View Poll Results: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

Voters
58. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    45 77.59%
  • No

    9 15.52%
  • Maybe

    2 3.45%
  • Don't know

    2 3.45%
Page 54 of 58 FirstFirst ... 4445253545556 ... LastLast
Results 531 to 540 of 572

Thread: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

  1. #531
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    06-05-15 @ 07:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Communist
    Posts
    2,264

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    the amount spent lobbying doesn't tell me who the lobbying benefits.
    The website tells you where it goes.

  2. #532
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 05:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    The website tells you where it goes.
    the website lists everyone who benefits from the lobbying expenditures?

    I'm not listed on that site, and I know I benefit from lobbying.

  3. #533
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    06-05-15 @ 07:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Communist
    Posts
    2,264

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    the website lists everyone who benefits from the lobbying expenditures?

    I'm not listed on that site, and I know I benefit from lobbying.
    It shows lobbying in relation to wealth contributions, and who contributes/where it goes.

  4. #534
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 05:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    It shows lobbying in relation to wealth contributions, and who contributes/where it goes.
    I'm familiar with the website.... and it does not show who benefits from any lobbying, nor does it enumerate the subject matter of any specific lobbying attempts.

    the website gives people just enough information to form an uninformed opinion.

  5. #535
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:19 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,115

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    I think people are worried about the lobbyists that right bills for congressman to just sign... that is the problem and not the marchers...
    They can write all the bills they want but it has to pass congress. And the bill has to be sponsored by a congress person and submitted for debate and a vote. I don't mind any lobbyist writing a bill as the work is free. A congress person has to already want the measure to be brought before congress before any bill could be written by staff or anyone for that matter. Remember there are lobbyist on either side of legislation, for and against.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  6. #536
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:23 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,018

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    Except they aren't worth 50 cents,
    Irrelevant to the point made.
    They are worth what they are worth.
    If that be a dime a week that is all they are worth.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    they are producing hundreds/thousands in profit each day,
    Irrelevant to what their labor is worth in their market.
    You clearly do not understand that.

    Again, as you were already told;
    You judge that by the local prevailing rate, just as you judge the conditions by the local requirements.

    If it is only worth 0.50¢ a week, that is all it is worth.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    the capitalist is deciding what they are worth to pay them the lowest amount available, no matter their quality of life, it's why we struggled so hard to get labor unions, the minimum wage..

    No, their economy determines that.
    And in some cases these capitalists pay above the prevailing wage.
    So you are again speaking nonsense.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    You're disgusting.
    Just more emotive nonsense from you confirming you have no valid argument.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    Not wrong,
    Yes wrong.
    Heck you can't even properly quote what you are replying to, so of course you are just more wrong in that regard as well.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    it's why capitalists love countries without minimum wage laws, labor laws.. and it's why they actively fight against labor laws/wage laws,
    Irrelevant emotive nonsense.
    There is nothing wrong with a company seeking lower costs in production. Nothing.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    You appear to literally have no emotion, which is important
    It is important in debate.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    The problem is, it is not 50 cents a week, where the hell are you getting that anyway?
    The problem is in your not understanding what was said.
    Again, as you were already told;
    You judge that by the local prevailing rate, just as you judge the conditions by the local requirements.

    If it is only worth 0.50¢ a week, that is all it is worth.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    You honestly think a sweatshop worker making $100 in product an hour that gets paid 10 cents an hour is just how much she/he is worth?
    Another lame argument.
    They are not making such a product.
    Nor is that product worth that much in the market it is made.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    I don't care what you say, any human being with a conscious knows that it is not right.
    What ever you are speaking to you are obviously wrong as usual.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    Facts are facts,
    That is right, and they are not on your side.
    And your emotive illogical nonsense are not facts that matter.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    You are defining it on your own,
    Wrong.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    you seem to think staring at excel sheets and working the stock market is more skilled then a construction worker,
    You seem to like making assertions of things not said.
    Btw construction workers are laborers. Not much skilled required.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    Capitalism doesn't help poverty,
    Wrong.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    which is why the people suffer from bad nutrition, laughable shelter, never guaranteed food, let alone meat, which is a rarity, hell, affording a good education, decent clothing, clean water, medicine?
    You are speaking to an overpopulation issue. Not capitalism.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    You keep saying wrong like you're superior,

    Wrong. I keep telling you that you are wrong because you are.
    Which has only to do with your inferior arguments.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    while defining stuff on your own
    Wrong again.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  7. #537
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    06-05-15 @ 07:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Communist
    Posts
    2,264

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Irrelevant to the point made.
    They are worth what they are worth.
    If that be a dime a week that is all they are worth.


    Irrelevant to what their labor is worth in their market.
    You clearly do not understand that.

    Again, as you were already told;
    You judge that by the local prevailing rate, just as you judge the conditions by the local requirements.

    If it is only worth 0.50¢ a week, that is all it is worth.



    No, their economy determines that.
    And in some cases these capitalists pay above the prevailing wage.
    So you are again speaking nonsense.



    Just more emotive nonsense from you confirming you have no valid argument.


    Yes wrong.
    Heck you can't even properly quote what you are replying to, so of course you are just more wrong in that regard as well.



    Irrelevant emotive nonsense.
    There is nothing wrong with a company seeking lower costs in production. Nothing.


    It is important in debate.


    The problem is in your not understanding what was said.
    Again, as you were already told;
    You judge that by the local prevailing rate, just as you judge the conditions by the local requirements.

    If it is only worth 0.50¢ a week, that is all it is worth.


    Another lame argument.
    They are not making such a product.
    Nor is that product worth that much in the market it is made.


    What ever you are speaking to you are obviously wrong as usual.


    That is right, and they are not on your side.
    And your emotive illogical nonsense are not facts that matter.


    Wrong.


    You seem to like making assertions of things not said.
    Btw construction workers are laborers. Not much skilled required.


    Wrong.


    You are speaking to an overpopulation issue. Not capitalism.



    Wrong. I keep telling you that you are wrong because you are.
    Which has only to do with your inferior arguments.


    Wrong again.
    Who the hell am I talking to? You seem to be ignoring the food point, nice job. Not worth continuing discussion with one who enjoys the exploitation of laborers and assumes they are correct on their own opinions.

  8. #538
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:23 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,018

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dovkan View Post
    Who the hell am I talking to? You seem to be ignoring the food point, nice job. Not worth continuing discussion with one who enjoys the exploitation of laborers and assumes they are correct on their own opinions.
    There is no relevant food point, but way to further you false claim of opinion.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  9. #539
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    09-26-15 @ 03:38 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,143

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    Key word you used "asking" sorry they can ask all they want but that does not mean what they are asking for will be granted. I don't think it takes constitutional power to ask anything.
    http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3034525

    If they pay politicians enough Money they receive negative taxes.

    There's even cases where special interest will spend more money on k street then output of their product

  10. #540
    Be different, be honest
    EdwinWillers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Divided States of Kardashia
    Last Seen
    12-25-15 @ 03:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,361

    Re: Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?

    Quote Originally Posted by EdwinWillers View Post

    Well, the reason I posted that is because a "rigorous definition" isn't possible for either - and you just demonstrated that. Indeed, both are completely relative terms - yet people like to use them in contexts like this as if they are definitive, easily understood, known and accepted by all - AN EASY STANDARD BY WHICH WE MIGHT JUDGE SOMEONE "GUILTY."

    And yet, they are anything but.

    When we start looking at someone with more money than we have, or more money than someone else has to decry them for their "riches" and "wealth" - we judge them accordingly, and when we do we err in an extremely egregious, unjust, and unfair manner.

    If as you and so many others here are asserting, that the "wealthy" are easily identifiable people like Soros, Adelson, the Koch brothers, et. al. - and that in a thread that is denouncing such people for being "the wealthy," then who - by whatever "rigorous definition" you can put forth for us - who by your definition is NOT guilty?

    I'll give you some help - you can't do it. It's not possible, by ANY definition, however "rigorous" one might think it.

    People here are equating guilt with wealth; they are judging an impossible to define group of people for what? For having more money (and in this context more power thereby). More money than what? What is the standard of guilt here?

    Impossible to define - and therefore totally unjust to be pronouncing anyone guilty on that basis. Totally unjust.
    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    You post is flawed at least in the following ways:

    1. It is possible to give a rigorous definition of it.
    Actually, no it's not. As I said, any definition of it is necessarily relative, or comparative.

    And frankly, you just proved my point, for if it were so easy to provide a rigorous definition of it, you would have.

    I'll help you. "Rich" = $______ (simply fill in the blank)

    Look, "rich" or "wealth" is typically 'defined' in terms of abundance (i.e. "lots" of something, in this case money), or in terms of excess (i.e. more than a 'typical' amount or more than one 'needs'). Go to any dictionary and that's what you'll find. The problem with those definitions is that they rely on non-specific terms themselves (e.g. "abundant," or "lots," or "more than" etc.). They're ambiguous terms that rely on other ambiguous terms for their own definitions.

    And the problem with that is, as I said in my first post, that when we use such terms to lump together some amorphous group of people and refer to them as "the rich" or "the wealthy" - as is being done in this thread (cf. the title "Do the wealthy...?") and all throughout our society today to decry perceived (or actual, it doesn't really matter) wrongs done by "them" - we are behaving unjustly, because the only way to identify such people as we give such labels to is by comparing them to some standard that simply does not exist - but by our own discrimination as we compare them against the only thing we CAN compare them against - ourselves, what money we might have or not have compared to what they have.

    If you don't believe that - provide a different articulation of the title of this thread - "Do the wealthy have too much power in the United States?" without using the term "the wealthy." Or better yet, provide a specific list that delineates the names of ALL the people to which that question specifically refers. Not some, because that wouldn't be fair or just to single out only a few. Give us a list of all their names.

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    2. No one is denouncing people for being wealthy
    You're kidding, right?
    Who chimes "No Absolutes!" chimes absolutely.

    zoom zoom

Page 54 of 58 FirstFirst ... 4445253545556 ... 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
  •