Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: should obama have the right to redistribute taxpayer money as president?
no 66 72.53%
yes 25 27.47%
Voters: 91. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-02-2008, 12:57 AM
 
207 posts, read 280,724 times
Reputation: 52

Advertisements

Assuming that the gazillion posts on the web by screen name moionfire are you, what do you do & how do you have so much free time? Also, given the lack of a profile, it is hard to tell why you have this obsession with how much people make.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-02-2008, 01:14 AM
 
8,986 posts, read 11,868,989 times
Reputation: 10898
Fear-mongering has taken on a new shape. The government redistributes money everyday. Where do you think the $700B bailout come from? Bush just gave your tax money to crooked bankers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2008, 01:27 AM
 
207 posts, read 280,724 times
Reputation: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidt1 View Post
Fear-mongering has taken on a new shape. The government redistributes money everyday. Where do you think the $700B bailout come from? Bush just gave your tax money to crooked bankers.
Fear mongering? Nice try...
Actually the Democratic Congress gave your money away & wanted even more before Bush said NO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2008, 01:01 AM
 
943 posts, read 786,440 times
Reputation: 587
Quote:
Originally Posted by independent thinker View Post
Assuming that the gazillion posts on the web by screen name moionfire are you, what do you do & how do you have so much free time? Also, given the lack of a profile, it is hard to tell why you have this obsession with how much people make.
Er, I don't write that much on this forum- especially when compared to others on the site.

Keep in mind that it is the weekend- So I don't have to work today...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2008, 01:02 AM
 
943 posts, read 786,440 times
Reputation: 587
Quote:
Originally Posted by independent thinker View Post
Moionfire - geez, you're all over the web.

Well, clearly you are too!! You are obviously here to comment on my post...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2008, 01:06 AM
 
943 posts, read 786,440 times
Reputation: 587
Quote:
Originally Posted by independent thinker View Post
NOPE. Not buyin it. Not true.

How much money do welfare recipents make? You are seem sure of yourself, so please back it up with facts/statistics....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2008, 01:30 AM
 
Location: NJ
56 posts, read 104,173 times
Reputation: 39
Hmmm, wish you could've made this a public poll to see how many Obama fans actually voted "no."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2008, 06:04 AM
 
8,986 posts, read 11,868,989 times
Reputation: 10898
Quote:
Originally Posted by independent thinker View Post
Fear mongering? Nice try...
Actually the Democratic Congress gave your money away & wanted even more before Bush said NO.
Change your handle back to sickmarine, smddumb or whatever it is you really are because you are anything but an independent thinker. Henry Paulson, a Bush employee, came up with the bailout and wanted absolutely authority over the bill. It was the democrats who tried to prevent unchecked compensations for the crooked bankers.

The Associated Press: Frank angry at banks over bailout plans

Paulson Bailout Plan a Historic Swindle

Is Paulson's bailout bill unconstitutional? - By Rod Smolla - Slate Magazine

The links I posted requires some reading skill. Think you can handle that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2008, 06:12 AM
 
Location: Southwestern Ohio
4,112 posts, read 6,546,606 times
Reputation: 1625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ever Adrift View Post
Virtually all governance involves redistribution of wealth, and you should be damn happy about it too. In the US, the government provides us with infrastructure, police, military, firefighters, social security, medicare, medicaid, public education, unemployment benefits, etc. Thus, the question is not whether the government should redistribute wealth but how much should be redistributed. Many of us, though by no means all, believe that the government should be involved in assuring that all have access to affordable healthcare, equal opportunity in education, assistance if laid off, etc. This requires that people are taxed in order to aid the disadvantaged. If you are in favor of these types of policies, then greater redistribution may be necessary. I, personally, believe that those of us who make $250,000 can afford small tax increases so that those of us who haven't been as fortunate, or lucky, in life can see some improvement in living standards. Some will argue that those earning that much have worked hard to get where they are. Yet, this ignores the fact that many, many (far more, likely) others have worked just as hard and gotten nowhere. We are not all subject to the same opportunities. A little redistribution may be necessary to ensure that those disadvantaged by birth, or location, or circumstance, may see modest increases in their lot in life. I recognize that this is a controversial opinion, but I do believe it. I personally find it morally reprehensible that there are multi-millionaires and billionaires who can have anything they could ever need and then some while, at the same time, there is widespread and pervasive poverty.
Taxes paid for infrastructure are fine as they should be maintained , but redistributing the wealth..medicare and social security where 80% is spent on administrative costs is not. Charities can't do this as they have strict laws to adhere to about what percentage need to go to those they are helping (98%, I think).

Redistributing the wealth is Socialism, plain and simple.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:15 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top