|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 20, 2010 16:22:07 GMT -5
They won't tax you anymore than they already do, assuming we're all middle class here. Hopefully they tax lazy businessmen who sit behind desks with networths of a trillion dollars, underpaying their laborers. Yeah. Those guys don't work at all. They just woke up some day and discovered that they made a ton of money. We should punish them for that. How dare they just wake up one day and make tons of money. Bastards. Bastards indeed. |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Baker's Scarf on Jan 20, 2010 16:31:23 GMT -5
Oh, politics. I'm pretty much done caring. You can't win either way.
I'll more than likely vote for the more liberal candidate anyway, depending on who the candidate is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deep Figure Value on Jan 20, 2010 22:14:45 GMT -5
It was Kennedy's seat. He died.
Now it's Brown's seat.
|
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 20, 2010 22:15:30 GMT -5
It was Kennedy's seat. He died. Now it's Brown's seat. It will be remembered as Kennedy's seat, just like Hillary's seat was Robert Kennedy's seat. |
|
Johnny Lawrence - Cobra Kai
Main Eventer
Promotional consideration paid for by the following
Joined on: Jul 25, 2005 17:12:49 GMT -5
Posts: 3,209
|
Post by Johnny Lawrence - Cobra Kai on Jan 20, 2010 22:27:56 GMT -5
Democrats are the ones who are refusing to work with anyone or make any concessions. They're in power now though so they don't have to make concessions. Which is what's so mind-boggling about the health care bill. The reason it's so crappy is because it's FULL of concessions. To the insurance and health care industries, to the conservatives, to just about everyone that might have marginally opposed a TRUE game-changing reform. The end result? A health care reform plan that sucks perhaps worse than what we have now (if that's even possible) due to the Democrats (mostly Obama) caving in on TRUE reform ideas to appease people who they didn't need to cater to, but did anyway to gain support... and now those people STILL don't support the bill, because 1) the bill sucks (partially because of their own influence), and 2) this was never about reform or ideals: It was about winning. Obama could let the Republicans draft their own bill entirely and put it up for vote without a single edit, and they'd still oppose their own plan, just so they could say Obama failed to get it done. This, my friends, is the America we live in. Congrats, Republicans! You win! Obama loses! Take a victory lap while the insurance industry finds new reasons to deny our claims. |
|
|
|
Post by Deep Figure Value on Jan 20, 2010 22:40:57 GMT -5
It was Kennedy's seat. He died. Now it's Brown's seat. It will be remembered as Kennedy's seat, just like Hillary's seat was Robert Kennedy's seat. It can be remembered, dedicated, memorialized all it wants. Hell, hang a medal on it for all I care - the sense of entitlement some people felt was obscene. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 17:24:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 11:25:15 GMT -5
They won't tax you anymore than they already do, assuming we're all middle class here. Hopefully they tax lazy businessmen who sit behind desks with networths of a trillion dollars, underpaying their laborers. Yeah. Those guys don't work at all. They just woke up some day and discovered that they made a ton of money. We should punish them for that. How dare they just wake up one day and make tons of money. Bastards. They don't do nearly as much work as a physicist or a chemist or an incredible scientist (or as much work as countless other jobs - Oh and by the way, Einstein was much smarter and did much more work than Donald Trump, but Trump has much, much more money), nor do they do work that is equivalent to their billions of net worth. Some of them even inherit it, meaning they DIDN'T earn it, and you'd have no problem with that... It's interesting that people complain and accuse socialism of being about people not making money equivalent to their labor, but that's really found in capitalism...wealth multiplies thousands and thousands times over with big business, but other laborsome jobs have no way up mutiplying or even expanding a lttle. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jan 21, 2010 11:44:27 GMT -5
Yeah. Those guys don't work at all. They just woke up some day and discovered that they made a ton of money. We should punish them for that. How dare they just wake up one day and make tons of money. Bastards. They don't do nearly as much work as a physicist or a chemist or an incredible scientist (or as much work as countless other jobs - Oh and by the way, Einstein was much smarter and did much more work than Donald Trump, but Trump has much, much more money), nor do they do work that is equivalent to their billions of net worth. Some of them even inherit it, meaning they DIDN'T earn it, and you'd have no problem with that... It's interesting that people complain and accuse socialism of being about people not making money equivalent to their labor, but that's really found in capitalism...wealth multiplies thousands and thousands times over with big business, but other laborsome jobs have no way up mutiplying or even expanding a lttle. Socialism will deny people the oppertuntity to rise above - something Capitalism can do fantastically. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 17:24:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 12:01:02 GMT -5
They don't do nearly as much work as a physicist or a chemist or an incredible scientist (or as much work as countless other jobs - Oh and by the way, Einstein was much smarter and did much more work than Donald Trump, but Trump has much, much more money), nor do they do work that is equivalent to their billions of net worth. Some of them even inherit it, meaning they DIDN'T earn it, and you'd have no problem with that... It's interesting that people complain and accuse socialism of being about people not making money equivalent to their labor, but that's really found in capitalism...wealth multiplies thousands and thousands times over with big business, but other laborsome jobs have no way up mutiplying or even expanding a lttle. Socialism will deny people the oppertuntity to rise above - something Capitalism can do fantastically. But completely unrestricted capitalism can also not allow people to rise above, if the lower class can never find money to go to college or rise above no matter how hard they try, simply because they were born in lower class situations, they're stuck - meanwhile the upperclass, if never taxed, remains at the top, stomping on the little people below, making sure they never move up. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jan 21, 2010 15:06:06 GMT -5
I don't think anyone wants lassiez-faire capitalism, Government Intervention must occur. But we should still be a long way away from socialism.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 17:24:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 15:37:59 GMT -5
I don't think anyone wants lassiez-faire capitalism, Government Intervention must occur. But we should still be a long way away from socialism. Germany is considered a socialist nation by many, and it is doing better economically than America. |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Jan 21, 2010 15:43:13 GMT -5
I don't think anyone wants lassiez-faire capitalism, Government Intervention must occur. But we should still be a long way away from socialism. Germany is considered a socialist nation by many, and it is doing better economically than America. Iceland is considered a socialist nation by many (has universal healthcare, has free post-secondary education). It is bankrupt. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 17:24:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 15:44:18 GMT -5
Germany is considered a socialist nation by many, and it is doing better economically than America. Iceland is considered a socialist nation by many (has universal healthcare, has free post-secondary education). It is bankrupt. America is considered a capitalist nation, and it sucks economically due to swindlers and bankers who decided to give themselves bonuses, and made money off of our collapse. |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Jan 21, 2010 15:49:31 GMT -5
Iceland is considered a socialist nation by many (has universal healthcare, has free post-secondary education). It is bankrupt. America is considered a capitalist nation, and it sucks economically due to swindlers and bankers who decided to give themselves bonuses, and made money off of our collapse. And it was on top of the world economically 10 years ago when you had swindlers and bankers giving themselves bonuses and making money off our success. What's your point? |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jan 21, 2010 15:50:54 GMT -5
I don't think anyone wants lassiez-faire capitalism, Government Intervention must occur. But we should still be a long way away from socialism. Germany is considered a socialist nation by many, and it is doing better economically than America. Germany is socialist? News to me  There are some socialist economies that work, but every economy is diferent. Germany is the world's second biggest exporter, it has a ton of raw materials in the country. The economies of Britain and the USA are primarily service based and mostly deindustrialized, and socialism would not thrive as well there. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 17:24:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 15:52:37 GMT -5
America is considered a capitalist nation, and it sucks economically due to swindlers and bankers who decided to give themselves bonuses, and made money off of our collapse. And it was on top of the world economically 10 years ago when you had swindlers and bankers giving themselves bonuses and making money off our success. What's your point? Because you didn't have a millionaire oil monger as President ten years ago, spending trillions on a pointless war, and who was willing to actually tax people and make sure everyone got a piece of the pie. You go back fifteen years before that, in the 1980s under Reagan, workers' wages didn't go up at all, and only the elite reigned supreme. Go back to the 30s and a revolutionary Democrat was wiling to put people back to work, rebuild roads and the infrastructure, while aristocratic Republicans stood against him. America goes in cycles, but works best when it leans left and tries to reach out to the poor and oppressed. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 17:24:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 15:55:24 GMT -5
Germany is considered a socialist nation by many, and it is doing better economically than America. Germany is socialist? News to me There are some socialist economies that work, but every economy is diferent. Germany is the world's second biggest exporter, it has a ton of raw materials in the country. The economies of Britain and the USA are primarily service based and mostly deindustrialized, and socialism would not thrive as well there. America could work as a socialist nation, and it doesn't matter the type of economy you're talking about. A man on Wall Street may have a ten billion dollar net worth; it doesn't matter if that he lives in a country that isn't the world's second biggest exporter, like Germany, you take a few billion from him and give it to people who are poor and oppressed, and he'll still be happy and wealthy. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jan 21, 2010 16:03:24 GMT -5
Germany is socialist? News to me There are some socialist economies that work, but every economy is diferent. Germany is the world's second biggest exporter, it has a ton of raw materials in the country. The economies of Britain and the USA are primarily service based and mostly deindustrialized, and socialism would not thrive as well there. America could work as a socialist nation, and it doesn't matter the type of economy you're talking about. A man on Wall Street may have a ten billion dollar net worth; it doesn't matter if that he lives in a country that isn't the world's second biggest exporter, like Germany, you take a few billion from him and give it to people who are poor and oppressed, and he'll still be happy and wealthy. You can't tax him 50% of his money. It just doesn't work that way. He would have no incentive to make profit if you tax him that much, so he would'nt work hard, thus making his buisness shrink. Do that to every buisness, and America gets  ed. The consumer depends on the buisness as much as the buisness depends on the consumer - Socialism is a lovely idea in theory, but just won't work in practice. He may well just up sticks to an economy that does'nt tax him 50%. America is now a service based economy. You can't reindustrialise it - it would lower quality of life, and the US would go backwards not forwards. It's moved past that, while Germany has not. A service based economy is not compatible with socialsim. Finally, are the poor opressed? Isn't Obama helping these people with healthcare etc? Sounds like its improving for them under capitalism. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 17:24:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2010 16:06:53 GMT -5
America could work as a socialist nation, and it doesn't matter the type of economy you're talking about. A man on Wall Street may have a ten billion dollar net worth; it doesn't matter if that he lives in a country that isn't the world's second biggest exporter, like Germany, you take a few billion from him and give it to people who are poor and oppressed, and he'll still be happy and wealthy. You can't tax him 50% of his money. It just doesn't work that way. He would have no incentive to make profit if you tax him that much, so he would'nt work hard, thus making his buisness shrink. Do that to every buisness, and America gets ed. The consumer depends on the buisness as much as the buisness depends on the consumer - Socialism is a lovely idea in theory, but just won't work in practice. He may well just up sticks to an economy that does'nt tax him 50%. America is now a service based economy. You can't reindustrialise it - it would lower quality of life, and the US would go backwards not forwards. It's moved past that, while Germany has not. A service based economy is not compatible with socialsim. Finally, are the poor opressed? Isn't Obama helping these people with healthcare etc? Sounds like its improving for them under capitalism. Ya know, with five billion dollars (if he was taxed 50% of his net worth), he can still afford pretty much the most luxurious life any of us could imagine. Several mansions and businesses and whatever else. I refuse to feel sorry for a man with five billion dollars, even if he "deserves" ten billion. Yes, Obama is helping the poor and oppressed, but people who hate him are claiming that he isn't a practitioner of "true" capitalism. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jan 21, 2010 16:10:07 GMT -5
You can't tax him 50% of his money. It just doesn't work that way. He would have no incentive to make profit if you tax him that much, so he would'nt work hard, thus making his buisness shrink. Do that to every buisness, and America gets ed. The consumer depends on the buisness as much as the buisness depends on the consumer - Socialism is a lovely idea in theory, but just won't work in practice. He may well just up sticks to an economy that does'nt tax him 50%. America is now a service based economy. You can't reindustrialise it - it would lower quality of life, and the US would go backwards not forwards. It's moved past that, while Germany has not. A service based economy is not compatible with socialsim. Finally, are the poor opressed? Isn't Obama helping these people with healthcare etc? Sounds like its improving for them under capitalism. Ya know, with five billion dollars (if he was taxed 50% of his net worth), he can still afford pretty much the most luxurious life any of us could imagine. Several mansions and businesses and whatever else. I refuse to feel sorry for a man with five billion dollars, even if he "deserves" ten billion. Yes, Obama is helping the poor and oppressed, but people who hate him are claiming that he isn't a practitioner of "true" capitalism. I don't disagree with you (Well I do a bit, but thats another argument). He does disagree, and I'm just saying what would happen. It can't work. He won't stick around in the USA when what he's doing can earn him 50% more money elsewhere. |
|
I dont know good luck 
