- Joined
- Aug 2, 2011
- Messages
- 7,692
- Reaction score
- 3,368
- Location
- TN
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Oh... It's the Republican binary thinking problem...
Pardon me? I'm sure that's much of a counter argument.
Oh... It's the Republican binary thinking problem...
that is a complete fail
and furthermore people don't exist to serve your welfare socialist schemes. the rich pay too much taxes as it is and the government wastes too much money. subsidizing anything tends to increase it and the dems have subsidized dependency in order to get more dependent overs.
we make poverty too easy
So, once again, you are unable to counter my evidence or come up with any of your own. Why do you think that keeps happening to you?
I bet corporations like Frigidaire enjoy the profits they reap from the poor having refrigerators
Pardon me? I'm sure that's much of a counter argument.
yeah and the poor need plasma tvs cell phones etc that we pay for
Pardon me? I'm sure that's much of a counter argument.
And corporations profit from........
Well, many, maybe even most, folks on the right seem to have trouble dealing with concepts that are not simplistic absolutes. What you did there, for example, was heard redistribution of wealth and you assumed that must mean to absolutely equalize all wealth, which of course would be absurd. What we're actually talking about in the US in terms of poverty amelioration is less than half of one percent of our GDP. The countries that have essentially managed to eliminate poverty spend about 1% of their GDP on it. Nothing remotely like totally evening out all the money so everybody makes the same of course. But because you approached it in binary mode, you jumped to that assumption (if it isn't 0, it must be 1), and then reacted to that absurd notion instead of the actual concept we're discussing. Anyways, that is a longwinded explanation, but it happens all the time. Literally many times every single day. It is, by far, the biggest difficulty conservatives on a whole struggle with in debating these issues. If the right could just get over that one problem the whole world would take a massive step forwards. The end of bumperstickerism!
Well, many, maybe even most, folks on the right seem to have trouble dealing with concepts that are not simplistic absolutes. What you did there, for example, was heard redistribution of wealth and you assumed that must mean to absolutely equalize all wealth, which of course would be absurd. What we're actually talking about in the US in terms of poverty amelioration is less than half of one percent of our GDP. The countries that have essentially managed to eliminate poverty spend about 1% of their GDP on it. Nothing remotely like totally evening out all the money so everybody makes the same of course. But because you approached it in binary mode, you jumped to that assumption (if it isn't 0, it must be 1), and then reacted to that absurd notion instead of the actual concept we're discussing. Anyways, that is a longwinded explanation, but it happens all the time. Literally many times every single day. It is, by far, the biggest difficulty conservatives on a whole struggle with in debating these issues. If the right could just get over that one problem the whole world would take a massive step forwards. The end of bumperstickerism!
ask most corporate shareholders what they want-high taxes taken from THEM so the dems can buy votes of the poor and that the poor can buy stuff with our money, or a society where there are less dependents, less suckers of the public teat and less pimps in office
Or you ask them if they want to see profits decline:shrug:
Or you ask them if they want to see profits decline:shrug:
You can call this crap poverty amelioration but the fact remains we spend a lot more than 1 percent on handouts and that includes all the crap that the indolent middle class has come to expect-such as paying artificially low federal income taxes for the stuff they demand.
Well, the problem is we won't even ask them. The government decides for them. (Hint: PROBLEM!)
And just exactly what stuff is that TD?
profits would be better if we had far less government interference
Just exactly what is the government interfering with TD?
do you know how much stuff is spent on the middle class that is paid for by people like me?
nothing gets older than those who constantly demand more government and more wealth redistribution assuming airs that those of us who don't buy into your assumptions and welfare socialist cravings are somehow less intelligent than you are.
I realize that part of the myth that liberalism depends on is that elite libs are so much smarter than the masses that the elite must be given the power to run the lives of the benighted.
You can call this crap poverty amelioration but the fact remains we spend a lot more than 1 percent on handouts and that includes all the crap that the indolent middle class has come to expect-such as paying artificially low federal income taxes for the stuff they demand.
the fact is, we have too much government
we have too many people who expect too much from government
and far too many people who expect others to pay for what they want from government
Government decides what shareholders want?
you don't know how many idiotic regulations US corporations are exposed to
Oh look, you're still unable to come up with any evidence for your claim or any counter for my evidence... SHOCKER!
Government continues supplying the poor with those cell phones, refrigerators, etc. so the shareholders have no choice but to go along with it.
I don't recall seeing any proof from you other than lame platitudes
remind me why more government is better.