Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

Evening Legal Briefs

View
48 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >

48. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 19, 2012, 17:36 RollinThundr
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 19:15:
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 14:42:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 14:18:
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 13:54:
Since you all seem so focused on not cutting any spending aside from military.

Another strawman from you since the president, democrats, and nearly everyone on this board have agreed that cuts need to be made. Unlike the republicans, the democrats haven't signed some absurd pledge which makes compromise impossible from the get-go. Thankfully the amount of signatories to Norquist's infantile "I don't wanna!" pledge dropped some after the election and we'll hopefully finally see some compromise.

As far as what to cut... I'm not qualified to determine what that should be but I would be okay with across the board cuts. I'm not in favor of shuttering budgetarily insignificant stuff like PBS and Planned Parenthood but I'm fine with cutting their budgets proportionally along with everything else.

Honestly neither am I, but the spending is the root of the issue, not taxing the rich to pay more just to spend that too. The quicker you guys realize that, the quicker maybe the two parties can actually seriously start putting it in effect. Entities like PBS would survive off donations.

The class warfare farce is just that a farce, and it's hurting this country more than I think those on the left realize.

Spending is mostly moot. Tell me how spending hurts our economy. You'll probably say something dumb like "China," even though China isn't even our largest foreign debtor.

Bottom line - you seem to not know much about our economy. The enormous gap between the amount of people in our country vs the amount earning money is a larger issue than the amount our country is spending. Not to say our country isn't spending too much, just that it isn't what's been the drain on our economy.

Tell me, in one paragraph, how spending damages our economy. Don't say "duh, it's obvious, BECAUSE!" tell me who you think our debtors are and how having a deficit is truly a drain and slowing things down.

Saying that putting ourselves into massive debt is no big deal is I think just about the stupidest thing I've ever read.

Spending the way we are affects alot, investor and consumer confidence right off the bat ties into the economy.

Why not mention China? As of May 2011 the largest single holder of U.S. government debt was China, with 26 percent of all foreign-held U.S. Treasury securities. The Office of Management and Budget forecasts that, by the end of fiscal year 2012, gross federal debt will total $16.3 trillion. Thus, the projected debt will equal 101% of projected gross domestic product, which represents a milestone in the U.S. economy. Public debt alone, which excludes amounts that the government owes its citizens via various trust funds, will be 67% of GDP by the end of fiscal 2012.

Yeah sorry if that doesn't instill confidence in me to go out and spend money thanks. That's not even mentioning the drain of SS and medicare, the former I'm sure won't be even there by the time I hit retirement age, guess I should just kiss that money goodbye before I even think about it.

Here's a pretty good article talking about our debt and why we're pretty much fucked either way. It's from 2010 but really not much has changed and we're still full speed driving over the cliff with the Obmessiah's foot slamming the pedal to the floor.

http://tinyurl.com/c6uumfq

This comment was edited on Nov 19, 2012, 17:45.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
47. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 17, 2012, 19:15 Beamer
 
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 14:42:
Sepharo wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 14:18:
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 13:54:
Since you all seem so focused on not cutting any spending aside from military.

Another strawman from you since the president, democrats, and nearly everyone on this board have agreed that cuts need to be made. Unlike the republicans, the democrats haven't signed some absurd pledge which makes compromise impossible from the get-go. Thankfully the amount of signatories to Norquist's infantile "I don't wanna!" pledge dropped some after the election and we'll hopefully finally see some compromise.

As far as what to cut... I'm not qualified to determine what that should be but I would be okay with across the board cuts. I'm not in favor of shuttering budgetarily insignificant stuff like PBS and Planned Parenthood but I'm fine with cutting their budgets proportionally along with everything else.

Honestly neither am I, but the spending is the root of the issue, not taxing the rich to pay more just to spend that too. The quicker you guys realize that, the quicker maybe the two parties can actually seriously start putting it in effect. Entities like PBS would survive off donations.

The class warfare farce is just that a farce, and it's hurting this country more than I think those on the left realize.

Spending is mostly moot. Tell me how spending hurts our economy. You'll probably say something dumb like "China," even though China isn't even our largest foreign debtor.

Bottom line - you seem to not know much about our economy. The enormous gap between the amount of people in our country vs the amount earning money is a larger issue than the amount our country is spending. Not to say our country isn't spending too much, just that it isn't what's been the drain on our economy.

Tell me, in one paragraph, how spending damages our economy. Don't say "duh, it's obvious, BECAUSE!" tell me who you think our debtors are and how having a deficit is truly a drain and slowing things down.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
46. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 17, 2012, 14:42 RollinThundr
 
Sepharo wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 14:18:
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 13:54:
Since you all seem so focused on not cutting any spending aside from military.

Another strawman from you since the president, democrats, and nearly everyone on this board have agreed that cuts need to be made. Unlike the republicans, the democrats haven't signed some absurd pledge which makes compromise impossible from the get-go. Thankfully the amount of signatories to Norquist's infantile "I don't wanna!" pledge dropped some after the election and we'll hopefully finally see some compromise.

As far as what to cut... I'm not qualified to determine what that should be but I would be okay with across the board cuts. I'm not in favor of shuttering budgetarily insignificant stuff like PBS and Planned Parenthood but I'm fine with cutting their budgets proportionally along with everything else.

Honestly neither am I, but the spending is the root of the issue, not taxing the rich to pay more just to spend that too. The quicker you guys realize that, the quicker maybe the two parties can actually seriously start putting it in effect. Entities like PBS would survive off donations.

The class warfare farce is just that a farce, and it's hurting this country more than I think those on the left realize.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
45. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 17, 2012, 14:18 Sepharo
 
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 17, 2012, 13:54:
Since you all seem so focused on not cutting any spending aside from military.

Another strawman from you since the president, democrats, and nearly everyone on this board have agreed that cuts need to be made. Unlike the republicans, the democrats haven't signed some absurd pledge which makes compromise impossible from the get-go. Thankfully the amount of signatories to Norquist's infantile "I don't wanna!" pledge dropped some after the election and we'll hopefully finally see some compromise.

As far as what to cut... I'm not qualified to determine what that should be but I would be okay with across the board cuts. I'm not in favor of shuttering budgetarily insignificant stuff like PBS and Planned Parenthood but I'm fine with cutting their budgets proportionally along with everything else.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 17, 2012, 13:54 RollinThundr
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 15:02:
Oh come now. I clearly said that giving everyone the same income is socialism, and I'm probably one of the biggest capitalists here (hence my reputation as a corporate shill.)

Stop making such idiotic strawman arguments. Never once did I say that everyone should make the same amount. This is why you are impossible to argue with - you never make a point, you never give evidence, you just say "blah blah blah BECAUSE!," like a 5 year old who thinks that there needs to be no logic or explanation behind statements, or you just pretend someone made an argument no one in their right mind would make.

Seriously, you read that as "everyone should make the same amount?" I mentioned a tax on people making over a million dollars a year and you think that means everyone should make the same amount?

Histrionics, hyperbole, lack of reading comprehension (which you'll somehow throw back at me), etc.

Try actually reading an argument instead of making up an entirely different one in your head before you hit "Reply."

And of course I won't give my money away. For the same reason I don't begrudge a CEO not giving his away. For the same reason I did not begrudge Romney for paying a tax rate less than half of mine. For the same reason I understand banks that kept giving out bad mortgages.
The person that individually changes behavior will get eaten by those that do not.
Rules need to change, not people. I shouldn't even get into this, though. At best this will be all you reply to. And you'll somehow read it wrong and think I'm saying something something entirely different.

I just want to know what you think is fair? Should those who work the hardest give half of their wealth to those who don't make the effort? 60%? 80%?

How about those folks who receive 100% of the benefits but pay nothing into the system?

And what spending cuts aside from the military would you guys propose? Since you all seem so focused on not cutting any spending aside from military. Explain to me how this is going to not only be sustainable, but not turn the US into a 3rd world shithole like a Greece or <insert shitty Eurohole here>

Socialism and communism do not work. Greece is the perfect example of this, the former USSR another. You often lay the blame solely on Ronald Reagan, but I'll say one thing, I'd take another president like Reagan anyday over what we currently have. Reagan wouldn't have divided the country the way Obama has into right vs left.

Nancy Reagan never would have made a comment like "all this for a flag" like Michelle Obama has while the president nods at her in agreement.

In 36 years I have never in my life seen the US as fragmented as it is right now. And to be honest with you that is both scary and disheartening.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
43. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 17, 2012, 01:34 Beamer
 
Creston wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 18:33:
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:20:
Again, you focus on Person B in your silly scenario when no one else is. The fact that Person A's life won't be significantly improved over Person B's is the problem. Rather than focus on that you concentrate on Person B.

And accuse everyone of being "liberals."

Just out of curiosity, what are the Democrats doing, exactly, to make person A's life better? Because from what I can tell, both parties pretty much shit on Person A.

Creston

They do. Like I keep saying, I'm not a Democrat, and not even particularly liberal.
Only difference is the democrats don't want to cut taxes on the super wealthy.

They also aren't too interested in raising them, though.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
42. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 20:40 Sepharo
 
Creston wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 18:33:
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:20:
Again, you focus on Person B in your silly scenario when no one else is. The fact that Person A's life won't be significantly improved over Person B's is the problem. Rather than focus on that you concentrate on Person B.

And accuse everyone of being "liberals."

Just out of curiosity, what are the Democrats doing, exactly, to make person A's life better? Because from what I can tell, both parties pretty much shit on Person A.

Creston

Government assistance/programs are not just for the poor. Every single person in this nation has benefited from government programs. When the GOP wants to make drastic cuts to all expenditures except defense they hobble the middle class and the nation. Cuts need to be made, programs reformed/refactored, and efficiency improved but to do so while maintaining historic wealth imbalances is absurd.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
41. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 18:33 Creston
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:20:
Again, you focus on Person B in your silly scenario when no one else is. The fact that Person A's life won't be significantly improved over Person B's is the problem. Rather than focus on that you concentrate on Person B.

And accuse everyone of being "liberals."

Just out of curiosity, what are the Democrats doing, exactly, to make person A's life better? Because from what I can tell, both parties pretty much shit on Person A.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 18:24 Creston
 
Cutter wrote on Nov 15, 2012, 22:14:
Yeah, because the security of a nation should be common knowledge to everyone. Rolleyes

I'm pretty sure everyone screamed bloody murder when Bush did the same thing.

I don't really give a shit one way or the other, and I don't hold to the theory that every single one of the President's actions need to be out in the open to be scrutinized, but the rhetoric WAS quite different around six or so years ago.

Creston


 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 15:02 Beamer
 
Oh come now. I clearly said that giving everyone the same income is socialism, and I'm probably one of the biggest capitalists here (hence my reputation as a corporate shill.)

Stop making such idiotic strawman arguments. Never once did I say that everyone should make the same amount. This is why you are impossible to argue with - you never make a point, you never give evidence, you just say "blah blah blah BECAUSE!," like a 5 year old who thinks that there needs to be no logic or explanation behind statements, or you just pretend someone made an argument no one in their right mind would make.

Seriously, you read that as "everyone should make the same amount?" I mentioned a tax on people making over a million dollars a year and you think that means everyone should make the same amount?

Histrionics, hyperbole, lack of reading comprehension (which you'll somehow throw back at me), etc.

Try actually reading an argument instead of making up an entirely different one in your head before you hit "Reply."

And of course I won't give my money away. For the same reason I don't begrudge a CEO not giving his away. For the same reason I did not begrudge Romney for paying a tax rate less than half of mine. For the same reason I understand banks that kept giving out bad mortgages.
The person that individually changes behavior will get eaten by those that do not.
Rules need to change, not people. I shouldn't even get into this, though. At best this will be all you reply to. And you'll somehow read it wrong and think I'm saying something something entirely different.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 14:12 RollinThundr
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 14:04:
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:59:
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:47
uote what playbook? The one that says the corporate tax rate should be 0%? Wait, which party wants a lower corporate tax rate again?

You should know hard work is meaningless.

Also, it isn't about jealousy. It's about collapsing our economy. It's kind of weasely to say "you only want that because you're jealous." No, our entire economy is drastically weakened because too many people aren't being paid enough money. But our country is earning a ton, so where is that money going?

Again, in the 1970s the top 1% had 19.5% of the wealth. Today it has 34.5% of the wealth and, since the 1990s, it has had 93% of the income growth, according to Bloomberg.

This isn't sustainable.


Listen, you can call me jealous all you want. I'd wager $100 I'm much more educated than you (which isn't a sign of intelligence or hard work, just a sign of pedigree) and therefore much more likely to ever be in the C-Suite of any company (because the decisions you make before 25 often matter as much as those made after - having the right letters and names after your own matter as much as what you prove on the job these days.) [/quote:


Spending 5 trillion in 4 years isn't sustainable either but folks like you seem fine with that, just as long as we tax the fuck outta anyone who makes 250k or more.

I'm college educated with an engineering degree and have multiple certs in IT as well. Am I rich? No, am I doing alright for myself after paying off loans and such? You bet your sweet ass I am.

I agree with you, knowing the right people or whatnot is obviously easier. I think that's kinda a given no?

Again, get off the wealth thing it doesn't even matter in what we're talking about. It does make you come off as jealous imo. You don't need to be rich to live well or be happy. Don't get me wrong, I'd be all for seeing minimum wage and the like be raised, I'd like to see loop holes in the tax code be fixed to ensure that big corps aren't scamming out of not paying the proper amount of taxes.


Stop being stupid (and fix your italics/bold), I said I agreed with you in that other topic that we spend too much in stupid areas.

And I don't give a shit if you think I'm jealous. This is not about me being rich. I'm already well into the six figures and well be in the 1% in a few years (which may be why I say it's more the top 0.5%, or even 0.1%.) It's about the economy, and the country, not falling apart because all the money our masses should be making are instead going to our few, leaving our masses unable to buy as much as our economy needs them to be buying, and that in order for those few to get that money they're actually reducing the number of jobs out there for the masses.

You are so fucking unable to comprehend that in order for one person to make $100 more another person needs to make $100 less, and you ignore nice things like how 93% of income growth over the past 22 years went to 1% of the people. That isn't sustainable. An economy cannot thrive like that. You need EVERYONE buying stuff. You need money changing hands. When it concentrates in a small group who are earning it much faster than they can spend it then money just sits around. That is what strangles an economy.

Yep lets just give everyone the same % of income regardless. Welcome to the United Socialist States of America. It will be a wonderful social utopia where everyone has the same!

That's ok Beamer, when you hit the 1% there in a little bit, you yourself can give all your money away to those too unwilling to make something of themselves.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 14:04 Beamer
 
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:59:
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:47
uote what playbook? The one that says the corporate tax rate should be 0%? Wait, which party wants a lower corporate tax rate again?

You should know hard work is meaningless.

Also, it isn't about jealousy. It's about collapsing our economy. It's kind of weasely to say "you only want that because you're jealous." No, our entire economy is drastically weakened because too many people aren't being paid enough money. But our country is earning a ton, so where is that money going?

Again, in the 1970s the top 1% had 19.5% of the wealth. Today it has 34.5% of the wealth and, since the 1990s, it has had 93% of the income growth, according to Bloomberg.

This isn't sustainable.


Listen, you can call me jealous all you want. I'd wager $100 I'm much more educated than you (which isn't a sign of intelligence or hard work, just a sign of pedigree) and therefore much more likely to ever be in the C-Suite of any company (because the decisions you make before 25 often matter as much as those made after - having the right letters and names after your own matter as much as what you prove on the job these days.) [/quote:


Spending 5 trillion in 4 years isn't sustainable either but folks like you seem fine with that, just as long as we tax the fuck outta anyone who makes 250k or more.

I'm college educated with an engineering degree and have multiple certs in IT as well. Am I rich? No, am I doing alright for myself after paying off loans and such? You bet your sweet ass I am.

I agree with you, knowing the right people or whatnot is obviously easier. I think that's kinda a given no?

Again, get off the wealth thing it doesn't even matter in what we're talking about. It does make you come off as jealous imo. You don't need to be rich to live well or be happy. Don't get me wrong, I'd be all for seeing minimum wage and the like be raised, I'd like to see loop holes in the tax code be fixed to ensure that big corps aren't scamming out of not paying the proper amount of taxes.


Stop being stupid (and fix your italics/bold), I said I agreed with you in that other topic that we spend too much in stupid areas.

And I don't give a shit if you think I'm jealous. This is not about me being rich. I'm already well into the six figures and well be in the 1% in a few years (which may be why I say it's more the top 0.5%, or even 0.1%.) It's about the economy, and the country, not falling apart because all the money our masses should be making are instead going to our few, leaving our masses unable to buy as much as our economy needs them to be buying, and that in order for those few to get that money they're actually reducing the number of jobs out there for the masses.

You are so fucking unable to comprehend that in order for one person to make $100 more another person needs to make $100 less, and you ignore nice things like how 93% of income growth over the past 22 years went to 1% of the people. That isn't sustainable. An economy cannot thrive like that. You need EVERYONE buying stuff. You need money changing hands. When it concentrates in a small group who are earning it much faster than they can spend it then money just sits around. That is what strangles an economy.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 14:00 Beamer
 
Axis wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:54:
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:47:

You should know hard work is meaningless.


Listen, you can call me jealous all you want. I'd wager $100 I'm much more educated than you (which isn't a sign of intelligence or hard work, just a sign of pedigree) and therefore much more likely to ever be in the C-Suite of any company (because the decisions you make before 25 often matter as much as those made after - having the right letters and names after your own matter as much as what you prove on the job these days.)

Hard work is meaningless? Wow.

And if you are more 'educated', I'll stick with the average working American. They are the ones who know working hard makes a difference, and they don't need self professed "educated" ones telling them how they'll succeed.

And do you plan on commenting on your racist comments earlier? I doubt you will nothing really more to say.

I can't imagine how your life will play out Beamer, so false and empty it would seem to me.

How many hard workers die penniless?
How many non-hard workers are rich.

You know who makes more money than every single person on this board combined? Kim Kardashian. We can say she's a fluke, but with her is her entire family, and Britney Spears, and Honey Boo Boo, and Snookie.

The GOP rallied around "hard work and intelligence = success" but it doesn't. Hard work is not going to make you rich. It won't even make you not poor. For every wealthy person working hard we have at least one poor person also working hard. That janitor in an elementary school cleaning toilets and vomit? He's working much harder than most people on this board. He's almost definitely making less than all of us on this board, too.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 13:59 RollinThundr
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:47
uote what playbook? The one that says the corporate tax rate should be 0%? Wait, which party wants a lower corporate tax rate again?

You should know hard work is meaningless.

Also, it isn't about jealousy. It's about collapsing our economy. It's kind of weasely to say "you only want that because you're jealous." No, our entire economy is drastically weakened because too many people aren't being paid enough money. But our country is earning a ton, so where is that money going?

Again, in the 1970s the top 1% had 19.5% of the wealth. Today it has 34.5% of the wealth and, since the 1990s, it has had 93% of the income growth, according to Bloomberg.

This isn't sustainable.


Listen, you can call me jealous all you want. I'd wager $100 I'm much more educated than you (which isn't a sign of intelligence or hard work, just a sign of pedigree) and therefore much more likely to ever be in the C-Suite of any company (because the decisions you make before 25 often matter as much as those made after - having the right letters and names after your own matter as much as what you prove on the job these days.) [/quote:


Spending 5 trillion in 4 years isn't sustainable either but folks like you seem fine with that, just as long as we tax the fuck outta anyone who makes 250k or more.

I'm college educated with an engineering degree and have multiple certs in IT as well. Am I rich? No, am I doing alright for myself after paying off loans and such? You bet your sweet ass I am.

I agree with you, knowing the right people or whatnot is obviously easier. I think that's kinda a given no?

Again, get off the wealth thing it doesn't even matter in what we're talking about. It does make you come off as jealous imo. You don't need to be rich to live well or be happy. Don't get me wrong, I'd be all for seeing minimum wage and the like be raised, I'd like to see loop holes in the tax code be fixed to ensure that big corps aren't scamming out of not paying the proper amount of taxes.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 13:57 Beamer
 
Axis wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:39:
That's king of racism, maybe we should start recognizing this crap that for what it is.

Go spend 4 years living in Newark NJ. Spend time in the juvenile court system. Spend time in the adult criminal court system. Befriend the teachers in the schools. Visit the projects kids live in. See the gunshots in the doors, the used condoms and needles in the stairwells. See the complete lack of any employment opportunity aside from minimum wage at McDonald's, KFC or Walmart because small family-owned businesses have been pushed out, or to make significantly more money selling drugs (and respecting yourself more because you're not a fry chef.)

It's a failing of society, not a failing of race. Those kids have no chance to make something of themselves because, by the time they're old enough to realize they should, it's far too late.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 13:54 Axis
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:47:

You should know hard work is meaningless.


Listen, you can call me jealous all you want. I'd wager $100 I'm much more educated than you (which isn't a sign of intelligence or hard work, just a sign of pedigree) and therefore much more likely to ever be in the C-Suite of any company (because the decisions you make before 25 often matter as much as those made after - having the right letters and names after your own matter as much as what you prove on the job these days.)

Hard work is meaningless? Wow.

And if you are more 'educated', I'll stick with the average working American. They are the ones who know working hard makes a difference, and they don't need self professed "educated" ones telling them how they'll succeed.

And do you plan on commenting on your racist comments earlier? I doubt you will nothing really more to say.

I can't imagine how your life will play out Beamer, so false and empty it would seem to me.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 13:47 Beamer
 
Quote what playbook? The one that says the corporate tax rate should be 0%? Wait, which party wants a lower corporate tax rate again?

You should know hard work is meaningless.

Also, it isn't about jealousy. It's about collapsing our economy. It's kind of weasely to say "you only want that because you're jealous." No, our entire economy is drastically weakened because too many people aren't being paid enough money. But our country is earning a ton, so where is that money going?

Again, in the 1970s the top 1% had 19.5% of the wealth. Today it has 34.5% of the wealth and, since the 1990s, it has had 93% of the income growth, according to Bloomberg.

This isn't sustainable.


Listen, you can call me jealous all you want. I'd wager $100 I'm much more educated than you (which isn't a sign of intelligence or hard work, just a sign of pedigree) and therefore much more likely to ever be in the C-Suite of any company (because the decisions you make before 25 often matter as much as those made after - having the right letters and names after your own matter as much as what you prove on the job these days.)
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 13:39 Axis
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:20:
Whatever, keep going back to personal responsibility, ignoring that for much of our country they never had the opportunity to be personally responsible, and ignoring that for pretty much our entire country there's really no upward mobility at all.

WAIT just a minute! This is either terribly racist or in the very least insensitive and condescending.

I won't even speculate, but you better clarify what you mean when you say "They" are incapable of being personally responsible without some outside forced 'opportunity'. Or "they" have no way to improve themselves and make a living.

Wow... and yet this is ENTIRELY the premise of most liberal programs - " "they" cannot survive without liberals pushing them along."

That's king of racism, maybe we should start recognizing this crap that for what it is.

This comment was edited on Nov 16, 2012, 13:48.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 13:34 RollinThundr
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:20:
[
I'm really not particularly liberal, given that most of this site accuses me of being a corporate shill, and way to ignore the lengthy response to you on the other page, including your failure to ever give reasoning other than "because!"

Whatever, keep going back to personal responsibility, ignoring that for much of our country they never had the opportunity to be personally responsible, and ignoring that for pretty much our entire country there's really no upward mobility at all.

Again, you focus on Person B in your silly scenario when no one else is. The fact that Person A's life won't be significantly improved over Person B's is the problem. Rather than focus on that you concentrate on Person B.

And accuse everyone of being "liberals."

You pretty much quote the playbook on a constant basis, I dunno maybe you're just jealous of others success and wish you had their piece because you know it's impossible to make anything of yourself because the rich are hoarding all the success.

I don't see how person A wouldn't have more success, they're not dependent on anyone but themselves, they work hard, and know what they want to accomplish and have the means to do so.
Person B on the other hand has to go welfare check to welfare check just to make ends meet.

Anyone can succeed, sure people who aren't born into money are going to have a tougher time obviously, but the notion that if one isn't born rich that they have zero chances of success in life unless we give them handouts is flat out silly. You have to start somewhere. Pretending that no one who has ever had to struggle to make ends meet, has gone on to be successful further down the road is ridiculous.



 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 16, 2012, 13:20 Beamer
 
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 13:14:
Beamer wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 12:36:
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 12:25:
Cutter wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 12:08:
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 10:57:
InBlack wrote on Nov 16, 2012, 10:48:
This election has shown how easily the liberal democrats have been able to influence the minorities, less educated and poor in this country by telling them that they are all victims by tapping into the very core of human emotions - envy & covetousness. Manipulating them that the successful have cheated them out of what should be rightfully theirs, and that the rich not only owes them a living, but a living in the manner of their choosing.

Welcome to Capitalism 101. How does wealth accumulation work exactly do you think? In a finite closed system how do you 'acquire' wealth?? What exactly is wealth?? You argue with Beamer but do you even have any clear concept of the fundemantal principles you are talking about?

Person A finishes high school and gets a college degree in a field of their choice and a career based on whatever field. Saves money, is personally responsible and does not rack up credit card debt.
Person B Drops out of highschool, has 4 different kids by 4 different fathers and lives off the taxpayers on welfare and section 8 housing.

You tell me which of the two will go on to acquire wealth. If you picked the person who is personally responsible for themselves and works hard to make a life for THEMSELF you were right.

Yeah, and 9 out of 10 times the latter person is one who supports the GOP while the former is a Democrat. Ignorant, uneducated and in debt is what the GOP base is. Red states are overwhelmingly debtor states while Blue states are the ones that carry them. Jesus Christ, you are just entirely out of touch with even the smallest semblance of reality when it comes to the left and right.

lol sure thing cupcake, yep those people on welfare are going to support the party that wants to cut welfare. Obama gonna pay my mortgage types generally vote democrat, I know that clashes with your fantasy world but that's pretty much how it goes.


I'd be shocked if you make over $70,000, yet you're a die hard Republican.
Wealth does not play into this much. Education only at a higher level (college degrees no longer factor.)

Ignorance, possibly. Too many seem to not understand what a marginal tax rate is, or understand that in order for some to make more money others need to make less, or understand that no president has ever redistributed wealth to the extent Reagan did.

Wealth doesn't really play into it at all. While you liberals can name call and do the usual deflection tactics from our real issue, spending all you want.

None of that changes the fact that being personally responsible for oneself is the easiest way to get ahead in life. Granted I realize the very idea of being self reliant is a foreign concept to the liberal ideology to grow government and make us completely dependent on said government, however that is not a path to being successful.

I'm really not particularly liberal, given that most of this site accuses me of being a corporate shill, and way to ignore the lengthy response to you on the other page, including your failure to ever give reasoning other than "because!"

Whatever, keep going back to personal responsibility, ignoring that for much of our country they never had the opportunity to be personally responsible, and ignoring that for pretty much our entire country there's really no upward mobility at all.

Again, you focus on Person B in your silly scenario when no one else is. The fact that Person A's life won't be significantly improved over Person B's is the problem. Rather than focus on that you concentrate on Person B.

And accuse everyone of being "liberals."
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
48 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo