View Poll Results: In today's election, politicians have more to gain than lose from lying

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • Agree

    12 63.16%
  • Disagree

    5 26.32%
  • Not Sure

    2 10.53%
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 62

Thread: 2012 - Election Lying

  1. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    I (and Marx) don't define a Marxist as someone who's policies stratify society even more than it was before. You apparently do.
    I (and Marx) don't define a Marxist as someone who enacts and supports free trade. You apparently do.
    I (and Marx) don't define a Marxist as someone who concentrates power and wealth at the top. You apparently do.

    You have demonstrated your grasp of Marxism is about as deep as the depth of the existing North American Shallow Sea...which no longer exists.
    Each of your statements represents a point of view error. It is obvious to you that the world is flat and that everything in the heavens revolves around the Earth. In addition you are simply wrong.

    You are also childishly melodramatic. Note below.

    WELL I'M DAMN SORRY I ACTUALLY USE THE PROPER DEFINITIONS OF WORDS.
    Know, what? I'm not sorry. I don't go about unilaterally redefining words because it suits my argument. I don't go about changing ideologies because they don't fit what I want them to be. You redefine words, phrases and ideologies as you see fit with no regards for their definitions. You called a class stratifying President a Marxist. That is insane.
    Just for fun let us take one example from the paragraph above. Let's talk about classes? Who writes about classes in society? Marxists of course. Radical Karl loved the classes. He relished the very idea. It allows the politician, the vanguard, to exercise their dictatorship on behalf of the proles, er, the middle class. You, Radical Karl, and the one term Marxist all get that one. Who pushes class warfare more than any president in my memory? Radical Barrack.

    You may have read them, but you demonstrated no understanding. What kind of Marxist screws over the worker in a national union? Oh wait. That's Obama.
    We have a different understanding of events. The one term Marxist illegally, in my opinion, coerced bond holders into taking very little. He elevated the Union's position, again illegally, over the ones with a higher legal claim. That is tyranny. And when done for unions, it begins to take on the familiar odor of Marxist redistribution of wealth. He cheated the rightful owners out of their property and he gave it to his friends, members of a union.

  2. #42
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    When I was a child I spoke as a child...but when I became a man I put away the things of childhood. Until you are able to change your point of view you will be unable to discern what is true and what is not true. I enumerated your list to make it easier to discuss.
    I work in reality. Not crazy land. I suggest you leave that place.

    1. What does privatize wealth mean? Are you one of those who secretly believe that the only thing we all belong to is our government? Do you believe that all wealth belongs to the government who then chooses winners and losers?
    Granted, I realize your understanding of business is sorely lacking. TARP effectively put the risk of stupid bank decisions on taxpayers while I-Bankers made off with the bailout money as well as got to keep making stupid decisions. Recent bonuses are back to what we saw in 2006 and banks are rolling in the money. The risks they are taking are the same ones before the crisis, only now they have a certified lifeline for bailouts. Obama has privatized the wealth from risky decisions and the rest of us pay for it when it goes bad. Learn about the financial crisis for once. Seriously. Lazy. Financial firms make big risks, make big profit and when it fails we pay to cover their costs. Rather than letting them take their losses, we bail them out.

    3. Do you believe that the one term Marxist is taking money from the Marxist-formulated "Middle Class" to give to the rich and to corporations? By what mechanism does he do this? How is the money transferred from one to the other?
    Easy. The low interest rates that we've seen are effectively transferring huge amounts of money from the Middle Class to the Elites. The Elites earn margins far in excess of what they would during normal interest rate periods while the Middle Class earns far less otherwise. This is a subsidy from Grandma to Wall Street.

    4. Of course you see that. It is a problem of your point of view. In reality his policies will force most insurance companies out of the insurance business. The government, of course, is poised to step in and save the day. Imagine your health care in the hands of some busybody bureaucrat somewhere. This is preparation for the end game.
    My point of view is not the problem here. You work under a giant conspiracy theory. In your view, not reality, expanding corporate insurance rolls actually kills them. More premiums = less income = insurance death. Yeah. That's not reality.

    5. This is just silly. Show me the corporate tax rate reductions that the one term Marxist has pushed for and signed into law.
    It's called Google you lazy hack:

    Economic Stimulus Acts impact on Section 179 and Bonus Depreciation | Section179.Org
    2010 HIRE Act: Tax Breaks for Small Business

    Effective corporate rates drop.

    6. I believe this is political posturing before the election.
    How easy. Doesn't fit your views, therefore it's not true. Which just proves my point. You ignore what happens and go with what you want. Obama's a Marxist to you because you want him to be a Marxist.

    7. This is a point of view error.
    No, it's not. The Unions got a set block of stock. Their trust income is dependent upon capital gains, dividends and dues. Capital gains reduces the corpus principal. Dividends are the whim of the board. And dues are set. No dividends forces a sale of corpus principal. Which makes it even harder to meet future obligations. Unions got the shaft here if you have any concept of funding, which it doesn't appear you do.

    The reality is that the one term Marxist overthrew well established bankruptcy laws to protect union health care plans. Unions and Marxists tend to walk hand in hand.
    Because you say so. Seriously, you operate under a massive conspiracy and have no regards for facts.

    You think that green firms who either are losing money or barely breaking even can afford huge contributions.
    You think that unions who have an ever decreasing corpus principal to pay for increasing costs really got their healthcare plans saved even after the union had its fate set by a judge in a way that removed many of their benefits really got the best deal here. Let's ignore that established bankruptcy laws allow for the voiding of union-management deals and that such laws were followed. But you think it really didn't happen.

    It's all a giant conspiracy.

    Each of your statements represents a point of view error. It is obvious to you that the world is flat and that everything in the heavens revolves around the Earth. In addition you are simply wrong.

    You are also childishly melodramatic. Note below.
    This is pathetic. Even for you.

    Just for fun let us take one example from the paragraph above. Let's talk about classes? Who writes about classes in society? Marxists of course. Radical Karl loved the classes. He relished the very idea. It allows the politician, the vanguard, to exercise their dictatorship on behalf of the proles, er, the middle class. You, Radical Karl, and the one term Marxist all get that one. Who pushes class warfare more than any president in my memory? Radical Barrack.
    Jesus Christ. Of COURSE Marx wrote about class! OMG. This is ridiculous. If you are trying to get me to abandon this by putting out incredibly stupid argument after argument it's working. Marx wrote about Class as an evil. And wanted to get rid of it. Obama does not. Furthermore, pushing welfare actually INCREASES stratification. The exact opposite of what Marx wrote.

    You want Obama to be a Marxist, that is your basis of your belief and you rewrite Marxism to fit that.

    We have a different understanding of events. The one term Marxist illegally, in my opinion, coerced bond holders into taking very little. He elevated the Union's position, again illegally, over the ones with a higher legal claim. That is tyranny. And when done for unions, it begins to take on the familiar odor of Marxist redistribution of wealth. He cheated the rightful owners out of their property and he gave it to his friends, members of a union.
    You have no understanding of events. Actually the bond holders agreed to it before hand because at the time, it looked like they'd get nothing. They did not want equity stock in a future corporation because they did not think there would BE a future corporation. You do not understand business nor what actually happened. Bond Holders looked at a prospective share in a future company that may not actually exist or a small payout and took the payout. This happened before the union deal was made. Which by the way null and voided a great many of their agreements. Furthermore, legacy obligations are required to be paid and in the event of a business failure are transferred over to the government. Effectively, the deal was less socialist because the company provided the financing for it rather than taxpayers. Bond Holders had the option for future rights in the company. They choose not to.
    Last edited by obvious Child; 09-16-12 at 07:32 PM.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  3. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    I wrote, "If there is no private property how can there be any taxes upon it? Do you begin to see your mistake? It is as if you cannot see the endings are different from the beginnings."

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    More fail. In a Marxist Society (notice I did not say state, go learn why as you clearly do not get it), all of the wealth created is given to the community. Effectively that is a 100% tax. All goods and services produced are not kept by the individual, but instead collectively pooled. If the organization takes everything you make, is that effectively a 100% tax? Absolutely.
    Okay. You really did not mean tax. You meant confiscation. The end result is the same. You cannot see that the ending, in a Utopian communist society is not the same as its beginnings where chaos is created, where the cost of energy doubles, where our troubles are magnified so that we are all discontented. From now on when I see you use "Marxist Society" I will know you mean the Utopian Communist society that Marx promised everyone if they would just give up their liberty.

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Marx also wrote that the workers in a violent uprising would overthrow the elites. All Obama has done is given words bashing some of the wealthy on their low taxes. And Obama's speech, if you read for clarity which you clearly did not was merely that successful people had help. And that they benefit from state owned resources. Marxist ideology by definition does not have such principles because there is no personal success as everything is communal.
    Marx was quite often wrong in his prophecies.

    A tax rate of about a third is steeply progressive. It is what Radical Karl, and apparently you, would want.
    Radical Barrack demonizes the successful with the same energy as Radical Karl did back in the day. Both had the same reasons. Both are relying upon the willing dupes to make it easier to take ever more property from the successful. There can be no capitalism if there is no capital.

  5. #45
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    Okay. You really did not mean tax. You meant confiscation.
    Wrong again. In a Marxist Society (which you have once again demonstrated you do not understand), it is freely given as the society is one of a classless democracy of workers. All product is pooled. Effectively that is a 100% tax, but it is voluntarily paid one. There is no confiscation because confiscation requires the taking, where in a Marxist society it is freely given.

    The fact you do not understand something that basic about Marxism is frightening given that you think you can discuss it

    The end result is the same. You cannot see that the ending, in a Utopian communist society is not the same as its beginnings where chaos is created, where the cost of energy doubles, where our troubles are magnified so that we are all discontented. From now on when I see you use "Marxist Society" I will know you mean the Utopian Communist society that Marx promised everyone if they would just give up their liberty.
    Again:

    Look, merely because I call you out for changing words does not mean I back Marxism. I agree with you it's fantasy land bordering on criminally insane. But that does not mean you have the right definitions.

    I use the actual definition of Marxism. You define words as you please with no regards for their definitions.

    The fact that you are picking and choosing what you want to respond to suggests to me you don't have a real argument.

    A tax rate of about a third is steeply progressive.
    No it's not. A tax rate of 91% is steeply progressive. GET SOME DAMN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Wrong again. In a Marxist Society (which you have once again demonstrated you do not understand), it is freely given as the society is one of a classless democracy of workers. All product is pooled. Effectively that is a 100% tax, but it is voluntarily paid one. There is no confiscation because confiscation requires the taking, where in a Marxist society it is freely given.

    The fact you do not understand something that basic about Marxism is frightening given that you think you can discuss it



    Again:

    Look, merely because I call you out for changing words does not mean I back Marxism. I agree with you it's fantasy land bordering on criminally insane. But that does not mean you have the right definitions.

    I use the actual definition of Marxism. You define words as you please with no regards for their definitions.

    The fact that you are picking and choosing what you want to respond to suggests to me you don't have a real argument.



    No it's not. A tax rate of 91% is steeply progressive. GET SOME DAMN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE.
    Child, as fun as this is I am one of the wealth creators. I will pick this back up on Tuesday. For those keeping score it took a great deal to change ones point of view from a flat, stationary Earth to the view above the solar system. OC, I do not believe you are up to the challenge.

  7. #47
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    Child, as fun as this is I am one of the wealth creators. I will pick this back up on Tuesday. For those keeping score it took a great deal to change ones point of view from a flat, stationary Earth to the view above the solar system. OC, I do not believe you are up to the challenge.
    I'm so done with this.

    You change definitions as you see fit, you say I'm wrong because of my view point and then utterly fail to explain why. You operate from a position of massive government conspiracy. You have no understanding of Marxism in the slightest. Everything that goes contrary to your giant conspiracy is just a cover for the real deal. You have no concept of what actually happened in the GM bankruptcy. I'm talking to someone who frankly makes up whatever he wants, whenever he wants.

    And your blatant picking and choosing shows me you got nothing. You flat up pretend my question about what ACTUAL Marxist policy Obama has enacted doesn't exist.

    I make it a habit to refrain from discussing the truly insane. I'm out.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    I'm so done with this.

    You change definitions as you see fit, you say I'm wrong because of my view point and then utterly fail to explain why. You operate from a position of massive government conspiracy. You have no understanding of Marxism in the slightest. Everything that goes contrary to your giant conspiracy is just a cover for the real deal. You have no concept of what actually happened in the GM bankruptcy. I'm talking to someone who frankly makes up whatever he wants, whenever he wants.

    And your blatant picking and choosing shows me you got nothing. You flat up pretend my question about what ACTUAL Marxist policy Obama has enacted doesn't exist.

    I make it a habit to refrain from discussing the truly insane. I'm out.
    And to think I just came back to jot down the name of the thread and the number I last commented on.

    I am constantly struck by how many people just like you insist that the current president, the One term Marxist, cannot possibly be Marxist because he has not passed one single Marxist policy. When people who believe as you do recognize an undeniably Marxist policy it will be too late for any of us to do anything about his Marxist views and desires. We will all be socialists then.

    Freedoms are lost for all by such people as you. Respond or don't. I cannot imagine changing your mind. I do hope to change the minds of others.

  9. #49
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    Of course politicians have a lot to gain by lying. The American population likes to hear their own beliefs confirmed, not have them challenged by facts. The truth is largely irrelevant. Telling people what they want to hear is how you win elections. Questions like whether the stimulus was beneficial or detrimental to our economy will never truly be important. The small minded members of both sides (affectionately termed "the base") will only accept hearing what they already believe. To Fox News watchers, the stimulus will always be bad, no matter what the truth is. And to PETA supporters, it will always be good, no matter what the truth is. Lying is the only sensible thing when the name of the game is confirmation bias.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: 2012 - Election Lying

    [QUOTE=obvious Child;1060918486]
    Marx's preferred method for wreaking capital accumulation was the elimination of the bourgeoisie. That is basic Marxism 101. How do you not know that?
    It is entirely likely that Radical Karl said two different things in two different works. In the Communist Manifesto he clearly says that progressive income taxes are essential to wreck capital formation. Do you have a different citation?
    Here is what Radical Karl wrote:

    ...the following will be pretty generally applicable.

    1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
    2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
    3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

    What say you, Child?

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •