Us 2008 presidential election.

正在查看此主题的用户

Folthrik 说:
Welfare doesn't motivate anyone. I know people who sit on their butt all day and smoke pot and collect welfare. And I am inclined to think that your views are those of hippies who think they can help everyone by taking from others.

Jesus Christ take American history. You're thinking of Rugged Individualism and Laissez-faire economic attitudes, which are LONG SINCE DEFUNCT! As they were proven to be absolute bull****. Some people need help.
 
I don't mind bastardry when it's honest, but enough with this victorian bull****. You don't want to help poor people, fine. But there's really no claiming the moral high ground.
 
Folthrik 说:
Welfare doesn't motivate anyone. I know people who sit on their butt all day and smoke pot and collect welfare. And I am inclined to think that your views are those of hippies who think they can help everyone by taking from others.

If socialism is such a great evil, then apparently Wall Street is full of Commies because it has asked for welfare sponsored by the People. These fat cats who do nothing but sit on their butts, smoking and counting their pennies (that they could have used to pay their own damn bill) are asking the Proletarians of society to bail them out of the crater they created for themselves? Well hell, if that ain't Commie BS, I don't know what is.

Clearly you don't know anything about people who are on welfare, otherwise you would not generalize the welfare nation as one or two pot smoking beach bums you've been acquainted with.

Let me mention some welfare people I know. They happen to be hard-working American citizens who have been laid off because the company they worked for was forced to downsize, or perhaps shipped the job they had off to India where a dusty kid would do the same job for pennies on the hour. They also happen to be students--like me--some of them are even parents--single parents even, who are struggling to find work and raise their kids because all the $8-10 an hour jobs they used to be shoo-ins for at McDonalds and Burger King are being snatched up by 30 and 40 year olds who've been laid off. They're also old people, you know, Grandma and Grandpa, who can't, for whatever reason, work anymore, so now they're on Social Security. OMG...omg...it has the..the..that word...that horrible word in it...SOCIAL!!!11!1eleventy!11!

I'm sure all these unmotivated welfare vampires are terribly sorry for taking money out of the pockets of wealthy corporate businessmen who must have something more relevant to do with the money, like buy a new Rolex or private jet or private island or maybe jet off to the Bahamas for the winter. Or maybe a nice war has cropped up that needs funding...or maybe a manned mission to Saturn. We're totally gonna be first on the gas giant, HOO RAH. Anyway, yes, I'm sure my unmotivated welfare buddies would much rather that some tycoon living in a secluded 6 figure income-only neighborhood held on to his money, than contribute to the charity pot so they can selfishly try to afford their own luxury items like food and rent. Dude! They can TOTALLY make it by on a $10.00 an hour job and pay for rent, food and other unecessary items like clothes, soap, the miscellaneous notebook or pen for class.

I don't know why I didn't see it before...nobody needs to spread the wealth around, it's true. Everybody's making it just fine. Those whining lackeys just need to lift themselves up by the bootstraps and let the trickle down effect work it's magic. The money can stay constipated in the corporate intestine right where it is, thank you very much. It's a dog eat dog world out there...you're neighbor ain't gonna help ya. What does this look like, a Democracy?

[/evil socialist rant]
[edited to add a "u"]
 
The vast majority of the idiots *****ing and moaning about higher taxes for the top tax brackets will never, ever in their ****ing wildest dreams get into those tax brackets, much less make it there in the next 4 years. It's cute to watch their delusions of grandeur though.
 
If you were earning that much money, you would really see the extra tax make much of a difference. Or, god forbid, maybe you'll just have to forgo buying a new car every 2 years.!
 
Dain, I don´t remember talking bad about him here. Are you following me elsewhere?

In any case, I don´t but I don´t thrust him to keep his word either and in some isues I hope he does not keep his word. I think it is good that he won the election. Time will tell.
 
Folthrik 说:
I'm sorry, but when I start making money I want to keep a substantial amount of it since I worked for it. Socialism is basically forced charity. Charity is a responsibility and up to the donor what to give and when, the government should never be in charge of that.
America:  The most capitalist society in the world, as long as you ignore the fact that they pay more than 50% income tax.
 
Folthrik 说:
I'm sorry, but when I start making money I want to keep a substantial amount of it since I worked for it. Socialism is basically forced charity. Charity is a responsibility and up to the donor what to give and when, the government should never be in charge of that.

So what should the government do, if not look out for it's citizens? Make sure they get the jobs? Well, since you already have money, you don't need one. They could sack you and give the job to someone who needs it, of course, then you'd be the one needing to rely on society for support, and then socialism is a good thing.

Or maybe you want to do it the old-fashioned way, keeping things on the lowest scale possible, you go to your family, if your family can't help, you go to your church instead, if you, god forbid, don't have a church or the church can't help you, well then, you're screwed!

Seriously, it's better that the people that can afford it help. Even if those people are too selfish, too out of touch with anything except greed, to want to help themselves.
 
Folthrik 说:
He said verbatum "spread the wealth" that's socialist enough for me.

Aw bless. You have such a blinkered view of these things :lol:

Spreading the wealth is essential to a capitalist economy too. It's the old "it takes money to make money" adage. Money needs to move around to create wealth; if the wealth is focused in too small a section of a society then it stops moving and the economy nosedives. In general terms, the more money the poor have to spend, the more money the rich are making. The more money the rich make, the more is kicked down to the poor (at least in theory). The more this happens, the more wealth is created.
 
Folthrik, I know you've a lot on your plate but anyway...

Given that equality of opportunity doesn't exist, what should governments do about poverty?
 
Folthrik 说:
I'm sorry, but when I start making money I want to keep a substantial amount of it since I worked for it. Socialism is basically forced charity. Charity is a responsibility and up to the donor what to give and when, the government should never be in charge of that.

A female Republican on teh internets? *Faints*
 
Bush has given billions of tax dollars to US churches for the purposes of charitible work.  Was that socialism?  I never agreed to fund it and neither did congress.  Taxation and redistribution via executive order.  And we've had a progressive tax system, where the wealthy pay more, for a hundred years. 

 
后退
顶部 底部