Why all these new guns laws and no economy cares? (Republic: calculated, cost of)

[northbound74]

Originally Posted by STLviaMSP

Open your eyes and tell me with a straight face that there has been enough redistribution. There hasn't, and we know for a fact that social mobility has stagnated and opportunity as measured in average wages has declined in inflation adjusted dollars. There are too many people working low paying service jobs today, that even a generation ago would have at least been working in lower-middle income jobs that provided some sense of security. Poverty has been increasing, and there are what, four or six applicants for every job opening? The good jobs for the masses appear to be mostly gone, and if we as a culture - and this is directed at those people in the position to hire and make payroll decisions for these low level workers - aren't going to take action to resolve this MAJOR problem (which will bite us all in the ass in the form of crime, economic decline, and municipal collapse), then the wealthiest people deserve to have a significant portion of their income pushed back into the economy and towards those that have little to no money and few graspable opportunities, to ensure that we do not become a feudally bifurcated society with all the third world problems that entails.

That lazy SOB you complain about is lazy because he perceives that despite his increased productivity, he has been getting a shrinking share of the pie. That is very dangerous for society.

So which is it? Better paying jobs for those of us on the lower end, or simply force rich people to give me money? The first fosters self-esteem and pride of workmanship/ownership, the latter fosters laziness and entitlement, not to mention the greater likelihood of the social ills you speak of. People who are hard workers are far less likely to be criminals. History is somber proof that welfare/forced redistribution never, ever comes with a lower crime rate. Quite the opposite.
You say if we can't have one, then force the other. I say the welfare option would indeed turn us into that third-world country you speak of. Rich and poor and nothing else. Welfare to that extent is what we fight against and should not be an option on the table. You can't just tax the rich out of spite and expect it to produce good results. At some point, there will not be enough money floating around to redistribute.

Seems like liberals and conservatives fall on both sides of the issue of bringing back blue-collar jobs for the masses. We aren't all college material and born to live in a cubicle. So yeah, losing those jobs has hurt. Obama gave it lip service once upon a time, but his ideology would get in the way of any true progress and Republicans have their own faults on the issue.
Oh well. That's a whole other discussion.

[STLviaMSP]

So...conservatives think the unemployed and the poor need less money in order to be adequately motivated, while the rich and wealthy need more money for adequate motivation? I just want to make sure I am correctly summing up the last two posts. And it's time for a laughter break.

[northbound74]

No, they need job opportunities, not free endless cash. And you know good and well that we're not talking about giving them less or more in order to be motivated. The issue is role of government in all of it. Me? Yeah, I'd be more motivated to improve my situation if money was running out, but I can't speak for everyone.
The rich and wealthy appear to be doing just fine. Tax them all you want (I don't care that much personally, since I'm anything but rich), but it won't produce the results you seek.

[STLviaMSP]

Why is it that the rich need tax breaks, but those that are not even really getting by need less? The rich have historically low taxes. They aren't creating the jobs those low taxes were supposed to compel them to create. Thus they are not upholding their end of the bargain and need to be taxed more so that money can be put to use growing the economy.

[MUTGR]

pay fines, or scale back hours, teachers, etc.....


KMIZ-MO: Missouri Schools Facing $150,000 In Fines, Cutting Hours For Teachers Due To ObamaCare - YouTube

And a Missouri connection to boot.

I guess Obamacare is the new trickle down economics! I'll take the Reagan version myself.


AND NOW WE LEARN 50% of the uninsured - you know, the ones the law was supposed to help - disapprove of the law.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...eliana-johnson

[Flyover_Country]

Originally Posted by STLviaMSP

So...conservatives think the unemployed and the poor need less money in order to be adequately motivated, while the rich and wealthy need more money for adequate motivation? I just want to make sure I am correctly summing up the last two posts. And it's time for a laughter break.

It's only funny to you since you apparently understand the situation so poorly that you miss the entire point we are trying to get across. The old parable "give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will feed himself for the rest of his life" describes the situation perfectly.

Somebody who is simply given handouts for little to nothing will continue to expect to receive it for little or nothing and will not make much of an effort to try to become self-sufficient, let alone prosper. This is what the statists want as the people receiving the handouts become dependent on the handouts and the statists and the government to give them the handouts, forever cementing them in power. The statists frequently try to hinder anybody in trying to be independently successful by levying punitive taxes, fees, fines, and regulations upon them, lest too many people become self-sufficient and reduce the need for the huge overbearing government. Conversely, conservatives would rather have a good environment for people to attempt to succeed in their own endeavours.

[Versatile]

Originally Posted by Flyover_Country

It's only funny to you since you apparently understand the situation so poorly that you miss the entire point we are trying to get across. The old parable "give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will feed himself for the rest of his life" describes the situation perfectly.

Somebody who is simply given handouts for little to nothing will continue to expect to receive it for little or nothing and will not make much of an effort to try to become self-sufficient, let alone prosper. This is what the statists want as the people receiving the handouts become dependent on the handouts and the statists and the government to give them the handouts, forever cementing them in power. The statists frequently try to hinder anybody in trying to be independently successful by levying punitive taxes, fees, fines, and regulations upon them, lest too many people become self-sufficient and reduce the need for the huge overbearing government. Conversely, conservatives would rather have a good environment for people to attempt to succeed in their own endeavours.

I think that only RWNJ's believe the stuff you are putting out.

[Flyover_Country]

Feel free to try to prove me wrong. I bet that you can't.

[STLviaMSP]

So if the private sector isn't producing jobs, it's better to just let the unemployed rot than to tax the wealthy that aren't investing or corps that are sitting on record piles of cash than to use tax policy to pull enough of this money into the economy to make a dent as stimulus? What? What?!!!?! What!??!?! And we also shouldn't give the poor/unemployed money to spend, since that will, you know, mess up their self esteem (even though that money will all get spent, in the process creating, you know, those j-things)? Where do you get this stuff? It's comedy gold.


Oh, and I got my insurance information for the new year: 35% ($2300) decrease in our premiums, $500 increase in deductible - $1800 net savings. Same coverage. Oooohhh, that meddling Obama! And I had no increase last year for pretty much the first time ever.

[Bideshi]

Originally Posted by STLviaMSP

Well, the Whigs...er I mean...GOP, won't matter outside the south and far west in a couple election cycles anyway. Unfortunately in the interim they are knuckle-dragging a few once-great Midwest states down with their gun loving, anti-science, low-wage, low-education, low-civil-rights, Baptist fundamentalist idiocy. It's a shame, and they should be ashamed of themselves for doing it. It's no use arguing with them, however, as they are incapable of processing facts that don't align with their conspiracy-theories.

You will absolutely turn our conservative heads with such flattery...