Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

27. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Nov 26, 2012, 15:28 RollinThundr
Beamer wrote on Nov 26, 2012, 15:16:
I think our balance of wealth is a much bigger issue than our spending. Do you know who holds the vast majority of our debt? We do. What happens if our debt rating drops? Not much, really. It's not something to be proud of, but given that our debt is mostly domestic, not foreign, it isn't really much of a concern, compared to the drastic hoovering of wealth our few have done, largely by cutting jobs or sending them overseas.

Our unemployment and our offshoring have nothing to do with our debt or our debt rating. In fact, all that outsourcing overseas is due to our debt being valuable, if anything.

Furthermore, paper money can never be worth nothing. We can't much go through a drastic inflation due to the size of our economy. It would bankrupt everyone, and I don't mean everyone in the country I mean everyone in the globe. This isn't Argentina, where our government could fold and make our currency useless. Although, in truth, having a sudden burst of massive inflation making my student debt moot does sound like a nice idea...

I don't say tax the rich, you dolt, I say tax the income. If someone has a lot of income tax it a lot. Fix Reagan's redistribution of wealth. Warren Buffet wrote a pretty solid editorial about it today. Only a moron says "the rich won't invest if they're taxed more." History shows they invest more. In jobs. For the middle class.

Also, you're the idiot playing the race card all the time. "I'm a straight white christian male, there's a war on me!"

I don't recall ever saying the rich won't invest if taxed more. I think I've been very consistent about spending being the issue. The idea that you think spending is sustainable when we pay out more than we take in, then add the fact that you could tax the 1% 100% of their income and still not cover what we're spending, that alone should raise some red flags for you but it apparently doesn't since you're too worried about the rich hoarding all that wealth as if it matters. Never mind that a person could start a company, become successful and make their own wealth, but no we need to redistribute from the rich and give to the poor, especially those folks that pay no taxes and receive all the hand outs, they deserve it the most.

Hey lets print more money and make it worth even less! That will surely solve everything! (rinse repeat)

You mentioned Cutter as well, It would take me both hands and toes to count how many times he's called me a bigot, or racist or whatever anytime something he can't dispute is said.

Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.


Blue's News logo