Opportunity is already provided, and supported by laws. Just how much hand holding do you intend on doing before everything is distributed evenly among the earners and non-earners?DonFck wrote:
Equal opportunity is given to all by distributing funds into public education, healthcare etc. The fact of the matter is that E.g. having an expensive education has more weight than a public one (for instance in job seeking/interviews), even if the content should be the same.lowing wrote:
Equal opportunity, not equal results.
"Equal opportunity" means that if you're born into shitty conditions, you still have a realistic chance of rising from those conditions. What one does with that opportunity is another thing.
Equal opportunity is gained by distributing funds to those instances in the social infrastructure that need it. Those funds are aquired by collecting taxes from both companies as well as working citizens. The better the social infrastructure is, the better are also the opportunities for the unemployed to become part of the taxpaying work force -> contributing to the nations welfare -> making the need for high taxation just that much smaller. It's a long road, but I'd say it's worth it. Call me a communist.
Apparently in your opinion, the words "solidarity" and "common interest" do not exist in "US values". I think the bulk of the US population would beg to differ. Ever heard of things like "All men are created equal" and "pursuit of happiness"? That applies to all, regardless of if one's born a "have" or a "have-not".
I believe that is the general idea of Sen. Obamas politics. If that makes him a "communist that will bring us all down", then I guess there's no talking you out of it.
Yes, spread the wealth. I pay my taxes and am totally fine with it. Because I know it contributes to equal opportunities.
It doesn't include the freedom to fail for businesses, because if it did, there would be no bailout and the US would be in even a deeper recession than it currently is. It might be 24 months before things are turned around.lowing wrote:
It does include freedom to fail, I have posted as much many times. But personal failure, should not affect the masses. Do not think for one minute that there are institutions out there poised to take over any failed companies. The bailout was not necessary. Let those thar were gunna fail do so, someone would have come along and turned their failure into a success storyo
If those businesses had failed, without a bailout, you would have seen Social Security collapse, personal savings in the banks wiped out and the businesses that are taken over, would be taken over by foreign owners.
Do you want your banks to be owned by the Chinese?
That's where most of your money is flowing too, China is whom your national debt is owed.
Yeah I noticed you deleted all the posts about your differences between socialism and communism. I don't blame ya. Share the wealth is the common denominator.Braddock wrote:
Barricade up that door lowing and get the shotgun down from above the fireplace... the Communists are coming to get ya!
There was a time on this forum when I would have debated you on the subtle differences between socialism and communism (differences that are about as subtle as a punch in the face), but now it's just more enjoyable to sit back and watch as your concept of a Judeo-Christian, cut-throat Capitalist America slowly gets 'hijacked' by a black, covert Communist with a name that wouldn't sound out of place on the roll call at a Wahabi madrasa.
Viva la revolucion lowing!
A republic involves the people making a democratic choice as to who represents them, as such America is not a static entity but a fluid one where culture changes are possible. Why not abolish capital gains taxes? Because the government must fund its expenditure and pay its bills, whether that be collected through taxes on sales, capital gains, inheritances, income, etc. The US is shifting leftward and there isn't much you can do about it other than voting for McCain for a further 4 to 8 years of failure. At the end of the day he too will have to increase taxes in order to pay for the global financial mess originating in the US. Either that or run the US economy into the ground.lowing wrote:
First and foremost the US is a Republic. Why not abolish capital gains taxes? It helps business growth which eventually provided jobs. Oh thats right, liberals are not interested in jobs, only what they can claim is rightfully theirs under Obama socialism.`
PS Your economy and almost every economy in the world necessarily operates to a certain extent on the principle of 'share the wealth'. That's why we aren't living a medieval existence anymore...
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-20 06:04:37)
Hmmmmmm, trying t ofigure out why the US is such a failure when it has done more as a country, in 230 years than Europe has done combined, in 5000 years. Yeah the US ideology of freedom is a failure. Also to think that govt. control over everything will benefit us all is laughable. Unless of course you can show me where govt. programs are more effecient than the private sector.CameronPoe wrote:
A republic involves the people making a democratic choice as to who represents them, as such America is not a static entity but a fluid one where culture changes are possible. Why not abolish capital gains taxes? Because the government must fund its expenditure and pay its bills, whether that be collected through taxes on sales, capital gains, inheritances, income, etc. The US is shifting leftward and there isn't much you can do about it other than voting for McCain for a further 4 to 8 years of failure. At the end of the day he too will have to increase taxes in order to pay for the global financial mess originating in the US. Either that or run the US economy into the ground.lowing wrote:
First and foremost the US is a Republic. Why not abolish capital gains taxes? It helps business growth which eventually provided jobs. Oh thats right, liberals are not interested in jobs, only what they can claim is rightfully theirs under Obama socialism.`
PS Your economy and almost every economy in the world necessarily operates to a certain extent on the principle of 'share the wealth'. That's why we aren't living a medieval existence anymore...
"There you go, bringing class into it again!"CameronPoe wrote:
That's why we aren't living a medieval existence anymore...
Last edited by TheAussieReaper (2008-10-20 06:09:01)
lollowing wrote:
Hmmmmmm, trying t ofigure out why the US is such a failure when it has done more as a country, in 230 years than Europe has done combined, in 5000 years. Yeah the US ideology of freedom is a failure. Also to think that govt. control over everything will benefit us all is laughable. Unless of course you can show me where govt. programs are more effecient than the private sector.
Yeah Europe hasn't done anything of worth in 5000 years. Hilarious. Europe aka the birthplace of democracy, the renaissance, navigation, the enlightenment, Leonardo DaVinci, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, Nikola Tesla, Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, the abolition of slavery, the Catholic Church, the reformation, the V2 rocket, the radio, the first man in space, the printing press, the television, the steam engine, penicillin, viagra, the TCP/IP communications standard, the combustion engine, the Magna Carta, etc., etc. Hilarious.
Where did anyone even hint at 'government control over everything'. You take an inch and run a fucking mile, as always. No point talking to someone who exaggerates so extremely tbh.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-20 06:21:56)
Hardly the bottom line. No minded the wealth being spread to the rich the past 8 years.lowing wrote:
"spread the wealth around" http://www.breitbart.tv/html/195153.html
This is the reason not to vote for Obama. What he wants to do is have govt. control over your money. When has it become the govts. job to seize money for the purpose of "spreading it around". Folks this is socialist/communist ideology and it goes against everything the US was meant to be.
Which is freedom to succeed, not guaranteed to succeed. Equal opportunity, not equal results.
and now we have this gallop poll which says only 13% of "national adults" are in favor of doing what Obama wants to do, yet, with the economy as the #1 concern for the voters, Obama is still leading in the polls. http://www.gallup.com/poll/108445/Ameri … onomy.aspx
Stupidity and a lack of quality informed liberal voters comes to mind. Maybe issues and not race or good looks,or celebrity, should be what motivates voters after all, this year.
Last edited by Mason4Assassin444 (2008-10-20 06:32:09)
I don't delete any of my posts lowing. Talk to a mod if you're looking for a past quote that may have been expurgated or jog my memory and I'll quote it to you myself.lowing wrote:
Yeah I noticed you deleted all the posts about your differences between socialism and communism. I don't blame ya. Share the wealth is the common denominator.Braddock wrote:
Barricade up that door lowing and get the shotgun down from above the fireplace... the Communists are coming to get ya!
There was a time on this forum when I would have debated you on the subtle differences between socialism and communism (differences that are about as subtle as a punch in the face), but now it's just more enjoyable to sit back and watch as your concept of a Judeo-Christian, cut-throat Capitalist America slowly gets 'hijacked' by a black, covert Communist with a name that wouldn't sound out of place on the roll call at a Wahabi madrasa.
Viva la revolucion lowing!
Communism is about sharing the wealth, Socialism is about living as a society and looking out for one another... a big difference in reality.
You left out the creation of the United States of America in that list of achievements... or maybe that was deliberate!CameronPoe wrote:
lollowing wrote:
Hmmmmmm, trying t ofigure out why the US is such a failure when it has done more as a country, in 230 years than Europe has done combined, in 5000 years. Yeah the US ideology of freedom is a failure. Also to think that govt. control over everything will benefit us all is laughable. Unless of course you can show me where govt. programs are more effecient than the private sector.
Yeah Europe hasn't done anything of worth in 5000 years. Hilarious. Europe aka the birthplace of democracy, the renaissance, navigation, the enlightenment, Leonardo DaVinci, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, Nikola Tesla, Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, the abolition of slavery, the Catholic Church, the reformation, the V2 rocket, the radio, the first man in space, the printing press, the television, the steam engine, penicillin, viagra, the TCP/IP communications standard, the combustion engine, the Magna Carta, etc., etc. Hilarious.
I don't regard Europe's imperial past as something to be proud of.Braddock wrote:
You left out the creation of the United States of America in that list of achievements... or maybe that was deliberate!CameronPoe wrote:
lollowing wrote:
Hmmmmmm, trying t ofigure out why the US is such a failure when it has done more as a country, in 230 years than Europe has done combined, in 5000 years. Yeah the US ideology of freedom is a failure. Also to think that govt. control over everything will benefit us all is laughable. Unless of course you can show me where govt. programs are more effecient than the private sector.
Yeah Europe hasn't done anything of worth in 5000 years. Hilarious. Europe aka the birthplace of democracy, the renaissance, navigation, the enlightenment, Leonardo DaVinci, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, Nikola Tesla, Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, the abolition of slavery, the Catholic Church, the reformation, the V2 rocket, the radio, the first man in space, the printing press, the television, the steam engine, penicillin, viagra, the TCP/IP communications standard, the combustion engine, the Magna Carta, etc., etc. Hilarious.
That's what I meant... it belongs on the other list along with fascism, reality TV and Scooter.CameronPoe wrote:
I don't regard Europe's imperial past as something to be proud of.Braddock wrote:
You left out the creation of the United States of America in that list of achievements... or maybe that was deliberate!CameronPoe wrote:
lol
Yeah Europe hasn't done anything of worth in 5000 years. Hilarious. Europe aka the birthplace of democracy, the renaissance, navigation, the enlightenment, Leonardo DaVinci, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, Nikola Tesla, Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, the abolition of slavery, the Catholic Church, the reformation, the V2 rocket, the radio, the first man in space, the printing press, the television, the steam engine, penicillin, viagra, the TCP/IP communications standard, the combustion engine, the Magna Carta, etc., etc. Hilarious.
O ffs lowing get off your goddamn high horse.lowing wrote:
Hmmmmmm, trying t ofigure out why the US is such a failure when it has done more as a country, in 230 years than Europe has done combined, in 5000 years. Yeah the US ideology of freedom is a failure. Also to think that govt. control over everything will benefit us all is laughable. Unless of course you can show me where govt. programs are more effecient than the private sector.
The USA was built by European labor and money. Also, don't forget the vast natural wealth of the country - and what you had to do to the natives to take it. Without 5000 years of European history you'd be nowhere - no fuck that! Europe? Which Europe exactly? 5000 years ago it was just the Greeks and the Egyptians. The rest were tree hugging monkeys.
And please stop selling "freedom" as an American product. It is no such thing.
Finally: Sweden.
ƒ³
Something lowing often forgets is that America was easy street compared to overpopulated Europe. There are still vast tracts of unpopulated fertile land and untapped resources in America.oug wrote:
O ffs lowing get off your goddamn high horse.lowing wrote:
Hmmmmmm, trying t ofigure out why the US is such a failure when it has done more as a country, in 230 years than Europe has done combined, in 5000 years. Yeah the US ideology of freedom is a failure. Also to think that govt. control over everything will benefit us all is laughable. Unless of course you can show me where govt. programs are more effecient than the private sector.
The USA was built by European labor and money. Also, don't forget the vast natural wealth of the country - and what you had to do to the natives to take it. Without 5000 years of European history you'd be nowhere - no fuck that! Europe? Which Europe exactly? 5000 years ago it was just the Greeks and the Egyptians. The rest were tree hugging monkeys.
And please stop selling "freedom" as an American product. It is no such thing.
Finally: Sweden.
It is akin to you taking a post and dismissing it as false or an unsubstanciated generalization, because it might not include every single person on earth.CameronPoe wrote:
lollowing wrote:
Hmmmmmm, trying t ofigure out why the US is such a failure when it has done more as a country, in 230 years than Europe has done combined, in 5000 years. Yeah the US ideology of freedom is a failure. Also to think that govt. control over everything will benefit us all is laughable. Unless of course you can show me where govt. programs are more effecient than the private sector.
Yeah Europe hasn't done anything of worth in 5000 years. Hilarious. Europe aka the birthplace of democracy, the renaissance, navigation, the enlightenment, Leonardo DaVinci, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, Nikola Tesla, Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, the abolition of slavery, the Catholic Church, the reformation, the V2 rocket, the radio, the first man in space, the printing press, the television, the steam engine, penicillin, viagra, the TCP/IP communications standard, the combustion engine, the Magna Carta, etc., etc. Hilarious.
Where did anyone even hint at 'government control over everything'. You take an inch and run a fucking mile, as always. No point talking to someone who exaggerates so extremely tbh.
whose wealth? The poor had no wealth to spread around, so pretty much that does not make sense.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Hardly the bottom line. No minded the wealth being spread to the rich the past 8 years.lowing wrote:
"spread the wealth around" http://www.breitbart.tv/html/195153.html
This is the reason not to vote for Obama. What he wants to do is have govt. control over your money. When has it become the govts. job to seize money for the purpose of "spreading it around". Folks this is socialist/communist ideology and it goes against everything the US was meant to be.
Which is freedom to succeed, not guaranteed to succeed. Equal opportunity, not equal results.
and now we have this gallop poll which says only 13% of "national adults" are in favor of doing what Obama wants to do, yet, with the economy as the #1 concern for the voters, Obama is still leading in the polls. http://www.gallup.com/poll/108445/Ameri … onomy.aspx
Stupidity and a lack of quality informed liberal voters comes to mind. Maybe issues and not race or good looks,or celebrity, should be what motivates voters after all, this year.
When you characterise a majority by the customs and acts of a tiny minority then you generalise and render your argument weaker for it. It's quite simple really.lowing wrote:
It is akin to you taking a post and dismissing it as false or an unsubstanciated generalization, because it might not include every single person on earth.
And sharing the wealth is EXACTLY what Obama wants to do. It is not the govts. job ( in the US anyway) to take money from one person and give it to another.Braddock wrote:
I don't delete any of my posts lowing. Talk to a mod if you're looking for a past quote that may have been expurgated or jog my memory and I'll quote it to you myself.lowing wrote:
Yeah I noticed you deleted all the posts about your differences between socialism and communism. I don't blame ya. Share the wealth is the common denominator.Braddock wrote:
Barricade up that door lowing and get the shotgun down from above the fireplace... the Communists are coming to get ya!
There was a time on this forum when I would have debated you on the subtle differences between socialism and communism (differences that are about as subtle as a punch in the face), but now it's just more enjoyable to sit back and watch as your concept of a Judeo-Christian, cut-throat Capitalist America slowly gets 'hijacked' by a black, covert Communist with a name that wouldn't sound out of place on the roll call at a Wahabi madrasa.
Viva la revolucion lowing!
Communism is about sharing the wealth, Socialism is about living as a society and looking out for one another... a big difference in reality.
I'm afraid it is lowing and always has been or hadn't you noticed? You do have a banded tax structure I gather. It is precisely the role of an elected government to dictate taxation policy when it receives a mandate, whether you like it or not. The US is not your idea of the US - it is what I said before: a dynamic entity that ebbs and flows in line with the changing sentiments and concerns of the collective (as with any respresentative democracy), i.e. the majority will.lowing wrote:
And sharing the wealth is EXACTLY what Obama wants to do. It is not the govts. job ( in the US anyway) to take money from one person and give it to another.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-20 08:57:58)
When you say in one sentence that a group of people are insignificant and then use that same group as a shining example to prove your points, makes your argument weaker, quite simple really.CameronPoe wrote:
When you characterise a majority by the customs and acts of a tiny minority then you generalise and render your argument weaker for it. It's quite simple really.lowing wrote:
It is akin to you taking a post and dismissing it as false or an unsubstanciated generalization, because it might not include every single person on earth.
Which two groups are you talking about here lowing?lowing wrote:
When you say in one sentence that a group of people are insignificant and then use that same group as a shining example to prove your points, makes your argument weaker, quite simple really.
Taxes for the masses Cam, not from one person to another for no other reason than to share HIS money with HER. Sorry, like it or not there is difference between paying taxes, and wealth redistribution.CameronPoe wrote:
I'm afraid it is lowing and always has been or hadn't you noticed? You do have a banded tax structure I gather. It is precisely the role of an elected government to dictate taxation policy when it receives a mandate, whether you like it or not. The US is not your idea of the US - it is what I said before: a dynamic entity that ebbs and flows in line with the changing sentiments and concerns of the collective (as with any respresentative democracy), i.e. the majority will.lowing wrote:
And sharing the wealth is EXACTLY what Obama wants to do. It is not the govts. job ( in the US anyway) to take money from one person and give it to another.
Pick any one ya want, Cam.CameronPoe wrote:
Which two groups are you talking about here lowing?lowing wrote:
When you say in one sentence that a group of people are insignificant and then use that same group as a shining example to prove your points, makes your argument weaker, quite simple really.
I get the impression that lowing labours under the illusion that all Americans pay exactly the same amount of tax and that every ordinary working stiff gets the same tax breaks as your average fortune 500 CEO.CameronPoe wrote:
I'm afraid it is lowing and always has been or hadn't you noticed? You do have a banded tax structure I gather. It is precisely the role of an elected government to dictate taxation policy when it receives a mandate, whether you like it or not. The US is not your idea of the US - it is what I said before: a dynamic entity that ebbs and flows in line with the changing sentiments and concerns of the collective (as with any respresentative democracy), i.e. the majority will.lowing wrote:
And sharing the wealth is EXACTLY what Obama wants to do. It is not the govts. job ( in the US anyway) to take money from one person and give it to another.
Wealth redistribution is sometimes called for and I think the populace of America will tell us what they think on the matter in November when the general will is expressed through the ballot box. Besides all it is is merely changing the rates of tax that segments of society pay. How is the money being redistributed to other people?lowing wrote:
Taxes for the masses Cam, not from one person to another for no other reason than to share HIS money with HER. Sorry, like it or not there is difference between paying taxes, and wealth redistribution.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-20 09:10:12)