• 67 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by nerdork (3847 posts) - - Show Bio

@falconpuuunch: I apologize for my very stupid error, and I edited the response.

@lykopis said:

@nerdork:

It was his aunt, not his mother -- but hey - skimming information and employing a meme to express your opinion makes sense now.

Thanks for catching that, and I just edited. I absolutely read his post. I don’t know how I confused the relation. That was a stupid typo to have made, on my part.

But, the second part of your post seems a bit closed minded. If differing views don’t make sense to you, that’s okay. The meme was something I found on a similar thread a while ago, and thought that it aptly says what our government is doing currently. Do you have a problem with others expressing their opinions? You absolutely have the right to be offended, or disagree and to question the opinion itself…but, to maliciously ridicule the person for posting their opinion…that is a big step backwards in civilized debate.

#52 Posted by Nerx (15088 posts) - - Show Bio

Not a big deal, ya'll still no#1 in the world

good tradeoff

#53 Edited by lykopis (10756 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerdork:

Do you have a problem with others expressing their opinions? You absolutely have the right to be offended, or disagree and to question the opinion itself…but, to maliciously ridicule the person for posting their opinion…that is a big step backwards in civilized debate.

Indicate to me where I maliciously ridiculed you for posting your opinion?

Do you have a problem with my finding your meme to express your opinion understandable according to my opinion?

#54 Posted by Night Thrasher (3585 posts) - - Show Bio

@vercingetorixthegreat: Did you even watch the video? The argument that all rich people inherit money is just as stupid as the argument that all people on government assistance are lazy. Neither are true and neither are productive. The argument is the DISTRIBUTION of wealth in the country, specifically the MIDDLE CLASS...which is overwhelmingly composed of HARD WORKING people who are severely under compensated.

#55 Posted by Xaos (240 posts) - - Show Bio

System are not the problem, it's people that endorse it.

Now, I think USA suffer of a middle case of moral myopia in which they seem to think that capitalism is synonymous of democracy, and saddly, this isn't the case.

The ida of state welfare isn't to take money from people to give them to other so they can do nothing with for no work.

The idea is to take money to people so people who aren't able to work for living can survive. This is including the people who suffer from savage capitalism : you know, the stuff like the corporation that decide to make work underpaying children in some remote country because they are cheap.

Capitalism and financial system is actually a way to rationning people with a degree of freedom in what they get for their work, and a quite nice substitution from the "way of the strongest".

The problem is, unrestricted, it's becoming a tricky game of fooling people around and scam them, some to death and hiding through distance, nice speach, law and authority.

#56 Edited by WillPayton (9034 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerdork said:

@falconpuuunch said:

@nerdork said:

This smells of Socialism. People should get what they earn in the United States, and I am not talking about taxes. We already have a President that rewards the most negligent of citizens for being exactly that...negligent.

I find this kind of offensive. My aunt served in the US army and was released after getting injured while on leave. Because of some loop bull sh*t she didn't receive the normal assistance that injured soldiers receive after being declared "unfit" for duty. She has permanent nerve damage all along her face and suffers from extreme anxiety and has a lot of other mental issues. She has been through literal hell and now the only way she can feed her children is by resorting to Social Security and Welfare.

I don't like the idea of the US government taking money out of the pockets of people against their will anymore than the next guy (mostly because I believe that people would generally assist their neighbors without being forced) but don't assume that everyone on assistance lazy. It only takes a really bad hand to have your whole world turned upside down. You don't have to care or agree that these people need this money but don't generalize them so easily.

If you find this offensive, I apologize; however, would you consider a wounded soldier as a negligent citizen? I wouldn't. My post clearly says negligent, not those that sacfriced their bodies for our country. Of course we should have an excellent soldier support system. What sickens me, is that we dont. That, in part, is because of how much our government rewards those that have never done anything to the betterment of society, yet recieve better care than you aunt does. In all sincerity, I thank your aunt for what she has done for our country, and mourn the fact that she is not getting the attention she so duly deserves.

But, answer this, as you seem to agree with an even spread of wealth; Should unemployed people, who dont pay for their own health care, who continue to have children with no regard for the resources they take from the Welfare system, be privileged to the same care you wish your aunt to receive?

Not everything can be even, and still be called fair.

Please point out where he says or implies that he "agrees with an even spread of wealth".

Can anyone name one country with even wealth distribution? It has never worked and never will work.

The whole argument about how rich people only inherit money and don't work at all is a huge lie. It is about as accurate as saying all poor people are poor because they are lazy and spend all their money on drugs and alcohol.

Why would we want to name one country with an even wealth distribution? Is that what you think the topic of discussion is? Have you even bothered to watch the video or read the replies?

Who said that all rich people only "inherit money and don't work at all"?

#57 Posted by WillPayton (9034 posts) - - Show Bio

@vercingetorixthegreat: Did you even watch the video?

But, watching a video and trying to think about stuff is soooooo hard! Much easier to just start ranting about the lazy people that want to take your stuff, or the socialist black President that wants to take away your guns and Bibles and bring in the UN to take over. Reality? The truth? Huh, what's that? Sounds like some kind of Commie conspiracy. Lets all just pray and go watch Fox News... Sarah Palin will tell us what to do.

#58 Posted by nappystr8 (1016 posts) - - Show Bio

People seem to think the distribution of wealth is an unchanging constant. Yes, Americans are still doing okay. Even the poor and homeless in this country have it better off than most people in the world. I would much rather be in the slums of New York City than say the slums of Mumbai: where the masses live in abject poverty of the sewage covered streets while a select few build themselves private skyscrapers. But this is not a stagnant issue. The gap is widening, and unless we as a people stand up against it, it will only continue to widen.

While this cannot be done with regulation alone, it can also not be done without regulation. There is a reason America is as strong as it is, why our dwindling middle class is still prevalent. It's because of the anti-trust legislation in the late 1800s and early 1900's, it's because of the New Deal. Socialism shouldn't be a dirty word, but the simple concessions that the left are asking for are not even socialism. They are the same strategies made a fledgling young nation into a superpower in only 200 years.

If you don't think anything needs to be done, make no mistake: you may currently be able to afford to watch an Avengers Blu-Ray on your 42" flat screen TV while stuffing your face with a McDonalds tripple cheeseburger combo meal, but when the middle class is gone you or your descendants will not be in the private skyscrapers. You'll be in the gutter with the rest of the 'trash' that you look down upon.

#59 Posted by nerdork (3847 posts) - - Show Bio

@willpayton: I suppose that was more conjecture on my end. I will concede that. His comment does disagree with my opinion, but you are right, that doesn’t mean his stance is the even spread of wealth. So, I guess I used the absolutist logic of a Sith. I’m not sure how I got there, either, now. I didn’t have much coffee by that point in the morning.

They say don’t drive while drunk…well, I say don’t post while sleepy.

#60 Posted by WillPayton (9034 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerdork said:

@willpayton: I suppose that was more conjecture on my end. I will concede that. His comment does disagree with my opinion, but you are right, that doesn’t mean his stance is the even spread of wealth. So, I guess I used the absolutist logic of a Sith. I’m not sure how I got there, either, now. I didn’t have much coffee by that point in the morning.

They say don’t drive while drunk…well, I say don’t post while sleepy.

No prob, I've posted my share of stuff right before going to bed and was like "wtf?" the next morning. LOL... especially so if I took some Ambien right before that. =)

I dont think anyone on this thread would want an "equal" distribution of wealth. True socialism, or communism, or capitalism are all unworkable. What we have now is actually pretty good... capitalism with government regulations. It keeps people motivated and innovating, but tries to keep greed under control so people dont destroy the environment or abuse others. Just look at the pollution in China, or the building that collapsed in Bangladesh that killed like 300 people. That's what happens when government isnt there to regulate what individuals and greedy corporations can do. We learned that lesson the hard way in the U.S. after the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in the early 20th century, after our rivers were so polluted that they were catching on fire, and after half of our rivers cant even support life.

But while we want some inequality to drive intensive, if the system gets out of control with corruption and money influencing politics, then we no longer have the fairness and equal opportunity that drives a healthy economy and political system. That's what's happening now. The reason inequality is so high and growing is because there is a systematic bias in the system, whereby the rich keep sucking money from the poor, along with political power and influence. Eventually that leads to a breakdown in effective government, because at that point we're back to the monopolies and robber barons of the past, and that leads back to all those horrible things that we're trying to get away from like slavish child labor, destruction of the environment, horrible working conditions and unsafe buildings, and all the rest.

#61 Edited by NorrinBoltagonPrime21 (5376 posts) - - Show Bio

@willpayton: When there's a video talking about how all the money is all unevenly distributed there's a purpose to their video. That purpose is to show us how all the rich have all the wealth in the country and aren't leaving enough for the rest of us. The video is giving us the obvious answer to redistribute wealth which everybody is seeing including yourself. The video doesn't have to say it, it's implying it.

The whole idea of redistributing wealth is a bad idea from experience which you probably can't say. Having family members grow up in socialist/ communist countries I know this idea of redistributing wealth which you seem to be an advocate for can never work. Having money taken from you and given to people who don't entirely deserve seems unfair. Middle ground or not this idea is doomed to fail.

Say what you want about the picture but the truth is the picture is socialism simplified. It's the same idea as redistributing wealth but with legos but people like you will deny it because you chose it to be incorrect when it's not.

#62 Posted by WillPayton (9034 posts) - - Show Bio

@norrinboltagonprime21 said:

@willpayton: When there's a video talking about how all the money is all unevenly distributed there's a purpose to their video. That purpose is to show us how all the rich have all the wealth in the country and aren't leaving enough for the rest of us. The video is giving us the obvious answer to redistribute wealth which everybody is seeing including yourself. The video doesn't have to say it, it's implying it.

The video is implying no such thing, and is very clear about what it's talking about.

No one said anything about redistributing wealth. Do you even bother reading what people, including myself, have posted multiple times already? It seems like you're just interested in saying the same things over and over. I'm not going to bother to repeat myself.

Also, I was born in a Communist country, and I still have relatives there. You dont have to lecture me about Communism, I probably know much more about the subject than you do.

The picture is a stupid straw man. The fact that you think it actually proves something is sad. I've already wasted enough time talking about it.

#63 Edited by Auralaria (479 posts) - - Show Bio

More, please? I'm interested.

#64 Posted by VercingetorixTheGreat (2823 posts) - - Show Bio

@night_thrasher said:

@vercingetorixthegreat: Did you even watch the video?

But, watching a video and trying to think about stuff is soooooo hard! Much easier to just start ranting about the lazy people that want to take your stuff, or the socialist black President that wants to take away your guns and Bibles and bring in the UN to take over. Reality? The truth? Huh, what's that? Sounds like some kind of Commie conspiracy. Lets all just pray and go watch Fox News... Sarah Palin will tell us what to do.

When did I ever mention Fox News, Sarah Palin, Guns, Obama, or even the Bible in my previous comment?

#65 Posted by Owie (3564 posts) - - Show Bio

The whole point here is that the laws in this country are designed to help the rich get richer and they keep the poor poor. This is not about taking from one to give to another. It's about how we provide opportunity to some and not others. There is not a level playing field. It is incredibly difficult for the poor to gain access to the middle class even if they work very hard. The lack of a level playing field--in fact, the intentionally unlevel playing field--is why we have such a disparity in this country, and it is an enormous problem.

The goal is not to have an exactly even distribution of wealth. It is to have a smaller disparity, as we have had in the past.

But I want to comment on the takers/makers thing anyway. I simply don't understand how people can get their hackles up against redistribution of wealth. They act like it's only socialists who do this. ALL TAXATION IS REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH! We have done this for the entire history of the United States, and pretty much every country in the history of the world has too. Name one country that did not have either taxation or some similar system where everyone had to give a portion of their money or goods to the people in charge.

Taxation: you take a percentage of everyone's money, and you apply it to the country's overall good. Some people get more of the benefits of this money than others. Therefore, it is redistributed. This is how we build roads, upkeep the army, pay for the science that makes the country so advanced, and so on. And yes, we give some to poor people.

Why? Well, it's the ethical, moral thing to do for one reason. It's a good thing to help people who are in desperate straits. But even if you don't want to help the starving, it also helps everyone else economically. The more we raise the economic level of the poor, the better everyone else does too. Rising tides lift all boats. This has been economically shown many times. Help the poor, and you help yourself. So even if you are completely selfish and have no empathy for those worse off than yourself, it is still logical to redistribute a proportion of the country's money to the poor.

#66 Edited by WillPayton (9034 posts) - - Show Bio

@owie said:

The whole point here is that the laws in this country are designed to help the rich get richer and they keep the poor poor. This is not about taking from one to give to another. It's about how we provide opportunity to some and not others. There is not a level playing field. It is incredibly difficult for the poor to gain access to the middle class even if they work very hard. The lack of a level playing field--in fact, the intentionally unlevel playing field--is why we have such a disparity in this country, and it is an enormous problem.

The goal is not to have an exactly even distribution of wealth. It is to have a smaller disparity, as we have had in the past.

But I want to comment on the takers/makers thing anyway. I simply don't understand how people can get their hackles up against redistribution of wealth. They act like it's only socialists who do this. ALL TAXATION IS REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH! We have done this for the entire history of the United States, and pretty much every country in the history of the world has too. Name one country that did not have either taxation or some similar system where everyone had to give a portion of their money or goods to the people in charge.

Taxation: you take a percentage of everyone's money, and you apply it to the country's overall good. Some people get more of the benefits of this money than others. Therefore, it is redistributed. This is how we build roads, upkeep the army, pay for the science that makes the country so advanced, and so on. And yes, we give some to poor people.

Why? Well, it's the ethical, moral thing to do for one reason. It's a good thing to help people who are in desperate straits. But even if you don't want to help the starving, it also helps everyone else economically. The more we raise the economic level of the poor, the better everyone else does too. Rising tides lift all boats. This has been economically shown many times. Help the poor, and you help yourself. So even if you are completely selfish and have no empathy for those worse off than yourself, it is still logical to redistribute a proportion of the country's money to the poor.

Excellent post. QFT!

#67 Edited by InnerSuperman (858 posts) - - Show Bio

if the rich don't want to pay their damn taxes then they don't get the police,fire department,schools and public transportation.

#68 Posted by NorrinBoltagonPrime21 (5376 posts) - - Show Bio

@willpayton: So you were born in a communist country but support socialism? I know you're lying because any sane person living in a communist country would never support any of the ideas unless they're living in a high government position. Nice try though, it almost sounded believable.

#69 Edited by WillPayton (9034 posts) - - Show Bio

@norrinboltagonprime21 said:

@willpayton: So you were born in a communist country but support socialism? I know you're lying because any sane person living in a communist country would never support any of the ideas unless they're living in a high government position. Nice try though, it almost sounded believable.

You have a serious lack of reading comprehension skills. Nowhere have I said that I support Socialism. What I support is a combination of capitalism and socialism, which is what we have in the US now... as well as in most western countries.

Also, please pay me the courtesy of not calling me a liar. I was indeed born in a Communist country, which also happens to still be a Communist country today.

And you are wrong, plenty of people who live (or did live) in Communist countries support Communist/Socialist policies, even if they are not high-ranking party officials.