A $1,251,360.00 Watch.....Now I can tell time and tell who is below me

[AntiParty]

I just ask someone nearby if I wanna know the time. Save money not having to buy my own.

But if you do that, that person will not look up to you like you are a King.

We want to forget Magna Carta in the US. We want to forget Robin Hood. We even want to forget the Bible, "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money."

I've never met a rich person that despised or hated money.

The super rich today are taking more from the middle class just like before Magna Carta. They want to be kings and queens. Corporations are doing the best ever and the people are doing the worst ever.

 

[AntiParty]

^Note this is a very good video.....It doesn't seem to know what Socialism is. But that's a flaw in 'Merica. We just know it's SCARY!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The super rich today are taking more from the middle class

too 100% stupid and liberal as always!! We live in a free country so they don't get to take anything. If you don't want Gates Jobs and Brin to have so much money just stop buying their products!! OMG!!You total idiot they don't take our money we give it to them voluntarily!!

See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance? Is any other conclusion possible?

 

[idb]

The super rich today are taking more from the middle class

too 100% stupid and liberal as always!! We live in a free country so they don't get to take anything. If you don't want Gates Jobs and Brin to have so much money just stop buying their products!! OMG!!You total idiot they don't take our money we give it to them voluntarily!!

See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance? Is any other conclusion possible?

Your world is so simple...and appealing.
Predatory business practices are naturally restrained, and inequality is naturally corrected by a completely free market.
It sounds like Nirvana.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The super rich today are taking more from the middle class

too 100% stupid and liberal as always!! We live in a free country so they don't get to take anything. If you don't want Gates Jobs and Brin to have so much money just stop buying their products!! OMG!!You total idiot they don't take our money we give it to them voluntarily!!

See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance? Is any other conclusion possible?

Your world is so simple...and appealing.
Predatory business practices are naturally restrained, and inequality is naturally corrected by a completely free market.
It sounds like Nirvana.

if not please give your best example or admit you lack IQ to defend what you say?

 

[idb]

The super rich today are taking more from the middle class

too 100% stupid and liberal as always!! We live in a free country so they don't get to take anything. If you don't want Gates Jobs and Brin to have so much money just stop buying their products!! OMG!!You total idiot they don't take our money we give it to them voluntarily!!

See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance? Is any other conclusion possible?

Your world is so simple...and appealing.
Predatory business practices are naturally restrained, and inequality is naturally corrected by a completely free market.
It sounds like Nirvana.

if not please give your best example or admit you lack IQ to defend what you say?

The simplest example that comes to mind is the buying of US politicians by corporates and wealthy individuals to further their business agendas.
How many less wealthy private citizens have that ability?

I examine the differential responsiveness of U.S. senators to the preferences of wealthy, middleclass,
and poor constituents. My analysis includes broad summary measures of senators’ voting
behavior as well as specific votes on the minimum wage, civil rights, government spending, and
abortion. In almost every instance, senators appear to be considerably more responsive to the
opinions of affluent constituents than to the opinions of middle-class constituents, while the
opinions of constituents in the bottom third of the income distribution have no apparent
statistical effect on their senators’ roll call votes. Disparities in representation are especially
pronounced for Republican senators, who were more than twice as responsive as Democratic
senators to the ideological views of affluent constituents.

https://www.princeton.edu/~bartels/economic.pdf

All I can say to that is..."well duh!".

 

[Roadrunner]

Yay! Now you can tell time!
15130bc.zz.8042bc.01 Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Offshore Automatic Mens Watch

Rare rocks...........Minimal functional use, but make a statement. I'm better than you......(I'll bet it can't even calculate)

I have Burger King SpongeBob Squarepants watch that says I am better than the likes of envious people like you.

 

[FA_Q2]

The super rich today are taking more from the middle class

too 100% stupid and liberal as always!! We live in a free country so they don't get to take anything. If you don't want Gates Jobs and Brin to have so much money just stop buying their products!! OMG!!You total idiot they don't take our money we give it to them voluntarily!!

See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance? Is any other conclusion possible?

Your world is so simple...and appealing.
Predatory business practices are naturally restrained, and inequality is naturally corrected by a completely free market.
It sounds like Nirvana.

They would be naturally restrained if people bothered to take responsibility. Sadly, people refuse to and then blame everyone else for the problem. It is asinine but it is the world we live in.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The simplest example that comes to mind is the buying of US politicians by corporates and wealthy individuals to further their business agendas.

dear, name the most bought politician and business agenda that was furthered thereby or admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thank you.

 

[idb]

The simplest example that comes to mind is the buying of US politicians by corporates and wealthy individuals to further their business agendas.

dear, name the most bought politician and business agenda that was furthered thereby or admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thank you.

Oh, puhlease!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, name the most bought politician and business agenda that was furthered thereby or admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thank you.

Oh, puhlease!

translation: as a typical liberal I lack the IQ to defend what I said.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The super rich today are taking more from the middle class

too 100% stupid and liberal as always!! We live in a free country so they don't get to take anything. If you don't want Gates Jobs and Brin to have so much money just stop buying their products!! OMG!!You total idiot they don't take our money we give it to them voluntarily!!

See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance? Is any other conclusion possible?

 

[idb]

dear, name the most bought politician and business agenda that was furthered thereby or admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thank you.

Oh, puhlease!

translation: as a typical liberal I lack the IQ to defend what I said.

Translation..."I only see what I want to see".

Try this...I'm only going to do one so pay attention;

David Donnelly, who spearheaded the clean elections effort in Massachusetts, remembers Brown as a reliable supporter of clean elections: "Over those years, Scott Brown was not only a consistent vote, but a consistently outspoken supporter of the clean-elections program." In a June 2001 letter to the editor in the Boston Globe, an activist with Common Cause, the good government group, hailed Brown's support for clean elections as "not only courageous, but gutsy and heroic."

When Brown ran for state Senate in 2004, he billed himself as "the person that bucks the system often." He frequently mentioned his support for clean elections as evidence of his reformer bona fides. "As a state representative," he said then, "I fought House Speaker Thomas Finneran's pay raise bill and supported the voters' will on Clean Elections." Brown won the special election and served in the state Senate from 2004 to 2010.

In 2010, Brown ran for the US Senate seat that had been held by Ted Kennedy for 46 years. Most people remember his ubiquitous pickup truck, the one he drove everywhere and used to burnish his regular-guy image. What's less remembered is how Brown again bragged about his support of campaign finance reform on his way to becoming a US senator.

Here's what Brown told NPR the day after his upset win over Democrat Martha Coakley:

Maybe there's a new breed of Republican coming to Washington. You know, I've always been that way. I always—I mean, you remember, I supported clean elections. I'm a self-imposed term limits person. I believe very, very strongly that we are there to serve the people.

That reformer approach vanished as soon as Brown joined the Senate Republican caucus.

In the summer of 2010, Senate Democrats heavily lobbied Brown to be the decisive 60th vote on the DISCLOSE Act, a bill that would beef up disclosure of spending on elections by dark-money nonprofit groups, including Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS and David Koch's Americans for Prosperity. But Brown instead joined the Republican filibuster that killed the bill. In an op-ed explaining his vote, Brown said the bill was an election year ploy that exempted labor unions, which traditionally back Democrats, from some disclosure requirements. (In fact, the bill applied the same requirements to corporations and unions, and the AFL-CIO opposed it.) But he praised the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law as "an honest attempt to reform campaign finance" and wrote that genuine reform "would include increased transparency, accountability, and would provide a level playing field to everyone." This gave some reformers hope that Brown might support a whittled-down version of the bill.

But no. Brown later opposed two newer, slimmer versions of the DISCLOSE Act andrefused to cosponsor a national clean-elections bill similar to the measure he had backed in Massachusetts. (A spokeswoman for Brown's campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)

Brown has gone on to accept millions from the interests most opposed to campaign finance reform. In 2011, he was caught on camera practically begging David Koch, the billionaire industrialist, for campaign cash. "Your support during the [2010] election, it meant a ton," Brown told Koch. "It made a difference, and I can certainly use it again." In his 2012 race against Warren, he benefited from a super-PACfunded largely by energy magnate Bill Koch, the youngest Koch brother and also a billionaire, and casino tycoon Sheldon Adelson's Las Vegas Sands company. And though he agreed that year to the "People's Pledge"—a pact intended to keep outside spending out of the campaign—Brown refused to make the same pledge in his current campaign against Shaheen.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, name the most bought politician and business agenda that was furthered thereby or admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thank you.

Oh, puhlease!

translation: as a typical liberal I lack the IQ to defend what I said.

Translation..."I only see what I want to see".

Try this...I'm only going to do one so pay attention;

David Donnelly, who spearheaded the clean elections effort in Massachusetts, remembers Brown as a reliable supporter of clean elections: "Over those years, Scott Brown was not only a consistent vote, but a consistently outspoken supporter of the clean-elections program." In a June 2001 letter to the editor in the Boston Globe, an activist with Common Cause, the good government group, hailed Brown's support for clean elections as "not only courageous, but gutsy and heroic."

When Brown ran for state Senate in 2004, he billed himself as "the person that bucks the system often." He frequently mentioned his support for clean elections as evidence of his reformer bona fides. "As a state representative," he said then, "I fought House Speaker Thomas Finneran's pay raise bill and supported the voters' will on Clean Elections." Brown won the special election and served in the state Senate from 2004 to 2010.

In 2010, Brown ran for the US Senate seat that had been held by Ted Kennedy for 46 years. Most people remember his ubiquitous pickup truck, the one he drove everywhere and used to burnish his regular-guy image. What's less remembered is how Brown again bragged about his support of campaign finance reform on his way to becoming a US senator.

Here's what Brown told NPR the day after his upset win over Democrat Martha Coakley:

Maybe there's a new breed of Republican coming to Washington. You know, I've always been that way. I always—I mean, you remember, I supported clean elections. I'm a self-imposed term limits person. I believe very, very strongly that we are there to serve the people.

That reformer approach vanished as soon as Brown joined the Senate Republican caucus.

In the summer of 2010, Senate Democrats heavily lobbied Brown to be the decisive 60th vote on the DISCLOSE Act, a bill that would beef up disclosure of spending on elections by dark-money nonprofit groups, including Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS and David Koch's Americans for Prosperity. But Brown instead joined the Republican filibuster that killed the bill. In an op-ed explaining his vote, Brown said the bill was an election year ploy that exempted labor unions, which traditionally back Democrats, from some disclosure requirements. (In fact, the bill applied the same requirements to corporations and unions, and the AFL-CIO opposed it.) But he praised the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law as "an honest attempt to reform campaign finance" and wrote that genuine reform "would include increased transparency, accountability, and would provide a level playing field to everyone." This gave some reformers hope that Brown might support a whittled-down version of the bill.

But no. Brown later opposed two newer, slimmer versions of the DISCLOSE Act andrefused to cosponsor a national clean-elections bill similar to the measure he had backed in Massachusetts. (A spokeswoman for Brown's campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)

Brown has gone on to accept millions from the interests most opposed to campaign finance reform. In 2011, he was caught on camera practically begging David Koch, the billionaire industrialist, for campaign cash. "Your support during the [2010] election, it meant a ton," Brown told Koch. "It made a difference, and I can certainly use it again." In his 2012 race against Warren, he benefited from a super-PACfunded largely by energy magnate Bill Koch, the youngest Koch brother and also a billionaire, and casino tycoon Sheldon Adelson's Las Vegas Sands company. And though he agreed that year to the "People's Pledge"—a pact intended to keep outside spending out of the campaign—Brown refused to make the same pledge in his current campaign against Shaheen.

dear, I asked for most bought off politician in America and horrible affects therefrom. What is the horrible affect here? Do you even see one?? Imagine, that is your best example? See why we say liberalism is based in pure stupidity??

 

[idb]

dear, name the most bought politician and business agenda that was furthered thereby or admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thank you.

Oh, puhlease!

translation: as a typical liberal I lack the IQ to defend what I said.

Translation..."I only see what I want to see".

Try this...I'm only going to do one so pay attention;

David Donnelly, who spearheaded the clean elections effort in Massachusetts, remembers Brown as a reliable supporter of clean elections: "Over those years, Scott Brown was not only a consistent vote, but a consistently outspoken supporter of the clean-elections program." In a June 2001 letter to the editor in the Boston Globe, an activist with Common Cause, the good government group, hailed Brown's support for clean elections as "not only courageous, but gutsy and heroic."

When Brown ran for state Senate in 2004, he billed himself as "the person that bucks the system often." He frequently mentioned his support for clean elections as evidence of his reformer bona fides. "As a state representative," he said then, "I fought House Speaker Thomas Finneran's pay raise bill and supported the voters' will on Clean Elections." Brown won the special election and served in the state Senate from 2004 to 2010.

In 2010, Brown ran for the US Senate seat that had been held by Ted Kennedy for 46 years. Most people remember his ubiquitous pickup truck, the one he drove everywhere and used to burnish his regular-guy image. What's less remembered is how Brown again bragged about his support of campaign finance reform on his way to becoming a US senator.

Here's what Brown told NPR the day after his upset win over Democrat Martha Coakley:

Maybe there's a new breed of Republican coming to Washington. You know, I've always been that way. I always—I mean, you remember, I supported clean elections. I'm a self-imposed term limits person. I believe very, very strongly that we are there to serve the people.

That reformer approach vanished as soon as Brown joined the Senate Republican caucus.

In the summer of 2010, Senate Democrats heavily lobbied Brown to be the decisive 60th vote on the DISCLOSE Act, a bill that would beef up disclosure of spending on elections by dark-money nonprofit groups, including Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS and David Koch's Americans for Prosperity. But Brown instead joined the Republican filibuster that killed the bill. In an op-ed explaining his vote, Brown said the bill was an election year ploy that exempted labor unions, which traditionally back Democrats, from some disclosure requirements. (In fact, the bill applied the same requirements to corporations and unions, and the AFL-CIO opposed it.) But he praised the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law as "an honest attempt to reform campaign finance" and wrote that genuine reform "would include increased transparency, accountability, and would provide a level playing field to everyone." This gave some reformers hope that Brown might support a whittled-down version of the bill.

But no. Brown later opposed two newer, slimmer versions of the DISCLOSE Act andrefused to cosponsor a national clean-elections bill similar to the measure he had backed in Massachusetts. (A spokeswoman for Brown's campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)

Brown has gone on to accept millions from the interests most opposed to campaign finance reform. In 2011, he was caught on camera practically begging David Koch, the billionaire industrialist, for campaign cash. "Your support during the [2010] election, it meant a ton," Brown told Koch. "It made a difference, and I can certainly use it again." In his 2012 race against Warren, he benefited from a super-PACfunded largely by energy magnate Bill Koch, the youngest Koch brother and also a billionaire, and casino tycoon Sheldon Adelson's Las Vegas Sands company. And though he agreed that year to the "People's Pledge"—a pact intended to keep outside spending out of the campaign—Brown refused to make the same pledge in his current campaign against Shaheen.

dear, I asked for most bought off politician in America and horrible affects therefrom. What is the horrible affect here? Do you even see one?? Imagine, that is your best example? See why we say liberalism is based in pure stupidity??

What you mean is that you don't have the wit to see the negative result of ensuring that politicians CAN be bought?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, name the most bought politician and business agenda that was furthered thereby or admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thank you.

Oh, puhlease!

translation: as a typical liberal I lack the IQ to defend what I said.

Translation..."I only see what I want to see".

Try this...I'm only going to do one so pay attention;

David Donnelly, who spearheaded the clean elections effort in Massachusetts, remembers Brown as a reliable supporter of clean elections: "Over those years, Scott Brown was not only a consistent vote, but a consistently outspoken supporter of the clean-elections program." In a June 2001 letter to the editor in the Boston Globe, an activist with Common Cause, the good government group, hailed Brown's support for clean elections as "not only courageous, but gutsy and heroic."

When Brown ran for state Senate in 2004, he billed himself as "the person that bucks the system often." He frequently mentioned his support for clean elections as evidence of his reformer bona fides. "As a state representative," he said then, "I fought House Speaker Thomas Finneran's pay raise bill and supported the voters' will on Clean Elections." Brown won the special election and served in the state Senate from 2004 to 2010.

In 2010, Brown ran for the US Senate seat that had been held by Ted Kennedy for 46 years. Most people remember his ubiquitous pickup truck, the one he drove everywhere and used to burnish his regular-guy image. What's less remembered is how Brown again bragged about his support of campaign finance reform on his way to becoming a US senator.

Here's what Brown told NPR the day after his upset win over Democrat Martha Coakley:

Maybe there's a new breed of Republican coming to Washington. You know, I've always been that way. I always—I mean, you remember, I supported clean elections. I'm a self-imposed term limits person. I believe very, very strongly that we are there to serve the people.

That reformer approach vanished as soon as Brown joined the Senate Republican caucus.

In the summer of 2010, Senate Democrats heavily lobbied Brown to be the decisive 60th vote on the DISCLOSE Act, a bill that would beef up disclosure of spending on elections by dark-money nonprofit groups, including Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS and David Koch's Americans for Prosperity. But Brown instead joined the Republican filibuster that killed the bill. In an op-ed explaining his vote, Brown said the bill was an election year ploy that exempted labor unions, which traditionally back Democrats, from some disclosure requirements. (In fact, the bill applied the same requirements to corporations and unions, and the AFL-CIO opposed it.) But he praised the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law as "an honest attempt to reform campaign finance" and wrote that genuine reform "would include increased transparency, accountability, and would provide a level playing field to everyone." This gave some reformers hope that Brown might support a whittled-down version of the bill.

But no. Brown later opposed two newer, slimmer versions of the DISCLOSE Act andrefused to cosponsor a national clean-elections bill similar to the measure he had backed in Massachusetts. (A spokeswoman for Brown's campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)

Brown has gone on to accept millions from the interests most opposed to campaign finance reform. In 2011, he was caught on camera practically begging David Koch, the billionaire industrialist, for campaign cash. "Your support during the [2010] election, it meant a ton," Brown told Koch. "It made a difference, and I can certainly use it again." In his 2012 race against Warren, he benefited from a super-PACfunded largely by energy magnate Bill Koch, the youngest Koch brother and also a billionaire, and casino tycoon Sheldon Adelson's Las Vegas Sands company. And though he agreed that year to the "People's Pledge"—a pact intended to keep outside spending out of the campaign—Brown refused to make the same pledge in his current campaign against Shaheen.

dear, I asked for most bought off politician in America and horrible affects therefrom. What is the horrible affect here? Do you even see one?? Imagine, that is your best example? See why we say liberalism is based in pure stupidity??

What you mean is that you don't have the wit to see the negative result of ensuring that politicians CAN be bought?

dear you said there were huge consequences of bought politicians . I asked for the consequence in the case of Brown( your best example) and you could not answer. What does that tell you about the IQ of liberals?

 

[idb]

dear, name the most bought politician and business agenda that was furthered thereby or admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thank you.

Oh, puhlease!

translation: as a typical liberal I lack the IQ to defend what I said.

Translation..."I only see what I want to see".

Try this...I'm only going to do one so pay attention;

David Donnelly, who spearheaded the clean elections effort in Massachusetts, remembers Brown as a reliable supporter of clean elections: "Over those years, Scott Brown was not only a consistent vote, but a consistently outspoken supporter of the clean-elections program." In a June 2001 letter to the editor in the Boston Globe, an activist with Common Cause, the good government group, hailed Brown's support for clean elections as "not only courageous, but gutsy and heroic."

When Brown ran for state Senate in 2004, he billed himself as "the person that bucks the system often." He frequently mentioned his support for clean elections as evidence of his reformer bona fides. "As a state representative," he said then, "I fought House Speaker Thomas Finneran's pay raise bill and supported the voters' will on Clean Elections." Brown won the special election and served in the state Senate from 2004 to 2010.

In 2010, Brown ran for the US Senate seat that had been held by Ted Kennedy for 46 years. Most people remember his ubiquitous pickup truck, the one he drove everywhere and used to burnish his regular-guy image. What's less remembered is how Brown again bragged about his support of campaign finance reform on his way to becoming a US senator.

Here's what Brown told NPR the day after his upset win over Democrat Martha Coakley:

Maybe there's a new breed of Republican coming to Washington. You know, I've always been that way. I always—I mean, you remember, I supported clean elections. I'm a self-imposed term limits person. I believe very, very strongly that we are there to serve the people.

That reformer approach vanished as soon as Brown joined the Senate Republican caucus.

In the summer of 2010, Senate Democrats heavily lobbied Brown to be the decisive 60th vote on the DISCLOSE Act, a bill that would beef up disclosure of spending on elections by dark-money nonprofit groups, including Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS and David Koch's Americans for Prosperity. But Brown instead joined the Republican filibuster that killed the bill. In an op-ed explaining his vote, Brown said the bill was an election year ploy that exempted labor unions, which traditionally back Democrats, from some disclosure requirements. (In fact, the bill applied the same requirements to corporations and unions, and the AFL-CIO opposed it.) But he praised the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law as "an honest attempt to reform campaign finance" and wrote that genuine reform "would include increased transparency, accountability, and would provide a level playing field to everyone." This gave some reformers hope that Brown might support a whittled-down version of the bill.

But no. Brown later opposed two newer, slimmer versions of the DISCLOSE Act andrefused to cosponsor a national clean-elections bill similar to the measure he had backed in Massachusetts. (A spokeswoman for Brown's campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)

Brown has gone on to accept millions from the interests most opposed to campaign finance reform. In 2011, he was caught on camera practically begging David Koch, the billionaire industrialist, for campaign cash. "Your support during the [2010] election, it meant a ton," Brown told Koch. "It made a difference, and I can certainly use it again." In his 2012 race against Warren, he benefited from a super-PACfunded largely by energy magnate Bill Koch, the youngest Koch brother and also a billionaire, and casino tycoon Sheldon Adelson's Las Vegas Sands company. And though he agreed that year to the "People's Pledge"—a pact intended to keep outside spending out of the campaign—Brown refused to make the same pledge in his current campaign against Shaheen.

dear, I asked for most bought off politician in America and horrible affects therefrom. What is the horrible affect here? Do you even see one?? Imagine, that is your best example? See why we say liberalism is based in pure stupidity??

What you mean is that you don't have the wit to see the negative result of ensuring that politicians CAN be bought?

dear you said there were huge consequences of bought politicians . I asked for the consequence in the case of Brown( your best example) and you could not answer. What does that tell you about the IQ of liberals?

It tells me that you have to have the most basic principles explained to you in single syllables.
Or maybe that 'reasoning' is not your forte.

 

[westwall]

What is your point?

The wealthy have always squandered massive amounts of money on useless shit that is not worth anything other than showing how much cash they have to burn. Nothing new here.

So you understand the concept but don't understand the point...............hmmmmmmmmmmmm.......

So, if you desire one so bad. Earn enough money to BUY one. It really is that simple. Just think, Kim Kardashian has no skills that anyone can think of other than an ability to film a sex tape, and look where she is now.

It really is that simple. Instead of whining and moping DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

 

[AntiParty]

What is your point?

The wealthy have always squandered massive amounts of money on useless shit that is not worth anything other than showing how much cash they have to burn. Nothing new here.

So you understand the concept but don't understand the point...............hmmmmmmmmmmmm.......

So, if you desire one so bad. Earn enough money to BUY one. It really is that simple. Just think, Kim Kardashian has no skills that anyone can think of other than an ability to film a sex tape, and look where she is now.

It really is that simple. Instead of whining and moping DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

Your post is more epic than I could have fished you out of.

Someone with no skills can get that watch yet some American families can't make a house payment. I'm glad you opened that door kiddo.

I don't need that watch. My family does just fine.

I love that you don't understand the point, as always.

 

[AntiParty]

I could get this watch if I took an in-human approach to my work. I could cut wages, force harder work, tell them to

The super rich today are taking more from the middle class

too 100% stupid and liberal as always!! We live in a free country so they don't get to take anything. If you don't want Gates Jobs and Brin to have so much money just stop buying their products!! OMG!!You total idiot they don't take our money we give it to them voluntarily!!

See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance? Is any other conclusion possible?

^Another political newbie that doesn't understand Monopolies and the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Probably believes in America's core values but doesn't understand them at all if he does.

Read more about the Constitution and Anti-Trust laws. Then get back to me on price gouging and forced purchases in America kiddo. THANKS