objective and unbiased. :lie: Also breaking news green men have been discovered on mars.

It's a direct transcript of the event regardless of the site. You seem to not grasp the concept.

pghin08
10-07-2011, 12:55 PM
A - That is what is known as an endorsement. It was a QUOTE from Obama endorsing Sanders.
B - Bernie Sanders is a publicly-admitted Socialist with a capital "S". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders

A lot of these people called "voters" endorse Bernie Sanders too.

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 12:56 PM
A lot of these people called "voters" endorse Bernie Sanders too.

They are just as bad.

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 12:57 PM
They are just as bad.

Actually, they are worse, because they chose to give him power.

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 12:57 PM
Actually, they are worse, because they chose to give him power.

True point.

pghin08
10-07-2011, 01:29 PM
Actually, they are worse, because they chose to give him power.

For pretty much its entire existence, Vermont has been a Republican stronghold. Only recently has it started to shift a bit more liberal, but they still even go back and forth on electing Republican and Democratic Governors (in fact, I think they have a Dem. Gov. and a Rep. Lieutenant Gov.). So I don't know what is so bad about the people in Vermont. They obviously like Sanders. Doesn't make them crazy extremists.

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 01:51 PM
For pretty much its entire existence, Vermont has been a Republican stronghold. Only recently has it started to shift a bit more liberal, but they still even go back and forth on electing Republican and Democratic Governors (in fact, I think they have a Dem. Gov. and a Rep. Lieutenant Gov.). So I don't know what is so bad about the people in Vermont. They obviously like Sanders. Doesn't make them crazy extremists.

No, they're just idiots.

pghin08
10-07-2011, 01:57 PM
No, they're just idiots.

I could sit here and say anyone that voted for Rick Perry is an idiot. It doesn't make it true. Clearly people in Vermont think Sanders works hard for them. He didn't get elected to the House and then Senate by accident.

theonedru
10-07-2011, 02:42 PM
rules people rules

Direct or indirect personal attacks are strictly not permitted. Insults and negative attitudes are not allowed.

sanfran22
10-07-2011, 02:45 PM
Look at Obamacare and compare it to a country that has socialized medicine (Canada, most of Europe, etc), and you can see how different they really are. By saying that he's "setting the framework", I think you're copping out. If you really think he's setting the framework for socialism, you have to believe that he has the stones to fight for what he believes in. I don't think he's shown much of that. For most of his Presidency, and particularly the past year, he's been the Great Capitulator.

And why would I want someone in office that has tendencies towards it? That's a tricky question. I want someone in office who is willing to address the UNBELIEVABLE economic disparities in this country. That, in its own vein, is a Marxist thought. But the reason that I think it is because I care about this country, and don't want to see it fail. Empires that fail have one big thing in common: a vast discrepancy between the "haves" and the "have nots". When the system grossly favors a small minority, it inevitably collapses. Material wealth in our country hasn't increased in a long time. When I say that, I mean for the everyman. The ridiculously wealthy in our country have become even more ridiculously wealthy while a lot of the middle class lives paycheck to paycheck.

I'm not saying that we should adopt true socialism. But something needs to be done to save the middle class. I don't really buy into the Democrats plan of just taxing the holy hell out of the rich. I think that's a short-term fix, and those people will park their money elsewhere. I think we can save the middle class by putting people to work, and by actually starting to produce things again.

Sounds somewhat like Saul Alinski?? I'm just saying that if you surround yourself with these kind of people, how much different could you really be? Now I'm talking politically as these are all political figures.

pghin08
10-07-2011, 03:49 PM
Sounds somewhat like Saul Alinski?? I'm just saying that if you surround yourself with these kind of people, how much different could you really be? Now I'm talking politically as these are all political figures.

First off, what a politician says DOESN'T matter. It's all about what they do. And frankly, that goes for everybody. You can tell me that you're the greatest wide receiver of all time, but if I don't see you ever catch a pass, how do I really know? Particularly when you get in the game and drop everything thrown at you. That's akin to what Obama has done. He said, "I'm an unreal wide receiver." Then we put him in the game, and he's dropping balls and running the wrong routes. So I don't care who you align yourself with or what you say. It's all about what you do.

Secondly, if you're comparing me to Alinsky, I would love to hear what you have to say on the issues of economic disparity. To me, there are two undeniable truths:

1. When empires consolidate money and power, they fall.
2. Today, the gap between the top 5% and the rest of us is greater than it has ever been.

If the system favors a small amount of people, then it is inherently unstable.

Tell me how you feel about this chart:

http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/16/news/economy/middle_class/index.htm?iid=EL

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 03:55 PM
First off, what a politician says DOESN'T matter. It's all about what they do. And frankly, that goes for everybody. You can tell me that you're the greatest wide receiver of all time, but if I don't see you ever catch a pass, how do I really know? Particularly when you get in the game and drop everything thrown at you. That's akin to what Obama has done. He said, "I'm an unreal wide receiver." Then we put him in the game, and he's dropping balls and running the wrong routes. So I don't care who you align yourself with or what you say. It's all about what you do.

Secondly, if you're comparing me to Alinsky, I would love to hear what you have to say on the issues of economic disparity. To me, there are two undeniable truths:

1. When empires consolidate money and power, they fall.
2. Today, the gap between the top 5&#37; and the rest of us is greater than it has ever been.

If the system favors a small amount of people, then it is inherently unstable.

Tell me how you feel about this chart:

http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/16/news/economy/middle_class/index.htm?iid=EL

I feel nothing about that chart. What point are you trying to make with it? What is wrong with the top 1% growing wealthier, and why is it any of our business how much money they have? You act as if there is a finite amount of wealth in the world that is all being accumulated by the top 1%. Wealth is not matter. It can be created, and it can be destroyed. Currently, the fed is destroying all of our wealth by printing money.

pghin08
10-07-2011, 04:06 PM
I feel nothing about that chart. What point are you trying to make with it? What is wrong with the top 1% growing wealthier, and why is it any of our business how much money they have? You act as if there is a finite amount of wealth in the world that is all being accumulated by the top 1%. Wealth is not matter. It can be created, and it can be destroyed. Currently, the fed is destroying all of our wealth by printing money.

Nothing. There's nothing at all wrong with the top 1% getting wealthier. There is a problem with them doing it at a rate 5 times that of everybody else. But frankly, you're skirting this issue a bit. So let me ask you a few questions point blank:

1. How do you feel about the economic disparity in our country?

2. Since those who have money also have power, how is it NOT our business?

3. Is our current system conducive to having a successful middle class?

4. Has Reaganomics worked in your opinion?

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 04:18 PM
Nothing. There's nothing at all wrong with the top 1% getting wealthier. There is a problem with them doing it at a rate 5 times that of everybody else. But frankly, you're skirting this issue a bit. So let me ask you a few questions point blank:

1. How do you feel about the economic disparity in our country?

2. Since those who have money also have power, how is it NOT our business?

3. Is our current system conducive to having a successful middle class?

4. Has Reaganomics worked in your opinion?

1. I feel that this country gives you the opportunity to succeed in life. That's all you can ask. I don't "feel" about economic disparity. I acknowledge that it exists and encourage those at the bottom to work hard and educate themselves if they would like to climb the ladder.

2. One man's personal finances, if gotten through legal means, are not another man's business. Do you think making the rich less rich (but still wealthier than everyone else) is going to decrease their power?

3. Define "successful."

4. Yes. Tax coffers have proven it. http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/08/the-historical-lessons-of-lower-tax-rates

pghin08
10-07-2011, 04:38 PM
1. I feel that this country gives you the opportunity to succeed in life. That's all you can ask. I don't "feel" about economic disparity. I acknowledge that it exists and encourage those at the bottom to work hard and educate themselves if they would like to climb the ladder.

2. One man's personal finances, if gotten through legal means, are not another man's business. Do you think making the rich less rich (but still wealthier than everyone else) is going to decrease their power?

3. Define "successful."

4. Yes. Tax coffers have proven it. http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/08/the-historical-lessons-of-lower-tax-rates


1. I work hard. I'm educated. Yet there's a (very) good chance that I'll never be part of the super-rich. If your solution is to work harder, are you suggesting that since the economic disparity between the super-rich and middle class has grown rapidly, that people are quickly becoming dumber and less-educated?

2. I think if we have to disclose our finances to the government in a fair manner, then they have to disclose theirs to us the same way.

3. Growing in numbers and wealth.

4. So lower tax rates have helped John Everyman get a job and has lead to the greatest growth in the middle class?

AUTaxMan
10-07-2011, 05:19 PM
1. I work hard. I'm educated. Yet there's a (very) good chance that I'll never be part of the super-rich. If your solution is to work harder, are you suggesting that since the economic disparity between the super-rich and middle class has grown rapidly, that people are quickly becoming dumber and less-educated?

2. I think if we have to disclose our finances to the government in a fair manner, then they have to disclose theirs to us the same way.

3. Growing in numbers and wealth.

4. So lower tax rates have helped John Everyman get a job and has lead to the greatest growth in the middle class?

1. Who said we were all going to be super-rich? I wasn't solving anything. You asked me how I felt about economic disparity. Yes, people are becoming dumber and less educated.

2. Who are "they," and how do you think they are not fairly disclosed?

3. Now define "middle class."

4. Unemployment declined from 7.0&#37; in 1980 to 5.4% in 1988.

theonedru
10-09-2011, 07:30 PM
1. I feel that this country gives you the opportunity to succeed in life. That's all you can ask. I don't "feel" about economic disparity. I acknowledge that it exists and encourage those at the bottom to work hard and educate themselves if they would like to climb the ladder.

2. One man's personal finances, if gotten through legal means, are not another man's business. Do you think making the rich less rich (but still wealthier than everyone else) is going to decrease their power?

3. Define "successful."

4. Yes. Tax coffers have proven it. http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/08/the-historical-lessons-of-lower-tax-rates

99.99999% of the wealthy are wealthy due to the hard work of the poor and middle class, if it wasnt for the workers the rich would not have their wealth. So why not give them part of the pie, they are just as deserving of it are they not since they worked the hardest to produce it?

AUTaxMan
10-10-2011, 12:58 AM
99.99999&#37; of the wealthy are wealthy due to the hard work of the poor and middle class, if it wasnt for the workers the rich would not have their wealth. So why not give them part of the pie, they are just as deserving of it are they not since they worked the hardest to produce it?

That is utter nonsense. If it wasn't for the evil rich, the poor and middle class wouldn't have jobs.

theonedru
10-10-2011, 01:04 AM
That is utter nonsense. If it wasn't for the evil rich, the poor and middle class wouldn't have jobs.

and without the working class the rich would not have money to be rich.

AUTaxMan
10-10-2011, 01:24 AM
and without the working class the rich would not have money to be rich.

The rich are rich because they possess certain knowledge, skill sets, expertise, and innovation that are not commonplace. You act like they are no different from the average manual laborer or unskilled worker who can be replaced with a million others.

theonedru
10-10-2011, 01:31 AM
The rich are rich because they possess certain knowledge, skill sets, expertise, and innovation that are not commonplace. You act like they are no different from the average manual laborer or unskilled worker who can be replaced with a million others.

true they have unique skills but without a workforce what are their skills worth? NOTHING. Regardless if the workplace is replaceable or not, which is miniscule in the argument because a workforce is a workforce regardless of who specifically is in it and as such my argument is repeated.

AUTaxMan
10-10-2011, 01:48 AM
true they have unique skills but without a workforce what are their skills worth? NOTHING. Regardless if the workplace is replaceable or not, which is miniscule in the argument because a workforce is a workforce regardless of who specifically is in it and as such my argument is repeated.

People are paid what they are worth. If they were worth more, they would be paid more. Actually, the minimum wage is too high, but that is a different discussion.

pghin08
10-10-2011, 12:47 PM
1. Who said we were all going to be super-rich? I wasn't solving anything. You asked me how I felt about economic disparity. Yes, people are becoming dumber and less educated.

2. Who are "they," and how do you think they are not fairly disclosed?

3. Now define "middle class."

4. Unemployment declined from 7.0% in 1980 to 5.4% in 1988.


Top of the morning! I thought I owed you a response to these:

1. I disagree that people are becoming dumber and less educated. More people are going to college and attaining higher levels of education than ever before. Plus, I'm doing work on an IPad, technology FTW! :winking0071:

2. I'll even expand who I was referencing to two entities: government and Wall Street. Government claims financial transparency, but until someone is able to actually audit the government, I don't think we're getting the full picture as to our expenditures.

As for Wall Street, I'll break it down further. The stock market is predominately okay. People can only lie and fudge so much until it comes out into the open, either via bankruptcy or investigation. But the bond market is a TOTALLY different story. And given the size of the bond market, it's a huge problem. That's what we saw in 2008. People look at the "stock market" and blame the "stock market", but that's not what the problem was. The problems lay in the complexity and the lack of regulation within the bond market. People can get away with MURDER there, and they basically did. There is no body out there that can adequately investigate the bond market due to its absolutely massive size, so corruption runs rampant. One of the reasons everything went to hell in '08 was because even the banks themselves had no idea how deep other banks were mired in these subprime tranches, and sometimes they didn't even know how deep they themselves were involved.

3. I'll define the middle class as literally, the middle 50% of American families. Those who aren't part of the richest 25% of the country, or the poorest 25%. Common characteristics being moderate to high debt to net worth, working or formerly working parents with school-age children, retired folks with less than half a million in investable assets, things of that sort.

4. Bush Jr. cut taxes twice and unemployment rose from 4.2% when he took office to 7.3% in December of 2007. I stop at 2007 to be nice. I don't blame Bush for the massive banking crisis and unemployment that stemmed from it. But see, these stats can work both ways.