Conquer Club

Nola_Lifer wrote:Let say all Obama wants to do is take money for the wealthiest people. That would be the people at the top, the 1%ers. If he does do this and gives take breaks to lower and middle class people, wouldn't that mean more money for you, PS? I am assuming your not a kabillionaire. Wouldn't you want more money? I am saying this as someone who probably won't vote for Obama so don't but this "O your a liberal" bullshit on me.

I want more of my own hard earned money. I don't want to "try to get" other people's earned money.

I vote for what is best for my country, not for me or my pocketbook. I'm not as greedy as you assume.

Nola_Lifer wrote:Let say all Obama wants to do is take money for the wealthiest people. That would be the people at the top, the 1%ers. If he does do this and gives take breaks to lower and middle class people, wouldn't that mean more money for you, PS? I am assuming your not a kabillionaire. Wouldn't you want more money? I am saying this as someone who probably won't vote for Obama so don't but this "O your a liberal" bullshit on me.

Because some people realize it's wrong to use the government to take money from someone else just so they can give some of it to you. For all the accusations of greed thrown at those who don't want higher taxes on "the rich", you have just precisely pointed out where the real greed in our society lies that the media never questions.

It matters not to you how people suffer
And should they, you'd consider that a gain
You bring a lot of trouble to the town and then you leave
That's part of your Communistic game
I detect a little Communism
I can see it in the things ya do
Communism, Socialism call it what you like
There's very little difference in the two


--Andy

PhatScotty's theme song!

Night Strike wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:Let say all Obama wants to do is take money for the wealthiest people. That would be the people at the top, the 1%ers. If he does do this and gives take breaks to lower and middle class people, wouldn't that mean more money for you, PS? I am assuming your not a kabillionaire. Wouldn't you want more money? I am saying this as someone who probably won't vote for Obama so don't but this "O your a liberal" bullshit on me.

Because some people realize it's wrong to use the government to take money from someone else just so they can give some of it to you. For all the accusations of greed thrown at those who don't want higher taxes on "the rich", you have just precisely pointed out where the real greed in our society lies that the media never questions.

LOL
Its not the middle class failing to pay their share that put us in debt, sorry.. it very much is the wealthy -- corporate discounts, bank bail outs.

The reason our government has had to expand so much is to protect people from the many abuses by corporations... Even so, they were not ENOUGH to prevent BP, Massey Energy, Madoff or many other debacles. THEY are why we need to increase taxes. And it is far more correct that the wealthy, who have money, pay those additional amounts than it is to cut school lunches, food for the elderly, healthcare for the poor and education funding.

I never knew that the wealthy forced the politicians to implement Medicare and Medicaid.

BigBallinStalin wrote:I never knew that the wealthy forced the politicians to implement Medicare and Medicaid.

Yes not many knows this. There's a lot of misconceptions around in the world. A lot of things that at first glance, appear simple. But chwhen you tink a little, it al becomes more complicated. You tsee, chwhen you use your mighty bräin, the word "wealthy" is relative, and can be applied to anyone who is whealthy in respect to another person. Even the poorest sods in the US are still richer than the average Somalis. So one might say (with a wicked perspective) that your irony was unfounded.

I tried to immitate Peter Sellers here but I'm pretty sure it was an epic fail haha.

thegreekdog wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I see what you are saying. I think he is Progressive and influenced by Marx because of what he stands for (what he says he stands for), ad based on his past, which included being directly tutored for years by Marxist Frank Marshall Davis, Jeremiah Wright, Reverand Wallace, his own words in his book "seeking out Marxist professors", the hand picked appointments of the straight up, self admitted Communists, admitted Maoists, admitted Marxists etc as Czars. I can only imagine what those Czars are doing, not like we will ever know much of the truth concerning them.

I'm going to have to be talked into changing my mind about this. Thanks for trying you made some good points. Just one question: if a Marxist got elected into a capitalist system, would the Marxist take advantage of Crony Capitalism?

That's a virtually impossible scenario. Marxists cannot get elected in our current system because no one would give them any campaign money.

Again, you're still focused on what he did in the past and not what he's done as president. If he is elected again, serves another four year term, and does nothing Marxist, would you then be willing to admit he's not a Marxist?

...unless they control the media and thus their image???????????????

What people do in the past is a key indicator of who they are today. Is that not what your parents taught you? Is that not what all parents try to teach their children? Is that not the very reason why we are supposed to "stay out of trouble" or "do the right thing"???

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:Let say all Obama wants to do is take money for the wealthiest people. That would be the people at the top, the 1%ers. If he does do this and gives take breaks to lower and middle class people, wouldn't that mean more money for you, PS? I am assuming your not a kabillionaire. Wouldn't you want more money? I am saying this as someone who probably won't vote for Obama so don't but this "O your a liberal" bullshit on me.

Because some people realize it's wrong to use the government to take money from someone else just so they can give some of it to you. For all the accusations of greed thrown at those who don't want higher taxes on "the rich", you have just precisely pointed out where the real greed in our society lies that the media never questions.

LOL
Its not the middle class failing to pay their share that put us in debt, sorry..

Actually, it's Obama voters. A study out today shows that the average Obama voters median tax rate is 3%. The average Romney voters median tax rate is 17%

@gillipig

Haha, yeah... I was reading Sean Connery in your post, then I lost it after the 6th sentence.

It could've used more exclamation points, and some references to <crazy arm movements, fidgets in wheelchair> woulda helped... =P

BigBallinStalin wrote:@gillipig

Haha, yeah... I was reading Sean Connery in your post, then I lost it after the 6th sentence.

It could've used more exclamation points, and some references to <crazy arm movements, fidgets in wheelchair> woulda helped... =P

Darn it! I tried to do inspector Clouseau. Turns out I've dragged Sean Connery's good name through the mud instead. Though I didn't include any violence towards women so it couldn't have been THAT authentic .

BigBallinStalin wrote:I never knew that the wealthy forced the politicians to implement Medicare and Medicaid.

They are not why we are going bankrupt, but many wealthy do benefit from Medicare.. as do their older relatives.

Phatscotty wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:Let say all Obama wants to do is take money for the wealthiest people. That would be the people at the top, the 1%ers. If he does do this and gives take breaks to lower and middle class people, wouldn't that mean more money for you, PS? I am assuming your not a kabillionaire. Wouldn't you want more money? I am saying this as someone who probably won't vote for Obama so don't but this "O your a liberal" bullshit on me.

Because some people realize it's wrong to use the government to take money from someone else just so they can give some of it to you. For all the accusations of greed thrown at those who don't want higher taxes on "the rich", you have just precisely pointed out where the real greed in our society lies that the media never questions.

LOL
Its not the middle class failing to pay their share that put us in debt, sorry..

Actually, it's Obama voters. A study out today shows that the average Obama voters median tax rate is 3%. The average Romney voters median tax rate is 17%

So your theory is that our tax breaks most of us got giving us an extra 100-200 kin our paychecks last year are why the deficit is so high?

Yet you want taxes lowered even more?
Never mind that your figures are wrong, your logic is quite flawed.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:Let say all Obama wants to do is take money for the wealthiest people. That would be the people at the top, the 1%ers. If he does do this and gives take breaks to lower and middle class people, wouldn't that mean more money for you, PS? I am assuming your not a kabillionaire. Wouldn't you want more money? I am saying this as someone who probably won't vote for Obama so don't but this "O your a liberal" bullshit on me.

Because some people realize it's wrong to use the government to take money from someone else just so they can give some of it to you. For all the accusations of greed thrown at those who don't want higher taxes on "the rich", you have just precisely pointed out where the real greed in our society lies that the media never questions.

LOL
Its not the middle class failing to pay their share that put us in debt, sorry.. it very much is the wealthy -- corporate discounts, bank bail outs.

And yet conservatives and libertarians oppose those things and the government mandates that forced banks to provide more and more riskier loans while promising the full backing of those toxic assets by the government. The government forced banks to up their toxic loan percentage to 10% from 1%, so of course there was going to be a horrible fallout coming. When some Republicans (even Bush) tried to warn that the housing bubble was going to collapse, it was the Democrats like Barney Frank who refused to listen to those calls of reform and swore that the housing market was sound. But no, we have to get the government even more involved in how the private sector works.

PLAYER57832 wrote:The reason our government has had to expand so much is to protect people from the many abuses by corporations... Even so, they were not ENOUGH to prevent BP, Massey Energy, Madoff or many other debacles. THEY are why we need to increase taxes. And it is far more correct that the wealthy, who have money, pay those additional amounts than it is to cut school lunches, food for the elderly, healthcare for the poor and education funding.

How do the wealthy have enough money to pay for all those things? You can have a 100% tax on income over $1 million and not have enough money to run the government for 1 month (assuming everyone keeps their pay rates exactly where they are). We have a spending problem, not a taxation problem. We have 47% of the population who does not pay any federal income taxes. Why can't they pay at least 1% instead of demanding more money from the other half of the country? THAT is the true us vs them that is present in the country today: those who are making money and paying taxes and those who demand the government give them more handouts.

By the way, none of those things listed in your last sentence are jobs the federal government is supposed to be doing anyway, so that would be a large chunk of spending to cut.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:Let say all Obama wants to do is take money for the wealthiest people. That would be the people at the top, the 1%ers. If he does do this and gives take breaks to lower and middle class people, wouldn't that mean more money for you, PS? I am assuming your not a kabillionaire. Wouldn't you want more money? I am saying this as someone who probably won't vote for Obama so don't but this "O your a liberal" bullshit on me.

Because some people realize it's wrong to use the government to take money from someone else just so they can give some of it to you. For all the accusations of greed thrown at those who don't want higher taxes on "the rich", you have just precisely pointed out where the real greed in our society lies that the media never questions.

LOL
Its not the middle class failing to pay their share that put us in debt, sorry..

Actually, it's Obama voters. A study out today shows that the average Obama voters median tax rate is 3%. The average Romney voters median tax rate is 17%

So your theory is that our tax breaks most of us got giving us an extra 100-200 kin our paychecks last year are why the deficit is so high?

Yet you want taxes lowered even more?
Never mind that your figures are wrong, your logic is quite flawed.

It's not a theory, it's a statement.

The only logic out of that is - "Obama voters pay less in taxes than you! FARRRRR less. Is this really fair?" The deficit is because the government, under Obama, has spent around 3.5 trillion per year on an income of around 1.7 trillion per year.



The deficit is because the government got a shortfall of dollars, it did not reign in it's spending. It doubled it's spending. Now we are on the hook to pay the tab, but we did not want that tab in the first place. We wanted to government to trim down, and we think it's common sense, and that is why the ideological battle is here and now.

Are we going to become Greece? Or are we going to stay America!

Obama is not a "Marxist" in the strict sense of the word. He did spend a lot of time with people who promoted and were exposed to a Re-re-re-hash of basic Marxist philosophy, filtered through several iterations of failed Communist utopias. So while he may be in general agreement with the general themes of Marx, his "means" has been created through the iterations of "community organizing" in the mid to late 20th century United States, and not the classical (and totally never implemented) model proposed by Marx in the 19th century.

Of course if you look at the three great powers in WWII - Hitler, Stallin, and F.D.R. you could easily say the same about them as well.

Thus Marx is not really the gold standard. A better description is to lump them all as varities of Utopists. People who keep thinking that if they constantly reinvent Plato's ideas enough times one of them is eventually going to work.

I ain't goin nowhere!

Phatscotty wrote:I ain't goin nowhere!

We know, we know...
and you have never been anywhere, either.

It has recently been revealed that Karl Marx had a secret meeting with Obama.



Case closed.

Dukasaur wrote:It has recently been revealed that Karl Marx had a secret meeting with Obama.

'You gotta be marxin' kiddin' me!'


--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:It has recently been revealed that Karl Marx had a secret meeting with Obama.

'You gotta be marxin' kiddin' me!'


--Andy

The evidence is right there in the picture:

I think Obama just likes to hang out with radicals:

show: evidence

--Andy

Obama is not a Marxist. He does subscribe to the anti-colonialist ideology from his father. Personally, I think he's a socialist. He (and the Democrats) are willing to work within the framework of radically changing America through the ballot box.

bradleybadly wrote:Obama is not a Marxist. He does subscribe to the anti-colonialist ideology from his father. Personally, I think he's a socialist. He (and the Democrats) are willing to work within the framework of radically changing America through the ballot box.

That's a well-intended expectation.

AndyDufresne wrote:I think Obama just likes to hang out with radicals:

show: evidence

--Andy

But why show a picture of Hitler, when Obama will admit it, in his own words......

::lights dim::