• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income

...of course if one is envious of the rich or sees many of the rich as one's enemies and taxation as a way of punishing the rich, no rational argument against taxation will be persuasive

when the wealthy support & enable the moving of millions of American jobs overseas where they can pay barely liveable wages, some might logically argue that many of the wealthy are indeed the enemy.
 
when the wealthy support & enable the moving of millions of American jobs overseas where they can pay barely liveable wages, some might logically argue that many of the wealthy are indeed the enemy.

what is the purpose of a corporation Thunder?
 
No one is speaking of equality; only equity. You should care as the current trajectory of class bifurcation is not sustainable in a democracy. Either it changes, or the democracy dies (which is what is happening here).

If you like being a rich man in a poor country, perhaps a relocation to Mexico would be in order. Oh, wait, Mexico is coming here.


Not even a close comparison. I'd rather have a society that people are free to be mobile in their pursuit of happiness. As far as "equity" and your misconception of what we live in, it's called a representative republic. If you want pure democracy, I suggest Venezuela, or Iran

J-mac


Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
 
when the wealthy support & enable the moving of millions of American jobs overseas where they can pay barely liveable wages, some might logically argue that many of the wealthy are indeed the enemy.

Only those that mistakenly believe that those who have attained wealth owe them something.


J-mac

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
 
Only those that mistakenly believe that those who have attained wealth owe them something...

rich folks who make their money directly off of the hard labor of thousands of employees, do owe their workers more than to suddenly ship their jobs to China.
 
what is the purpose of a corporation Thunder?

So the picture is now perfectly clear you support the raping of the poor and middle class of America, You support the advantages that the Chinese have over Americans, you support the bills that make it easier for Americans to lose jobs as long as it lines the pockets of those with enough money to invest in those corporations.

How long do you think it will be before the Chinese nationalize foreign manufacturing and call in thier markers? Can you speak chinese?
 
rich folks who make their money directly off of the hard labor of thousands of employees, do owe their workers more than to suddenly ship their jobs to China.

that's a red herring that has nothing to do with most rich people
 
So the picture is now perfectly clear you support the raping of the poor and middle class of America, You support the advantages that the Chinese have over Americans, you support the bills that make it easier for Americans to lose jobs as long as it lines the pockets of those with enough money to invest in those corporations.

How long do you think it will be before the Chinese nationalize foreign manufacturing and call in thier markers? Can you speak chinese?

stop the psychobabble. its the middle class that demands Cheap chinese goods.
 
according to some, not to have any loyalty to their employees or the country that made their attainment of wealth possible.

more evasion and diversion.

what is the purpose of a corporation. and why should someone who has a fiduciary duty to make profits for the owners of a corporation show any loyalty to a parasitic government or a parasitic labor union?
 
more evasion and diversion.

what is the purpose of a corporation. and why should someone who has a fiduciary duty to make profits for the owners of a corporation show any loyalty to a parasitic government or a parasitic labor union?

..or a parasitic country?
 
I did, most people understand that its the middle class that drives most of the spending in this country by the politicians and taxing the rich does nothing to give the middle class a reminder that its desire for more spending is destructive and requires more and more taxes. when the middle class is taxed for what they want, I suspect they will curb their appetite

of course if one is envious of the rich or sees many of the rich as one's enemies and taxation as a way of punishing the rich, no rational argument against taxation will be persuasive

No you did not. All you did is give us the standard Turtle post in which you state your belief based on a complete misunderstanding and perverted distortion of the reality of the position of those which you disagree with.

And then you could not resist playing your ENVY card ... for what is it now... the 8,392 time?
 
that's a red herring that has nothing to do with most rich people

just who the heck do you think it is who owns those factories and sits on the board which makes those decisions?:doh
 
No you did not. All you did is give us the standard Turtle post in which you state your belief based on a complete misunderstanding and perverted distortion of the reality of the position of those which you disagree with.

And then you could not resist playing your ENVY card ... for what is it now... the 8,392 time?

if envy is obvious I will note it and the comments I see directed at the rich, especially heirs, ooze envy
 
just who the heck do you think it is who owns those factories and sits on the board which makes those decisions?:doh

the shareholders own them

that includes union pension plans among others
 
So many of you view the shipping of jobs elsewhere as if it were a choice, for many employers.


Let me break this down for you. This is a little truism that ANYONE who has every owned a business either already knew, or learned the hard way, at some point. "You're either growing, or you're dying." In the case of globalism, everyone ELSE is growing, RAPIDLY. India, China, most of Asia, actually....why? Because they have the single greatest resource a business NEEDS...cheap labor. I'm sorry, but we FORCED many manufacturers out of the country, when we decided that assembly line workers required 25+ an hour to do the jobs that many a monkey could handle, just fine. Look at GM. No sooner do they get out from under the crappy labor union contracts and stifling pensions, etc...and baby, they are BACK in business. I call that pretty solid evidence. But I'm wasting my time here, because none of you are going to present a rational counter argument that doesn't rely almost solely on emotional responses (the poor, but raped middle class!!! ), and most of you already know where you stand, and nothing, NOTHING, is going to sway you, no matter what sort of proof or evidence could be tossed into your faces.
 
So many of you view the shipping of jobs elsewhere as if it were a choice, for many employers.


Let me break this down for you. This is a little truism that ANYONE who has every owned a business either already knew, or learned the hard way, at some point. "You're either growing, or you're dying." In the case of globalism, everyone ELSE is growing, RAPIDLY. India, China, most of Asia, actually....why? Because they have the single greatest resource a business NEEDS...cheap labor. I'm sorry, but we FORCED many manufacturers out of the country, when we decided that assembly line workers required 25+ an hour to do the jobs that many a monkey could handle, just fine. Look at GM. No sooner do they get out from under the crappy labor union contracts and stifling pensions, etc...and baby, they are BACK in business. I call that pretty solid evidence. But I'm wasting my time here, because none of you are going to present a rational counter argument that doesn't rely almost solely on emotional responses (the poor, but raped middle class!!! ), and most of you already know where you stand, and nothing, NOTHING, is going to sway you, no matter what sort of proof or evidence could be tossed into your faces.

economic reality has little use to the faith based arguments of the bash corporations crowd
 
rich folks who make their money directly off of the hard labor of thousands of employees, do owe their workers more than to suddenly ship their jobs to China.

So people are forced to work there?

J-mac

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
 
So many of you view the shipping of jobs elsewhere as if it were a choice, for many employers.


Let me break this down for you. This is a little truism that ANYONE who has every owned a business either already knew, or learned the hard way, at some point. "You're either growing, or you're dying." In the case of globalism, everyone ELSE is growing, RAPIDLY. India, China, most of Asia, actually....why? Because they have the single greatest resource a business NEEDS...cheap labor. I'm sorry, but we FORCED many manufacturers out of the country, when we decided that assembly line workers required 25+ an hour to do the jobs that many a monkey could handle, just fine. Look at GM. No sooner do they get out from under the crappy labor union contracts and stifling pensions, etc...and baby, they are BACK in business. I call that pretty solid evidence. But I'm wasting my time here, because none of you are going to present a rational counter argument that doesn't rely almost solely on emotional responses (the poor, but raped middle class!!! ), and most of you already know where you stand, and nothing, NOTHING, is going to sway you, no matter what sort of proof or evidence could be tossed into your faces.

GM didn't get out from under their pension liability. It's still going to come crashing down on them. Besides that, sending jobs overseas is a short sighted solution.
 
GM didn't get out from under their pension liability. It's still going to come crashing down on them. Besides that, sending jobs overseas is a short sighted solution.

I just read in time magazine that that was one of the reason GM made such a strong come back...because they were able to re negotiate terms with the UAW. Reducing, and, in some cases, removing pensions, and "cadilac" health care plans, etc...was that wrong?
 
I just read in time magazine that that was one of the reason GM made such a strong come back...because they were able to re negotiate terms with the UAW. Reducing, and, in some cases, removing pensions, and "cadilac" health care plans, etc...was that wrong?

It's about time to pack it in for the night but if I recall, the big 3 have 800,000 retiree's on their books. I believe they lessened their future obligations with their current employee's but did nothing about what these 800,000 is costing them.
 
stop the psychobabble. its the middle class that demands Cheap chinese goods.

Your good with your psychobabble comments how are you with unplugging a toilet? My thoughts the right including you sold our country out to the chinese
 
Your good with your psychobabble comments how are you with unplugging a toilet? My thoughts the right including you sold our country out to the chinese

good, I was single and living on my own basically for 15 years. I didn't have time to wait around for a plumber to show up.
 
I find this statement kind of galling:



Being poor in America, you have little security. Having a car, a roof and a TV (as if they're rare or expensive) is hardly representative of your ability to afford health insurance or provide for yourself or your family in old age. We live in a consumer society filled with cheap electronics. The working poor have ample access to Wiis, as they are affordable. Health insurance, however ...

One must be destitute on the streets apparently before being qualified as in need of assistance. Corporations, however, are more worthy of government spending. The consumers, it seems, are disposable.
 
Back
Top Bottom