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.
Great! I've been unemployed for two years and can't find work. I'm running out of deferrments on my Parent Plus loans for my kid's college education. Will you please take that debt off my hands?
I have to tell you, reading all of this is downright painful. I hate being reminded that so many on the right side of the aisle - my side, my team, my homies! - can be just as irrrational, incoherent, and incapable of following a simple argument as the looniest of the loony left.
Actually presenting one usually helps.
Uproarious. An uber-conservative tries to explains it all to his fellow Believers In The Righteousness Of All Things Ronald Reagan (and/or Ron Paul) and none of them have any clue as to what it is he's preaching. This is exactly why Mitt Romney is now pumping his own gas.
Last edited by DewDropInn; 11-20-2012 at 08:05 PM..
If all of the 'wealth' in this country were evenly distributed among all the people, how long do you think it would take for it to get back where it started? The 'wealthy' in this country are already paying over 70% of all income taxes, even though the number$ of those earning over $250K is about 5-percent. Ironically, the 'wealthy' will always be able to afford to find the 'loopholes' faster than those who seek a more socialistic form of government can close them.
The real issue we need to be working on is finding the will to STOP SPENDING MORE THAN TAXES PRODUCE! Do you really believe that our illustrious legislators will not increase spending to match or exceed any possible amount of increased taxes?
If we're talking wealth, it would get back where it started only if people were greedy and lazy. I'm not greedy and lazy, so I would guard and hoard my wealth, knowing that my capacity to go out and make more is minimal. (Most people figure if they lost their wealth they can just go out and make more; I am fully aware than I'm not able to do that.)
Here we have a typical attack on those who are in need, are sick, have lost their employment, are incapable of working for one reason or another. It's truely disgusting that you can have so many people who are so small, so incapable of putting themselves in another's shoes.
And I could say the EXACT same of you and your ilk... It's truly disgusting that you can have so many people who are so small, so incapable of putting themselves in another's shoes. They just think others should slave away to provide for them without expending any effort whatsoever to support themselves and/or live within their means. It's truly disgusting that so many small-minded people think they are entitled to STEAL the fruits of OTHERS' labors to enrich themselves so they don't have to work.
The cornerstone of good government is its written constitution. That charter may have other names, but always takes the form of a document that lays out what the government can and cannot do.
It's up to the people who wrote and ratified it, to put "good" things in it. If they don't, they can change it later.
Our constitution contains a list of things the Fed govt is given authority to do. All oher things are forbidden to the Fed.
One of the things not included, is authority to do "anything that helps people".
The people of our country could change that if they wanted to. In more than 200 years, they have made a number of changes to the document... but chosen not to change that one.
Liberals just can't get over that fact. And so they spend endless amounts of time trying to get around it, circumvent it, or just plain ignore it, trying to force their version of utopia on the rest of us even after we specifically, and repeatedly, forbade it.
They just won't take the hint.
I am a member of a minority class which was excluded from participation in writing and ratifying the Constitution. As a member of a minority class (without money to boot), I am pretty much powerless to change it.
I see nothing in the Constitution that hinders states from screwing poor people, so if Congress has no power to do "anything that helps people" what do you expect to happen to the poor?
I keep hearing liberals and other socialists say they want to "redistribute" the wealth in this country. But that implies that the wealth was "distributed" by someone to us all in the first place, and maybe that someone did a bad job and the liberals think they can do it better.
But wealth was never "distributed" to any of us, except maybe by welfare clerks to various indigent persons. But the $100 that's in my wallet now, wasn't distributed to me by anyone. A guy with a car and I made an agreement: I'd tune up his car and fix a few things on it, and he'd pay me $100 to do it. I tuned it up, changed the oil, and replaced two squeaking belts that were badly worn. He's happy, now it starts easier, gets better gas mileage, and doesn't make weird sounds as he drives. He'd much rather have a car that drives like this, than have the $100; and I'd much rather have the $100 and don't mind getting my hands dirty to do something I do well.
Nobody "distributed" anything to either one of us. He and I made a deal, both of us gave the other something of value, both of us are happy with the outcome.
But if Barack Obama had come along just then, he might have taken the guy's $100, and the guy couldn't have gotten me to fix his car. He'd still have a ****ty-running car that sometimes wouldn't start, I'd be $100 poorer... which means my son would be walking 3 miles to school instead of riding the bike I was about to fix up for him. Barack Obama wants me to think that a better use was made of that $100, than we would have made of it... but when we asked Barack Obama exactly what the money was used for, he couldn't answer the question.
People who talk about "redistributing" wealth, are lying. What they are doing, is taking something that was yours, that you earned, and telling you that (a) they know better how to use it than you do, and (b) this somehow makes it OK for them to take it from you, whether you like it or not.
These people aren't "redistributing" anything, because your money wasn't "distributed" to you in the first place. You EARNED it, and you got it because you DESERVED it, not because some uninvolved bureaucrat thought your having it would somehow be a good idea and so gave his blessing on you to receive it.
"Redistributing" is a politician's way of implying you did NOT earn your money, and so it's not really yours. And pretending that his deciding what to use your money for, is the natural order of things. Not the idea that since you earned it, YOU should decide what to use it for. He's trying to get you away from that idea.
Know what kills me? I worked two jobs to get thru undergrad, then I worked THREE jobs to get thru grad school. I have worked since I was 15 years old. Currently, I work two jobs and I am over 50. Sooo....having worked like a dog, saved every penny I can, neglected to buy the trinkets that most people of my income have (new car, cable tv, I pad, Ipod, DVD, well, you name it)....people like Western Pilgrim think I still do not give enough. Do I feel sorry for the "less privileged"? Honestly, not a lot. I have worked so hard to get where I am, and I resent those who now point the finger at me and say "pay up".
Excellent post!
Damn near close to my personal experience, as well. If we can do it, so can others. They should foot their own bills and stop stealing the money we've worked so hard for.
It is a welfare program, that is run by the government
Nope. Not one single mention of welfare. Read it... P.L. 89-97
It's insurance.
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.