1. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    Side note: I wish people knew the difference between 'to' and 'too'. And 'you're' and 'your'. And 'their', 'they're' and 'there'. It really takes away from your credibility even if people would otherwise agree with you. It's not just old dudes being cranky. It really makes you sound like you're uneducated when your spelling and word choice are bad. There are examples of it all over this thread. And I bet they're not even aware of their errors.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Dude, if I could, I'd shake your hand, but since I can't, I'll simply say...."thank you"...
    01-21-2015 09:23 PM
  2. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    Redistributing wealth for any reason is an outrage...
    Honestly..... you think the "redistribution of wealth" started with Obama?

    Do you really believe that?

    You are just parroting what you have heard other people say. Talk about following blindly.


    Chuckles.......
    01-21-2015 10:47 PM
  3. palandri's Avatar
    Side note: I wish people knew the difference between 'to' and 'too'. And 'you're' and 'your'. And 'their', 'they're' and 'there'. It really takes away from your credibility even if people would otherwise agree with you. It's not just old dudes being cranky. It really makes you sound like you're uneducated when your spelling and word choice are bad. There are examples of it all over this thread. And I bet they're not even aware of their errors.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    There are hundreds of homophones in the English language. Maybe this will help: Browse Homophones by Letter at Homophone.com
    01-21-2015 10:52 PM
  4. Scatabrain's Avatar
    Dude, if I could, I'd shake your hand, but since I can't, I'll simply say...."thank you"...
    Love it when we can find something to agree on.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    01-21-2015 10:58 PM
  5. Scatabrain's Avatar
    There are hundreds of homophones in the English language. Maybe this will help: Browse Homophones by Letter at Homophone.com
    If the younglings could just start with these 3 that would be a fantastic start.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    palandri likes this.
    01-21-2015 11:01 PM
  6. hydrogen3's Avatar
    Honestly..... you think the "redistribution of wealth" started with Obama?

    Do you really believe that?

    You are just parroting what you have heard other people say. Talk about following blindly.


    Chuckles.......
    No, I don't. I speak out against "redistribution of wealth" regardless who the flavor of the 4 year term is. Republican or Democrat.


    Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
    01-22-2015 07:35 AM
  7. Scatabrain's Avatar
    No, I don't. I speak out against "redistribution of wealth" regardless who the flavor of the 4 year term is. Republican or Democrat.


    Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
    So you agree with the president then when he speaks about the redistribution of our wealth to benefit big oil? $25 billion in tax credits for the big 3 oil companies at the height of oil prices.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    kilofoxtrot likes this.
    01-22-2015 08:01 AM
  8. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    So you agree with the president then when he speaks about the redistribution of our wealth to benefit big oil? $25 billion in tax credits for the big 3 oil companies at the height of oil prices.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thats not redistribution...... thats... thats.... well, its not redistribution. Its something else. <sarcasim>

    "Why is it that if you take advantage of a tax break and you're a corporation, you're a smart businessman, but if you take advantage of something you need to not be hungry, you're a moocher?" Jon Stewart

    "The biggest problem with the denizens of Bulls**t Mountain is they act like their s**t don't stink. If they have success, they built it. If they failed, the government ruined it for 'em. If they get a break, they deserve it. If you get a break, it's a handout and an entitlement. It's a baffling, willfully blind cognitive dissonance best summed up by their head coach, in what is perhaps my favorite sound bite of all time: [on screen, a clip of actor Craig T. Nelson saying, "I've been on food stamps and welfare. Anyone help me out? No."] -Jon Stewart

    This clip is Nelson on Beck's show saying the same thing..... ironic and yet very believable.
    Scatabrain and sanibel like this.
    01-22-2015 09:11 AM
  9. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    If the younglings could just start with these 3 that would be a fantastic start.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    .. add using paragraphs to the list of things to learn.
    01-22-2015 09:40 AM
  10. hydrogen3's Avatar
    So you agree with the president then when he speaks about the redistribution of our wealth to benefit big oil? $25 billion in tax credits for the big 3 oil companies at the height of oil prices.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The primary motivation behind liberal economic theology is the basic premise that the poor are too poor and the rich are too rich.

    Big Oil, shouldn't have tax credits, period.

    Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
    the_tech_eater likes this.
    01-22-2015 10:47 AM
  11. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    The primary motivation behind liberal economic theology is the basic premise that the poor are too poor and the rich are too rich.

    Big Oil, shouldn't have tax credits, period.

    Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
    Agreed. Far too many people have a blanket view of "poor". They don't recognize that financially poor is not the same as being without, and as I've stated before, many people would be surprised to find how comfortable many of the "poor" are living. Too many assume that everyone who begs at a street corner is indeed hungry or are in dire need of financial assistance. I can tell you firsthand that that is not the case. If they ever took the time to talk to many of the "homeless" away from a camera, they'd discover that many of them are there by "choice". I've seen several "confirmed" rich people who were NOT on drugs or an alcoholic or were crazy, living among the homeless because they felt "free". I've talked to both them and their families. Anyway, I didn't mean to ramble....
    BreakingKayfabe likes this.
    01-22-2015 10:57 AM
  12. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    The primary motivation behind liberal economic theology is the basic premise that the poor are too poor and the rich are too rich.

    Big Oil, shouldn't have tax credits, period.

    Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
    But they do have tax credits... and that's because of the primary motivation behind conservative economic theology.
    01-22-2015 11:12 AM
  13. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    The primary motivation behind liberal economic theology is the basic premise that the poor are too poor and the rich are too rich.

    Big Oil, shouldn't have tax credits, period.

    Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

    Agreed. Far too many people have a blanket view of "poor". They don't recognize that financially poor is not the same as being without, and as I've stated before, many people would be surprised to find how comfortable many of the "poor" are living. Too many assume that everyone who begs at a street corner is indeed hungry or are in dire need of financial assistance. I can tell you firsthand that that is not the case. If they ever took the time to talk to many of the "homeless" away from a camera, they'd discover that many of them are there by "choice". I've seen several "confirmed" rich people who were NOT on drugs or an alcoholic or were crazy, living among the homeless because they felt "free". I've talked to both them and their families. Anyway, I didn't mean to ramble....
    You agree with hydro's statement, but only choose to comment on the first half of his statement?

    Why is that so?
    01-22-2015 11:17 AM
  14. Scatabrain's Avatar
    The primary motivation behind liberal economic theology is the basic premise that the poor are too poor and the rich are too rich.

    Big Oil, shouldn't have tax credits, period.

    Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
    Thats your opinion. And its not even close to the truth. My motivation is that one group should not have unequal power against another. The poor are just not represented as well as corporations period. This is only one example.

    And FUD about the poor living comfortably is laughable. I'm sure that's just the kind of thing you need to believe in order to let this kind of inequity to exist.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    01-22-2015 11:22 AM
  15. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    You agree with hydro's statement, but only choose to comment on the first half of his statement?

    Why is that so?
    To be honest, I didn't even pay attention to the big oil shouldn't get a tax credit comment. I read the part about the poor and it struck a nerve and caused me to want to share my experience. That's all. Having said that, I don't have a problem with businesses getting tax credits, especially when their investments have created jobs and/or spurs job growth.
    BreakingKayfabe likes this.
    01-22-2015 11:24 AM
  16. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    Thats your opinion. And its not even close to the truth. My motivation is that one group should not have unequal power against another. The poor are just not represented as well as corporations period. This is only one example.

    And FUD about the poor living comfortably is laughable. I'm sure that's just the kind of thing you need to believe in order to let this kind of inequity to exist.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Exactly.. it is a "baffling, willfully blind cognitive dissonance". Conservatives control congress, will they end big oil's tax credits? No. The poor ripping us off is the bigger problem.
    01-22-2015 11:28 AM
  17. sanibel's Avatar
    The primary motivation behind liberal economic theology is the basic premise that the poor are too poor and the rich are too rich.
    Quotation marks are missing from Redistribution of Wealth - Chapter 1 - Newspeak Dictionary. And you might as well add the photo from the article...
    The Massacre in Paris-robin_hood.jpg
    kilofoxtrot likes this.
    01-22-2015 11:29 AM
  18. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    Quotation marks are missing from Redistribution of Wealth - Chapter 1 - Newspeak Dictionary. And you might as well add the photo from the article...
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	robin_hood.jpg 
Views:	31 
Size:	23.0 KB 
ID:	76023
    Well played San... well played.
    01-22-2015 11:34 AM
  19. hydrogen3's Avatar
    01-22-2015 11:37 AM
  20. Scatabrain's Avatar
    The Pope asks us to care for the poor. I don't always listen to the pope but when I do I choose caring.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    01-22-2015 12:01 PM
  21. kilofoxtrot's Avatar

    The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics - Redistribution


    Some highlights:

    "Almost without exception, academic studies and journalistic accounts of government’s effect on the well-being of the poor focus exclusively on the effectiveness of programs that actually transfer income to the poor. What does this leave out? It leaves out all the programs that transfer income away from the poor. To know the net amount the poor receive after considering transfers to and transfers from them, we need to consider all government transfer programs."

    "Such an examination yields a striking fact: most government transfers are not from the rich to the poor. Instead, government takes from the relatively unorganized (e.g., consumers and general taxpayers) and gives to the relatively organized (groups politically organized around common interests, such as the elderly, sugar farmers, and steel producers). The most important factor in determining the pattern of redistribution appears to be political influence, not poverty."

    "Not only do the poor receive a smaller percentage of income transfers than most people realize, but also the transfers they do get are worth less to them, dollar for dollar, than transfers going to the nonpoor. The reason is that subsidies to the poor tend to be in kind rather than in cash."

    "Probably the best reason for believing that government transfers have done less to help the poor than most people think follows from recognizing that competition for political favor determines transfer decisions, as it does most government decisions. People are poor because they do not have the skills, drive, and connections to compete effectively in the marketplace. For those same reasons, they are unlikely to compete very effectively politically. The result is that the best-organized, and generally the wealthiest, groups consistently outcompete the poor for government transfers. "
    01-22-2015 12:15 PM
  22. Just_Me_D's Avatar

    The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics - Redistribution


    Some highlights:

    "Almost without exception, academic studies and journalistic accounts of governments effect on the well-being of the poor focus exclusively on the effectiveness of programs that actually transfer income to the poor. What does this leave out? It leaves out all the programs that transfer income away from the poor. To know the net amount the poor receive after considering transfers to and transfers from them, we need to consider all government transfer programs."

    "Such an examination yields a striking fact: most government transfers are not from the rich to the poor. Instead, government takes from the relatively unorganized (e.g., consumers and general taxpayers) and gives to the relatively organized (groups politically organized around common interests, such as the elderly, sugar farmers, and steel producers). The most important factor in determining the pattern of redistribution appears to be political influence, not poverty."

    "Not only do the poor receive a smaller percentage of income transfers than most people realize, but also the transfers they do get are worth less to them, dollar for dollar, than transfers going to the nonpoor. The reason is that subsidies to the poor tend to be in kind rather than in cash."

    "Probably the best reason for believing that government transfers have done less to help the poor than most people think follows from recognizing that competition for political favor determines transfer decisions, as it does most government decisions. People are poor because they do not have the skills, drive, and connections to compete effectively in the marketplace. For those same reasons, they are unlikely to compete very effectively politically. The result is that the best-organized, and generally the wealthiest, groups consistently outcompete the poor for government transfers. "
    "General taxpayers"? Everyone who pays taxes, whether rich or not, fall into that category, don't they? Anyway, there will always be wealthy and/or powerful people who exploits the poor just like there will always be poor and crafty people who will exploit the wealthy, and arguably, it's the middle class who is left making up the difference.
    grunt0300 likes this.
    01-22-2015 12:48 PM
  23. Scatabrain's Avatar
    "General taxpayers"? Everyone who pays taxes, whether rich or not, fall into that category, don't they? Anyway, there will always be wealthy and/or powerful people who exploits the poor just like there will always be poor and crafty people who will exploit the wealthy, and arguably, it's the middle class who is left making up the difference.
    Sounds like you're okay with it. I'm not.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    01-22-2015 01:11 PM
  24. grunt0300's Avatar
    What "poor" are we talking about here? The honest, hard working people who just can't seem to get ahead, even though they try? Or, the sit at home, won't even look for a job, but let the Govt. take care of them, kind. The third or fourth generation "poor", who sit at home and watch their t.v., and talk on their free Govt. phone? How about using food stamps to buy beer and cigarettes. That "poor"?
    01-22-2015 01:12 PM
  25. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    Sounds like you're okay with it. I'm not.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It doesn't matter if I'm okay with it or not. It is what it is. Far too many people spend a good deal of time focusing on what the haves have in comparison to the have-nots with a skewed view. They don't want to hear the truth about why *many* of the have-nots don't possess what the haves possess. They conclude that they should be able to have what the haves have, but *many* of them do not want to put in the work to get it. They complain to elected officials and activists who, with the help of the media, create stories and images that reflect the sentiments of those complaining. In other words, they exploit the complainers and character assassinate anyone who dares stand up and voice any common sense that exposes that exploitation or refutes their misconceptions. On the other hand, you have those who will gain wealth by exploiting the haves' reluctance to be viewed in a negative manner. Race pimps are good at this. Now, without making this a religious conversation, it is said that the poor will always be among us. If true, and thus far it is, then that also means that there will always be those who aren't poor. It also means that the pipe dream in regard to creating a society where "everyone" is equal is just that, a pipe dream.
    01-22-2015 01:41 PM
199 ... 5678

Similar Threads

  1. Where to buy MBPr in LA
    By Highrisedrifter in forum MacBook Pro
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-18-2015, 12:13 PM
  2. Replies: 33
    Last Post: 01-13-2015, 01:48 PM
  3. How do I get the 2G option back?
    By iMore Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-08-2015, 10:29 AM
  4. Any idea free download similar to the removed Itube?
    By iMore Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-08-2015, 10:25 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-08-2015, 09:01 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD