A sobering reality

Srikaleak

Sergeant of the Hide
May 11, 2018
240
96
28
#2
If all that wealth is tied to the stock market and the market crashes those people aren't wealthy anymore. It's like people who hate on Jeff Bezos because he's the richest person on the planet. He doesnt actually have that money. It's tied to the value of Amazon. If Amazon ceases to exist Bezos doesn't retain any of that wealth. I think the wealth inequality story is kind of overblown. I think people's quality of life has gone down but that is more due to cycle of poverty and poor choices.
 

Maggot

Philo-Sophia Fidelis et veritas
Jul 27, 2007
6,748
872
113
Charlottesville, Virginia
#6
If all that wealth is tied to the stock market and the market crashes those people aren't wealthy anymore. It's like people who hate on Jeff Bezos because he's the richest person on the planet. He doesnt actually have that money. It's tied to the value of Amazon. If Amazon ceases to exist Bezos doesn't retain any of that wealth. I think the wealth inequality story is kind of overblown. I think people's quality of life has gone down but that is more due to cycle of poverty and poor choices.
I probably shouldnt waste my time but...

Thats just not so.

Im in no way suggesting a socialist re distribution, so dont start that shit.

If the market crashes he will lose some, perhaps a lot, but do you think he/they are stupid enough to leave it all in intangibles?
It wouldnt touch the jets, the ranch in Montana, the estates in Beverly Hills, The Hampton's, The Swiss chalet, the 3 Rembrant's hanging in one of them, etc. all paid for.

If you think otherwise you need to dig deeper.

Im just asking how much does any one need?

 

Nik H

Constantly Learning
Jan 22, 2014
3,299
988
113
Rhode Island
#10
It would be interesting to see the originator since it is not stated when I looked at it.

It would also be interesting to understand the point of the presentation.
  1. Is it that too much wealth is held by too few people?
  2. Is it to point out that the wealthiest 1% earn more wealth more quickly than ever?
  3. Is it to open the eyes to how many people are truly poor?
Not sure I am following the logic.
 
Jan 6, 2012
3,486
2,080
113
#11
Grow up.

It has nothing to do with that. Im just asking a simple question.

How much does anyone need.
Other than for myself, that's not for me to decide.

The wealth created by those top earners creates more wealth for everyone. They are not taking something from one person and keeping it for themselves; they made wealth that otherwise would not have existed.
 
Aug 24, 2010
4,530
1,176
113
Northeast Wyoming
#12
The richest people in America all started out with nothing, just regular Americans in college or business who clawed to the top by being good and having the opportunity to do so. That's America, where with an idea, ingenuity and follow through, you can do anything.

Take a look at the ten richest people in America. http://time.com/money/5095574/the-10-richest-people-in-america/ 1-8 are all self made, most of which in the last two decades. Bezos (Amazon), Gates (MS), Buffet (BH), Zuckerburg (Facebook), Page (Google), Ellison (Oracle), Brin (Google) Half are college dropouts and others like Bezos started their business in their garage who took their idea, worked their ass off, and are now richer than they could have ever imagined. They are also massive philanthropists who give away billions upon billions of their fortunes to major causes that benefit millions upon millions of people, or are funding major medical research to cure our worst diseases. Even if they kept every single cent, it's their business, not ours.

Only in America can that happen, the rest of the world can have their thievery and deceit in the name of "fairness". Wealth redistribution is theft, and wealth jealousy is pettiness.
 

Nik H

Constantly Learning
Jan 22, 2014
3,299
988
113
Rhode Island
#13
Grow up.

It has nothing to do with that. Im just asking a simple question.

How much does anyone need.
I tend to agree with @MtnCreek

I can't say what anyone else NEEDS. I know what I NEED. That is the operative word in your sentence. NEED has little to do with it...food, shelter, a sense of purpose is what I call the NEEDS. However, most never look at it that way. it is what do I WANT versus what I NEED.
 

sharac

Sergeant
Dec 8, 2008
317
25
28
42
Slovenia
#14
It's a fucking rigged casino and if someone accidentally gets (crumbs) some modest winnings that still doesn't mean the game in general for everyone is fair. Entire narrative of "in this country anyone can succeed" is a bullshit fairytale and has long been such (remember the railroad tycoons and how much good did Colt 45 do for those farmers who stood in a way of "progress").
 
Likes: Strykervet

Maggot

Philo-Sophia Fidelis et veritas
Jul 27, 2007
6,748
872
113
Charlottesville, Virginia
#15
It would be interesting to see the originator since it is not stated when I looked at it.

It would also be interesting to understand the point of the presentation.
  1. Is it that too much wealth is held by too few people?
  2. Is it to point out that the wealthiest 1% earn more wealth more quickly than ever?
  3. Is it to open the eyes to how many people are truly poor?
Not sure I am following the logic.
1- I cant answer that for you. Its from You Tube and you can follow the link as well as I.
2-All the above

----------------------------------------------------

"Other than for myself, that's not for me to decide.

The wealth created by those top earners creates more wealth for everyone. They are not taking something from one person and keeping it for themselves; they made wealth that otherwise would not have existed. "

------------------------------

Nor for me to decide, Im just asking a question. Id be interested in hearing their answer. They do create (a certain amount) by the efforts but skim the largest part off for themselves.

Again, Im not suggesting any form of forced re distribution. That has to be a personal decision.

Just kind of wondering how they sleep at night knowing they have 1,000,000 cans of soup and the lady down the street has none.

If asking a simple question upsets you I can delete the thread.
 

Maggot

Philo-Sophia Fidelis et veritas
Jul 27, 2007
6,748
872
113
Charlottesville, Virginia
#16
The richest people in America all started out with nothing, just regular Americans in college or business who clawed to the top by being good and having the opportunity to do so. That's America, where with an idea, ingenuity and follow through, you can do anything.

Take a look at the ten richest people in America. http://time.com/money/5095574/the-10-richest-people-in-america/ 1-8 are all self made, most of which in the last two decades. Bezos (Amazon), Gates (MS), Buffet (BH), Zuckerburg (Facebook), Page (Google), Ellison (Oracle), Brin (Google) Half are college dropouts and others like Bezos started their business in their garage who took their idea, worked their ass off, and are now richer than they could have ever imagined. They are also massive philanthropists who give away billions upon billions of their fortunes to major causes that benefit millions upon millions of people, or are funding major medical research to cure our worst diseases. Even if they kept every single cent, it's their business, not ours.

Only in America can that happen, the rest of the world can have their thievery and deceit in the name of "fairness". Wealth redistribution is theft, and wealth jealousy is pettiness.

You mistake asking a question for jealousy. Thats your problem.

The chart only points out one truth.

As I said above, I shouldnt have wasted my time inviting thinking beyond the typical rhetoric.
 

Nik H

Constantly Learning
Jan 22, 2014
3,299
988
113
Rhode Island
#18
I'm not at all offended nor upset by it. Just pointing out that the way that the data was presented belies some sort of agenda on pointing out that wealth is unfairly distributed.

To me, there is zero wrong with the way things are. You either make something out of yourself or you choose not to. The simple law of economics apply:
  1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
  2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
  3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
  4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
  5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
I am more successful than I ever thought I would ever be coming from Greek immigrants who came here without a pot to piss in. My parents had not even graduated form High School in Greece. They came here and worked their ASSES of 7 days a week in a restaurant they started after working in the leather by piece trade for 5 years with money they saved. My parents who were fiercely proud of their Greek heritage always said that this country is like no other on the planet because your opportunities are not curtailed. I still believe that. I am not what I would consider rich but I live a good life and never begrudge anyone who is more successful than myself. I hear the "lucky" aspect all the time. Luck has little to do with it. Success is part skill, part nerve, lots of hard work and knowing when it is time.

Anyone I have ever met that tells me it is not possible to succeed in the US is someone who I considered as lazy.
 

Maggot

Philo-Sophia Fidelis et veritas
Jul 27, 2007
6,748
872
113
Charlottesville, Virginia
#21
A friend (smarter than me) once told me that if you took the nation's wealth and divided it up evenly, it would be back where it is today within a generation, if not sooner.
With that I agree and its why I say that draining the swamp will do no good. It will be re filled with the same vermin in a couple years.

And it boils down to the same as my original point/question, which Ive brought up before. Nothing will change until human nature changes. Thats not something that can be legislated, it will need to come from somewhere else.
 

sharac

Sergeant
Dec 8, 2008
317
25
28
42
Slovenia
#22
I think Maggot was mostly referring to filthy rich like Rotschild clan or some other family whose wealth transcends centuries (literally). Also its pretty clear that .gov regulation will not do much for fairness but fact is .gov has been stolen for a while now and most of the legislation put into place is not for more "opportunity to noname ameri to become american instead of americant" but exactly the opposite to protect existing wealth and power. A typical example would be the dismantling of Glass-Steagall and smokescreen law later adopted after the crisis by Obama. Its simply not black and white as government is actively involved in redistribution of wealth (among other things) and communism being its extreme example.
 

Fig

Janitor of the Hide
Mar 15, 2018
1,132
1,586
113
The Most Dangerous City in the USA
#23
Grow up.

It has nothing to do with that. Im just asking a simple question.

How much does anyone need.
Only you can answer that for yourself. If you try to ask that for someone else and don't like their answer you might come to the conclusion it's ok to steal from them, which makes you a Democrat.

The whole thing is an exercise in mental masturbation. Lets compare a poor American to a Rich European of only 100 years ago and see how they stack up! Why do the poor need TVs, and cars, and Air Conditioning, and smart phones, and alcohol, and cigarettes, and on and on and on. Once you think you can make these decisions and determinations for other people you are totally off the reservation in terms of freedom and limited government, because the only way to make a person stop accumulating wealth (some people are never satisfied and accumulate it just to accumulate it) is to use force.
 

Fig

Janitor of the Hide
Mar 15, 2018
1,132
1,586
113
The Most Dangerous City in the USA
#24
Capitalism, i.e. a real free market with economic liberty, is not a zero sum game. Looking it as if it were IS Marxism. A Marxist can't turn sand into computer chips. A Marxist can't and take something worthless and make it priceless. Only a capitalist GENERATES wealth from nothing, and it does not come at the expense of someone else. A Marxist only steals from an even diminishing finite pie. A Marxist is worried who has more. A capitalist only gets concerned if someone doesn't have enough to survive, and that is where actual human chairity comes in. You know, the kind where the poor person has AGENCY, and actually owes another person for helping them out when they're down, not the kind where they think they're entitled for help and never have to say, "thank you".
 

deersniper

Online Training Member
Feb 22, 2007
1,956
424
83
N. Maryland
#26
As a business owner, I can tell you there only two hurdles between anyone and success. The first hurdle is the mentality of "I can't." The second hurdle is the government saying "you can't".
Il add crony capitalism and things like big business lobbying for more regulation to keep the smaller companies and start ups out

We aren't even close to having a free market.
 
Aug 21, 2007
1,280
272
83
#27
The thing about the video is that it does nothing to discuss how America got to be in the position it is in now. The video invites a discussion about what the ideal distribution of wealth should be - which is to deny that it is what is now, and unless it is by force, it ain’t changing. What the video doesn’t do is take any one thing and make it dirt simple so people can begin to understand how we got here. Glass-Steagall would be a great one.

Big picture and crayon simple - you can not have an ever shrinking middle class that carries the biggest proportionate tax burden. At a certain point wherein there is too high of a concentration of poverty on one end of the scale, and too much wealth on the other - violence breaks out.

Guess what? Big picture thinkers in Gov policy circles know this. In fact, their counting on it. The Fed / Welfare System / Expansion of Consumer Credit + Women’s Lib / School Systems (surrogate parents) / the exportation of American manufacturing / the subsidization and build up of every 3rd world shit hole / an MSM that lies to you / Movies that lie to you / Government legalized propaganda via the MSM - all part of a plan.

Government is riddled with corrupt Politicians on the take or under the thumb + bureaucratic lifers in charge of fiefdom$$.

This is why Gov has a legal monopoly on force.

Removing the corruption gives everyone an equal shot.

Equal opportunity is not the same as equal outcomes.
 
Last edited:
Jan 11, 2006
3,069
633
113
Florida
#28
Im just asking how much does any one need?
How much can one earn?

Everywhere is freaks and hairies
Dykes and fairies, tell me where is sanity
Tax the rich, feed the poor
'Til there are no rich no more?
I'd love to change the world
But I don't know what to do
So I'll leave it up to you
Population keeps on breeding
Nation bleeding, still more feeding economy
Life is funny, skies are sunny
Bees make honey, who needs money, Monopoly
I'd love to change the world
But I don't know what to do
So I'll leave it up to you

TYA
 
Likes: RNWRKNP

FS1

Sergeant
Mar 24, 2014
1,716
1,135
113
Earth
#29
The sobering reality is there will never be total income equality. People are just not wired alike. Some folks will spend every nickel they get. It does not matter how much money that is they will spend it. Others save and look for security in a steady job decent income. Others are driven to excel. They take the money they saved and roll the dice on an idea or business.

All that money concentrated at the top, got there for a reason. It also is all that money that keeps the first two types of people in the jobs they have. That money at the top drives the economy. Darwin's Theory's work economically too.

Life is not or ever has been fair. This is the way its been since cavemen started trading rocks. Our economy died when we subcontracted to China. The middle class died with it.
 

sharac

Sergeant
Dec 8, 2008
317
25
28
42
Slovenia
#30
As long as you have community where there are certain rules you have variance of grey and not black and white. Looking at world in black and white means that if i have means, will and power to steal wealth from "you as a capitalist" it's ok its just my way of getting ahead in life. Capitalist might do it via brains, ideas or work ethos well i would do it via brute force. It doesn't work like that if you want to have civilization and when enough is enough is valid question ESPECIALLY if harvesting profits is not the real goal but using that wealth to form society to your liking (SOROS for example). So yeah the average doer and winner in grand US lottery might be something to look up to some other examples of "fine white stock" might be quite the opposite.

It's naive to think that those with uber wealth will either stay the same as they were in mommys garage and not use it to shape society to their will or pleasure...
 
Likes: RNWRKNP

Greg Langelius *

Resident Elder Fart
Aug 10, 2001
5,136
510
113
Arizona, good place for me...
#31
If you want a planned economy, you need only look to those of the past and how they arrived at where they (are if they are anywhere anymore) to see how well such schemes succeed. They look good, and they sound good, and they all end in blood.

Socialist Communism is the mice voting to bell the cat; it all works wonderfully until they try to put that bell on the Kitty. Then there's blood, lots of it; and the blood flow continues for as long as the bell remains in place.

A social order that depends on force, or on the threat of force, in order to function as intended, is morally bankrupt. In this sense, only anarchy isn't. But I kinda get the feeling that's wrong, too. The problem isn't that the problem is insoluble, it's that it never was a problem in the first place; until folks started deciding it was important that they decide things for other people, without their consent, who are perfectly capable of making their own decisions.

We call that oppression, and we call them tyrants.

All schemes that are based on redistribution of wealth by external means have at their core the necessity for coercion.

I don't like being coerced. Does anybody?

Are any of us ready to do something concrete about that? If so, when?

Or are we all just pissing into the wind here?

Greg
 
Last edited:
Likes: Bender

Maggot

Philo-Sophia Fidelis et veritas
Jul 27, 2007
6,748
872
113
Charlottesville, Virginia
#32
The thing about the video is that it does nothing to discuss how America got to be in the position it is in now. The video invites a discussion about what the ideal distribution of wealth should be - which is to deny that it is what is now, and unless it is by force, it ain’t changing. What the video doesn’t do is take any one thing and make it dirt simple so people can begin to understand how we got here. Glass-Steagall would be a great one.

Big picture and crayon simple - you can not have an ever shrinking middle class that carries the biggest proportionate tax burden. At a certain point wherein there is too high of a concentration of poverty on one end of the scale, and too much wealth on the other - violence breaks out.

Guess what? Big picture thinkers in Gov policy circles know this. In fact, their counting on it. The Fed / Welfare System / Expansion of Consumer Credit + Women’s Lib / School Systems (surrogate parents) / the exportation of American manufacturing / the subsidization and build up of every 3rd world shit hole / an MSM that lies to you / Movies that lie to you / Government legalized propaganda via the MSM - all part of a plan.

Government is riddled with corrupt Politicians on the take or under the thumb + bureaucratic lifers in charge of fiefdom$$.

This is why Gov has a legal monopoly on force.

Removing the corruption gives everyone an equal shot.

Equal opportunity is not the same as equal outcomes.
Good post. Honcho. But there will be no removal of corruption because the corruption is from the top down. Like asking the police to 'police themselves', they gave a vested interest in NOT doing that.
 

sharac

Sergeant
Dec 8, 2008
317
25
28
42
Slovenia
#33
But you are via taxes, via society moral/hard rules or not.

I really don't think anyone here advocates planned economy (though this is debatable at what point is planned and when not but i digress) as those schemes fail miserably. US for example is typical example how society EVEN a capitalistic one will degrade through time and through more and more legislation. Its never less always more just another law to fix them all...
 
Aug 21, 2007
1,280
272
83
#34
We have functioned under a planned econ for more than 100 yrs.




ETA - Again if things like Glass Steagall were made dirt simple everyone would come to the understanding that some smart banker guys bought themselves the then POTUS and the controlling members in Congress to bring about a change in long standing law that had been written with pragmatism in mind. This change in law carried with it foreseeable risks and consequences; however it also offered many points along the way wherein those that were in Congress subsequent to the change in law, could have put the brakes on this.

This IS economic planning.

It is no different than sub prime auto loans.

Juicing the banks on the frontend / backend + tax incentive opportunities at every level of municipality to drive various industry sectors.

That it all stems from corruption instead of altruism and really thinking it all through? These pump and dumps tend to come apart in spectacular fashion which ultimately leaves the taxpayer picking up the tab - al la Too Big to Fail.

The IL PERS debacle wherein the State of IL is now going to steal from the taxpayer the short fall of what the taxpayer has already paid for once; or the situation Puerto Rico comes to mind as they are recent, and municipal financing is a whole different part of the scam. News flash - just like we own Mexico’s debt (plus Africa and near every other shit hole’s debt) you and I are about to own PR’s debt. The scam is Commercial bankers make lopsided deals with corrupt foreigners. When they default initially they recapitalize and reamortize, until the default number gets to be a big enough deal. At that point corrupt politicians help negotiate a new loan and pledge US backing in the event of the default. Commercial bank then extends the new loan (still under lopsided terms), next default, taxpayer makes Commercial Bank whole on their lopsided deal. Foreigners are then refinanced through the next level of the scam, generally World Bank - of which the US (taxpayer) is an underwriter of.

While it is both possible and pragmatic to use Institutional and Tax incentives to stimulate industry sectors, by so doing, predicable impacts (both +/-) on all other markets as well as communities can be accurately forecasted. That it always ends in sheer fucking disaster is the tell.

The problem and what the video does not address is that the economic planning is primarily benefitting those that are in on the scam......
 
Last edited:
Likes: RNWRKNP

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
1,840
1,256
113
Dallas, TX
#35
"Capitalism" in actual practice by the rich and powerful in this country is not what those usually morally defending it think it is.

You can't directly compare small individual owned business to massive multinational corporations and think small hard working business people operate on the same moral plane as the super rich who wind up trying to make a new law to themselves, where things such as crime, taxes, responsibilities don't matter, that's only for the little folks.

You can defend the ideal all you want, but it will go around in circles till you fully admit that what you have in this country is not actually Capitalism, but rather a big version of Monopoly, where the rich say they are capitalists, but actually are just working hard to win at monopoly at the expense of as many as possible while bribing the government to help them stay on top with your tax dollars.

Take a look at the banking system as a classic example... if you get in a tight spot, they want to take everything you have and leave you on the street and then hound you for more.... when they mess up... they get the government to give them open ended near interest free loans.

Even if you get more of an actual real Capitalist thing going on, you will eventually need hard limits on behavior and abilities so as to not wind up once again having someone gain enough wealth and then using it to make sure nobody else can get ahead.
 

Maggot

Philo-Sophia Fidelis et veritas
Jul 27, 2007
6,748
872
113
Charlottesville, Virginia
#36
A social order that depends on force, or on the threat of force, in order to function as intended, is morally bankrupt.



Greg
But in one fashion or another, arent they all?

Tried not paying your taxes?

Growing some cannabis in your back yard where it illegal?

In our time, refusing to register for the draft, or go to VN?

Those will most surely acquaint you with force.

And it will remain that way, no matter which social order you tout because of one thing.

Human Nature
 

Maggot

Philo-Sophia Fidelis et veritas
Jul 27, 2007
6,748
872
113
Charlottesville, Virginia
#37
"Capitalism" in actual practice by the rich and powerful in this country is not what those usually morally defending it think it is.

You can't directly compare small individual owned business to massive multinational corporations and think small hard working business people operate on the same moral plane as the super rich who wind up trying to make a new law to themselves, where things such as crime, taxes, responsibilities don't matter, that's only for the little folks.

You can defend the ideal all you want, but it will go around in circles till you fully admit that what you have in this country is not actually Capitalism, but rather a big version of Monopoly, where the rich say they are capitalists, but actually are just working hard to win at monopoly at the expense of as many as possible while bribing the government to help them stay on top with your tax dollars.

Take a look at the banking system as a classic example... if you get in a tight spot, they want to take everything you have and leave you on the street and then hound you for more.... when they mess up... they get the government to give them open ended near interest free loans.

Even if you get more of an actual real Capitalist thing going on, you will eventually need hard limits on behavior and abilities so as to not wind up once again having someone gain enough wealth and then using it to make sure nobody else can get ahead.
Thanks, thats the kind of discussion Im looking for.

I think it necessary to face this fact.

While 'positionally' we are all declared 'equal' (under the law), 'experientially', we are not all equal. some are genius, some are highly intelligent, most are average, some are dim, and some are retarded. Hard work can make a difference, but being more intelligent (or unfortunately more corrupt) tends to get you farther, faster.
 

Greg Langelius *

Resident Elder Fart
Aug 10, 2001
5,136
510
113
Arizona, good place for me...
#38
Yes they all are.

The works of man are impermanent, imperfect, and not perfectible.

This is not a problem until we decide it's not a necessary fact.

Man is not perfectible, but there are folks around who insist man is perfectible, and insist that nothing will be allowed to rest until they achieve the task.

Such people are despots, and are a cancer in our midst.

Greg
 

sharac

Sergeant
Dec 8, 2008
317
25
28
42
Slovenia
#39
As to the socialism i find it very peculiar how you seem to perceive how it looked like to average Joe or Janez in our case - some kind of agony or wrath from hell. Far from it (even in steel fifties when some Stalinist lovers were put to prisons etc.. and saying something against gov would get you jailed) thats why masses love it and in some radical cases they actually go far enough that really only those without a dime to their name survive (Khmer rouge for example).

It was quite good for most people (while it lasted though :) ) granted it was quite excellent for a privileged minority but nowhere near the scale it is now where there are those who are filthy rich (not by work or skill but mainly by ability to scheme and steal and be in power at the right time - privatization) and most of the people poor more than before. Middle class is basically non existent. The major downside and why socialism doesn't work (even compared to chrony capitalism) is that it kills will to perform, to excel as people need (even an illusion is ok - like lottery you know the odds are shitty but if you buy the ticket who knows...) to believe that they can make it. Socialism takes that away and unless you're born into the privileged class or you scheme your way into (by being a nasty SOB) your out of luck and you come to the conclusion you're a moron if you work and do your job as it should be done. So people adjust and slack and steal from work etc...
 

Maggot

Philo-Sophia Fidelis et veritas
Jul 27, 2007
6,748
872
113
Charlottesville, Virginia
#41
Yes they all are.

The works of man are impermanent, imperfect, and not perfectible.

This is not a problem until we decide it's not a necessary fact.

Man is not perfectible, but there are folks around who insist man is perfectible, and insist that nothing will be allowed to rest until they achieve the task.

Such people are despots, and are a cancer in our midst.

Greg
I agree. I do hold that man is perfectible, but not by human hands. That though gets into religion and best avoided here.
 
Jun 8, 2011
184
97
28
51
Fort Worth, TX
#44
Good post. Honcho. But there will be no removal of corruption because the corruption is from the top down. Like asking the police to 'police themselves', they gave a vested interest in NOT doing that.
There is a part of the equation that you left out. While the corruption is from the top down, those that are paid by that corruption will never walk away from keeping those people in power. A prime example is generational entitlements. It has been pointed out multiple times in different threads that generational entitlements is the same as slavery. Demokrats have perpetuated their own voter base through entitlements and how many of those recipients have changed the party they vote for? Those entitlements have also gone a long way to increasing the divide in wealth in this country.
 
Jan 11, 2006
3,069
633
113
Florida
#45
Equal opportunity is not the same as equal outcomes.
On target. Anyone can succeed; not everyone will. I think the best description I've heard describing differences between liberals and conservatives is:

- Conservatives want everyone to be equal at the starting line.

- Liberals want everyone to be equal at the finish line.

Probably read that here.

I equate liberalism to NASCAR: Ford develops a more streamlined body and NASCAR makes them lower their spoilers to keep things fair.
 
May 27, 2014
601
191
43
32.752325 -79.867804
#47
I wonder if the workers of all the failed corporations who lost their retirement and pensions think we have a fair system while at the same time the CEOs and select few at the top still walked away with their bonus and millions? I wonder where the government got all the money from for all the bailouts? Anyone that thinks we live in a free and fair society keep smoking that shit! With that said is their anywhere else on this earth I would rather live? Fuck no I love this country, you have to play the hand that was dealt to you the best you can.
 

Srikaleak

Sergeant of the Hide
May 11, 2018
240
96
28
#48
Life is not fair. But a rising tide that lifts all ships is better than stepping on others to get to the top. #ThanosDidNothingWrong
 
Likes: Bender

Tims

Sergeant
Jan 7, 2008
372
36
28
50
Orange, California
#49
How much does anyone need.
"How much dose anyone need". Where have I heard this before??????? Now I remember, the left uses questions like this all the time, its called class warfare. A very similar question the left likes too ask is "Who needs an AR15", " who needs 30 round magazines", "who needs an assault weapon"? Thankfully I live in a country where I can have what I want. Its called freedom. It would suck to live someplace where you only got what you need.
 
Likes: Bender

Maggot

Philo-Sophia Fidelis et veritas
Jul 27, 2007
6,748
872
113
Charlottesville, Virginia
#50
"How much dose anyone need". Where have I heard this before??????? Now I remember, the left uses questions like this all the time, its called class warfare. A very similar question the left likes too ask is "Who needs an AR15", " who needs 30 round magazines", "who needs an assault weapon"? Thankfully I live in a country where I can have what I want. Its called freedom. It would suck to live someplace where you only got what you need.
Im constantly amazed by how people can read a simple statement and create so much confusion in their minds by taking it out of context or by only seeing what theyve been pre programmed to see.
 
Top Bottom