Bernie Sanders : This Grotesque Level of Income and Wealth Inequality is Wrong

[Dr Grump]

You mean people are breaking the law? And what happens when they get caught? What happened in the Erin Brockovich movie?

Exactly. So what are we arguing about. We need the EPA. Thank you.

You claimed big business simply avoided complying with EPA regulations. If that's the case, then what good is the EPA?

No, I never said that. I am implying that big business will get away with what they can and cannot be relied upon to do the right thing for the people and environment. Thus the need for the EPA.

Allow me to quote you:

"And the EPA laws are always being avoided by big business. You think Erin Brockovich was fiction?"
​

Yeah....and?

 

[bripat9643]

They won it lawsuit. It had nothing to do with EPA regulations. First you claim big business simply avoids complying with the law, then you thank "the laws of the land" for something they had not part in. You're batting 1000 when it comes to posting contradictions.

Oh, god, this is hurting my head. Why are conservatives so dumb. Why do I have to spell everything out all the time. This is getting tiresome. It really is. If you cannot connect the dots, there are two things happening here. You are (and I'm being totally serious here) dumb as a bag of rocks, or you are being deliberately obtuse.

Your problem is that you keep stepping on your own dick. You can't post two sentences without contradicting yourself. That's what happens when everything you believe is based on contradictions. You get confused when I point them out.

 

[bripat9643]

You mean people are breaking the law? And what happens when they get caught? What happened in the Erin Brockovich movie?

Exactly. So what are we arguing about. We need the EPA. Thank you.

You claimed big business simply avoided complying with EPA regulations. If that's the case, then what good is the EPA?

No, I never said that. I am implying that big business will get away with what they can and cannot be relied upon to do the right thing for the people and environment. Thus the need for the EPA.

Allow me to quote you:

"And the EPA laws are always being avoided by big business. You think Erin Brockovich was fiction?"
​

Yeah....and?

You just denied saying that.

 

[Dr Grump]

The U.S. flag was never planted on Iraqi soil junior (at least not in the context of indicating we had taken over the country).

Seriously man....take the tin foil hat off and start getting your information from something other than fictional movies made in Hollywood.

Who was talking about you taking over the country, Little Boy? Not I.

Fictional? So there was no Erin Brockovich? No gas company that got sued for 100s of millions? Okay....

 

[Dr Grump]

Your problem is that you keep stepping on your own dick. You can't post two sentences without contradicting yourself. That's what happens when everything you believe is based on contradictions. You get confused when I point them out.

You are the one who is getting confused. This is all pretty straight forward. you don't like regulations and think the world would be better without them. All I'm saying, is without the EPA and similar legislation you cannot rely on big business to do the right thing. My Erin Brockovich rant is just but one example. There are literally thousands of others. Now, if big business could be relied on to do the right thing for both the environment and the people, you are right, the EPA et al would not be necessary.

 

[hjmick]

Ten full pages of this stale, reheated topic and the OP's author hasn't once returned to comment?


What a dick.

 

[bripat9643]

Your problem is that you keep stepping on your own dick. You can't post two sentences without contradicting yourself. That's what happens when everything you believe is based on contradictions. You get confused when I point them out.

You are the one who is getting confused. This is all pretty straight forward. you don't like regulations and think the world would be better without them. All I'm saying, is without the EPA and similar legislation you cannot rely on big business to do the right thing. My Erin Brockovich rant is just but one example. There are literally thousands of others. Now, if big business could be relied on to do the right thing for both the environment and the people, you are right, the EPA et al would not be necessary.

The Erin Brockovich incident was not resolved with regulation. It was resolved with a lawsuit, so it doesn't support your point. It shows the EPA isn't necessary.

 

[Dr Grump]

The Erin Brockovich incident was not resolved with regulation. It was resolved with a lawsuit, so it doesn't support your point. It shows the EPA isn't necessary.

But there are probably thousands of businesses that do comply because they are worried about what the EPA will do. As a result of the Brockovich case the CalEPA put in new measures and regulations with regard to crap put into the soil.

 

[Slade3200]

I"m only name calling if calling some a thief when they take your property is name calling. The bottom line is that you do not question the government's authority to do whatever it likes with you and your property. That's the essence of servility.

This is the problem in America today. Too bad that most are so brainwashed by the government education system that they do not even understand what theft means coming out of the Marxist indoctrination. The so called Marxist exploitation (someone not providing you free shit) they seem to understand though...

It's painful how far Slade3200 is in it... case example...

I think it's a shame to see ungrateful spoiled pricks like you that have appreciation for the country that we live in. Yes, there are many areas that need reform and improvement. But y'all that deny the basic function of our governement and call anybody who supports them, idiots.... Well y'all are the problem

That all boils down to what the "basic function" is.

I believe the basic function of the government is what is in the US Constitution and nothing more. Liberals believe it extends way beyond that.

The constitution affords both the state and the federal government to pass laws to keep us safe and promote the general welfare of our citizens. What is considered safe and beneficial to the people is an evolving process and a collection of votes, laws, regulations, and deregulations. These are the specifics that we should be discussing but then we have these wing nutz that don't accept their place In Society nor the governments authority to create any kind of law that impededs their desire to do whatever the fuck they want to do. Makes it hard to discuss anything real or productive

IN other words, accept your premise that the federal government has authority to do whatever it likes to us, or you decline to discuss the issues. You have yet to demonstrate that government has any authority whatsoever to control me. You simply assume it. That's pretty much how all your arguments go: assume what you believe to be true, and then claim anyone who disputes your assumption to be "out of touch,: or their arguments are "unproductive."

You don't debate. You only vent your spleen and then make personal attacks on those who criticize your recieved wisdom.

Really? I've made plenty of points and have posed plenty of questions that you choose to ignore. I'm not promoting an agenda, simply stating facts that you can't seem to accept. It blows my mind that there are people out there that truly feel like they are above the law. You live in our society, reaping the benefits, and then deny any responsibly to adhere to the rules and laws that our elected government has put in place. The fact that you then argue about the constitution is a complete contradiction of your arguments. Go ahead and be a fringe extremist all you want... Just work on better arguments... At least ones that make some kind of sense

 

[Slade3200]

You are to the government as your tenants are to you... Don't you see that. You complain about having to follow the governments rules while expecting your tenants to succumb to your rules. You say if your tenants don't like your rules they can live somewhere else. Same goes for you. If you don't like our governement rules the. You can live somewhere else.... You seeing the parallel now?

No, that's apples and oranges.

If my tenants don't like my rules, they can leave my property. If I don't like government, I do what I can to change the government.

You actually do have a voice to change the government which is more power than your tenants have to change your policies as you are the dictator in your property world. If you don't like your governments rules on your business you also have the choice to not run your own business... Get another job... or move to another country... Similar to your tenants choice to live elsewhere. It isn't apples and oranges, it is very similar. You just don't like the thought of YOU being the "tenant"

Once again, apples and oranges.

If my tenants don't like the way I do things, they can move down the street if another unit is available, or easily within five or ten miles from where they live. But you say if I don't like the way government does things, I should pack my bags, leave my family and friends, and move to another country? You call that an equal comparison?

All things considered they are pretty close... Yes if you can see the relation that you And your property has with the government and their/our United States

There's no comparison, and only a bootlicking douche bag would claim there was. The federal government doesn't own my house, my street, my town or my state. The federal government doesn't even have authority to own property other than what's strictly needed to perform its functions.

You pump out the most unbelievable horseshit into this forum and then expect other forum members to treat it like it's some kind of received wisdom that they are obligated to treat with respect. It's shit, caca, manure, horse squeeze.

Ok genius, then answer the question... What happens to you and your house if you don't pay taxes?

 

[Slade3200]

That's a fantasy if you think that's our world. You can't break laws or regulations set forth with your business. You can only operate if you register and pay taxes. This is reality. You lease the right to own In this country no matter what you tell yourself. If you don't believe me then stop paying taxes and hire a bunch of children to work for $1 per hour and see how your "full dictatioral control" works out for you

So lets apply your "logic" here to something else, shall we? The Green River Killer brutally raped and murdered over 40 women. Since that happened, it must make it ok for me to do the same, right?

Illegal stuff happens every day in this country because it's filled with liberals who refuse to accept the rule of law. Just because a state or city passes a law, doesn't make that law constitutional or right. A great example is the idiot Bill DeBlasio in New York. He's not only outlawed firearms (a major violation of the 2nd Amendment), but he also authorized his officers to "stop and frisk" without any probable cause (a major violation of the 4th Amendment). You know it. I know it. Bill DeBlasio knows it.

There are dirt-bag libtards in office all over this country violating the law. It doesn't make it legal or ok.

What are you talking about man? Somebody rapes women and you think liberals think that makes it ok. And all law breaking is liberals too? Are you high?

"What am I taking about"? According to you, if a law is passed (whether that law violates the U.S. Constitution or not), that makes it "ok". So by your own logic - since The Green River Killer raped and murdered women (even though they is not ok), that precedence makes it ok for me to do it too.

What law allowed him to rape? And I'm all for questioning, fighting, reversing, and evolving our laws and regulations. I never made any mention of just sitting back content ly if you don't agree with something. Many in this discussion are objecting to the governments authority to impose law which is just absurd

 

[Contumacious]

Bernie Sanders : This Grotesque Level of Income and Wealth Inequality is Wrong

I agree.

SO back in 1976 I went to college. Learned a marketable skill and stayed gainfully employed. That is my responsibility as an American.


Unfortunately , the parasites, the moochers, the gimmes believe that their neighbors owe them a living and will recruit scumbag like Sanders who to steal loot and plunder.


.

 

[Slade3200]

You are to the government as your tenants are to you... Don't you see that. You complain about having to follow the governments rules while expecting your tenants to succumb to your rules. You say if your tenants don't like your rules they can live somewhere else. Same goes for you. If you don't like our governement rules the. You can live somewhere else.... You seeing the parallel now?

No, that's apples and oranges.

If my tenants don't like my rules, they can leave my property. If I don't like government, I do what I can to change the government.

You actually do have a voice to change the government which is more power than your tenants have to change your policies as you are the dictator in your property world. If you don't like your governments rules on your business you also have the choice to not run your own business... Get another job... or move to another country... Similar to your tenants choice to live elsewhere. It isn't apples and oranges, it is very similar. You just don't like the thought of YOU being the "tenant"

Once again, apples and oranges.

If my tenants don't like the way I do things, they can move down the street if another unit is available, or easily within five or ten miles from where they live. But you say if I don't like the way government does things, I should pack my bags, leave my family and friends, and move to another country? You call that an equal comparison?

All things considered they are pretty close... Yes if you can see the relation that you And your property has with the government and their/our United States

No, I don't see the relation because it's my property--not the governments. Furthermore the more government interferes with my business; makes doing business more expensive; solves problems that never existed, is not what our founders intended the government to be.


"When people fear the government, there is tyranny. When government fears the people, there is liberty."
Thomas Jefferson

At least you are not quoting rush anymore. I like that Jefferson quote. I oppose unnessessary and needless regulation, but also see the need for it in some situations. It's a simple point that shouldn't be too hard to agree with. This opposition I'm hearing from some of you is surprising.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, that's apples and oranges.

If my tenants don't like my rules, they can leave my property. If I don't like government, I do what I can to change the government.

You actually do have a voice to change the government which is more power than your tenants have to change your policies as you are the dictator in your property world. If you don't like your governments rules on your business you also have the choice to not run your own business... Get another job... or move to another country... Similar to your tenants choice to live elsewhere. It isn't apples and oranges, it is very similar. You just don't like the thought of YOU being the "tenant"

Once again, apples and oranges.

If my tenants don't like the way I do things, they can move down the street if another unit is available, or easily within five or ten miles from where they live. But you say if I don't like the way government does things, I should pack my bags, leave my family and friends, and move to another country? You call that an equal comparison?

All things considered they are pretty close... Yes if you can see the relation that you And your property has with the government and their/our United States

No, I don't see the relation because it's my property--not the governments. Furthermore the more government interferes with my business; makes doing business more expensive; solves problems that never existed, is not what our founders intended the government to be.


"When people fear the government, there is tyranny. When government fears the people, there is liberty."
Thomas Jefferson

At least you are not quoting rush anymore. I like that Jefferson quote. I oppose unnessessary and needless regulation, but also see the need for it in some situations. It's a simple point that shouldn't be too hard to agree with. This opposition I'm hearing from some of you is surprising.

I'm a surprising kind of guy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, that's apples and oranges.

If my tenants don't like my rules, they can leave my property. If I don't like government, I do what I can to change the government.

You actually do have a voice to change the government which is more power than your tenants have to change your policies as you are the dictator in your property world. If you don't like your governments rules on your business you also have the choice to not run your own business... Get another job... or move to another country... Similar to your tenants choice to live elsewhere. It isn't apples and oranges, it is very similar. You just don't like the thought of YOU being the "tenant"

Once again, apples and oranges.

If my tenants don't like the way I do things, they can move down the street if another unit is available, or easily within five or ten miles from where they live. But you say if I don't like the way government does things, I should pack my bags, leave my family and friends, and move to another country? You call that an equal comparison?

All things considered they are pretty close... Yes if you can see the relation that you And your property has with the government and their/our United States

There's no comparison, and only a bootlicking douche bag would claim there was. The federal government doesn't own my house, my street, my town or my state. The federal government doesn't even have authority to own property other than what's strictly needed to perform its functions.

You pump out the most unbelievable horseshit into this forum and then expect other forum members to treat it like it's some kind of received wisdom that they are obligated to treat with respect. It's shit, caca, manure, horse squeeze.

Ok genius, then answer the question... What happens to you and your house if you don't pay taxes?

The same thing as when somebody sues you and you don't pay such as running up an outstanding balance with a creditor like a hospital or nursing home.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Your problem is that you keep stepping on your own dick. You can't post two sentences without contradicting yourself. That's what happens when everything you believe is based on contradictions. You get confused when I point them out.

You are the one who is getting confused. This is all pretty straight forward. you don't like regulations and think the world would be better without them. All I'm saying, is without the EPA and similar legislation you cannot rely on big business to do the right thing. My Erin Brockovich rant is just but one example. There are literally thousands of others. Now, if big business could be relied on to do the right thing for both the environment and the people, you are right, the EPA et al would not be necessary.

They are not necessary now; no bureaucracy is.

Think those Congress people are working so hard around the clock year round? The only people that spend less time away from work are school teachers.

The concept of a country like ours is to have redress in the event government oversteps their boundaries. You can't do that with bureaucracies because they are unelected law makers. And when they make decisions, it doesn't mean they are the correct ones.

When we have new laws, they are to be decided on and made by Congress, not nameless faceless people.

 

[JoeNormal]

Bernie Sanders : This Grotesque Level of Income and Wealth Inequality is Wrong

Translation: I can't prove there's anything wrong with it, or even find any evidence that the rich people somehow stole from the poor people. But if I keep telling the same lie over and over, my mentor says that people will believe it and it will become The Truth. And enough people might get fooled into voting for me, that I'll win anyway.

If average people could have a better lifestyle 40 years ago on one income when productivity has exploded over those years, what's your explanation for what has changed?

We've sadly injected more liberal socialism into policy. And it creates collapse. Just ask Detroit. Over 60 years of liberal utopia - a Democrat mayor all of those years, a Democrat-controlled city council all of those years, plus massive unions like the UAW and teacher unions. And what does the city have to show for that? Poverty. Famine. Misery. The place is like a third-world hell-hole now thanks to liberalism.

Nope, Reagan put us on a path in which whatever the large coporations wanted, the large corporations got. They crushed whatever representation the average guy had and the squeeze continue in earnest today.

Really, back to Reagan again, a guy that's been out of office for over 25 years?

Since Reagan, we've had two Democrat presidents that both served two terms. That's 16 years of Democrat leadership. If Reagan had so much power (with a Democrat Congress mind you) then why didn't any of your hero's do something about it?

You seem to think I'm defending the Democrats. Clinton was every bit the corporate shill that Reagan was and his administration marked the era when the Democrats stopped being the party of the average guy.

 

[P@triot]

Translation: I can't prove there's anything wrong with it, or even find any evidence that the rich people somehow stole from the poor people. But if I keep telling the same lie over and over, my mentor says that people will believe it and it will become The Truth. And enough people might get fooled into voting for me, that I'll win anyway.

If average people could have a better lifestyle 40 years ago on one income when productivity has exploded over those years, what's your explanation for what has changed?

We've sadly injected more liberal socialism into policy. And it creates collapse. Just ask Detroit. Over 60 years of liberal utopia - a Democrat mayor all of those years, a Democrat-controlled city council all of those years, plus massive unions like the UAW and teacher unions. And what does the city have to show for that? Poverty. Famine. Misery. The place is like a third-world hell-hole now thanks to liberalism.

Nope, Reagan put us on a path in which whatever the large coporations wanted, the large corporations got. They crushed whatever representation the average guy had and the squeeze continue in earnest today.

Really, back to Reagan again, a guy that's been out of office for over 25 years?

Since Reagan, we've had two Democrat presidents that both served two terms. That's 16 years of Democrat leadership. If Reagan had so much power (with a Democrat Congress mind you) then why didn't any of your hero's do something about it?

You seem to think I'm defending the Democrats. Clinton was every bit the corporate shill that Reagan was and his administration marked the era when the Democrats stopped being the party of the average guy.

You got that right. The party has been completely hijacked by true communists, marxists, socialists. If you notice, liberals have all joined the Republican Party (the Republican's operate in every way like the liberals of the JFK-era), and true conservatives have all moved to the Tea Party.

 

[JoeNormal]

Bernie Sanders : This Grotesque Level of Income and Wealth Inequality is Wrong

Translation: I can't prove there's anything wrong with it, or even find any evidence that the rich people somehow stole from the poor people. But if I keep telling the same lie over and over, my mentor says that people will believe it and it will become The Truth. And enough people might get fooled into voting for me, that I'll win anyway.

If average people could have a better lifestyle 40 years ago on one income when productivity has exploded over those years, what's your explanation for what has changed?

We've sadly injected more liberal socialism into policy. And it creates collapse. Just ask Detroit. Over 60 years of liberal utopia - a Democrat mayor all of those years, a Democrat-controlled city council all of those years, plus massive unions like the UAW and teacher unions. And what does the city have to show for that? Poverty. Famine. Misery. The place is like a third-world hell-hole now thanks to liberalism.

Nope, Reagan put us on a path in which whatever the large coporations wanted, the large corporations got. They crushed whatever representation the average guy had and the squeeze continue in earnest today.

One small problem Joe. Actually....it's a huge problem If Reagan's policy is responsible for Detroit's bankruptcy, why is it that cities across the nation under Reagan's exact same policies are flourishing? Places all over Texas, North Dakota, North Carolina, etc.

Sorry chief....but Detroit is undeniable proof of the failure of liberalism and you can't possibly blame it on anything conservative since other cities have flourished while that poor city collapsed under the weight of the cancer that is liberalism.

Different cities have different supporting industries. Heavy industry has been the loser in the current game of corporatism. I live in what has become known as the Silicon Slopes as a software engineer. At the moment, I'm doing alright. However, the big shitty corporation I work for is doing their best to export jobs like mine to India. Fortunately, they just can't seem to get the job done and it looks likely that I'll be able to keep my job until retirement. But it's not guaranteed and given the short term, kiss-ass mentality of our illustrious leaders, there's not much incentive to be loyal.

 

[Slade3200]

You actually do have a voice to change the government which is more power than your tenants have to change your policies as you are the dictator in your property world. If you don't like your governments rules on your business you also have the choice to not run your own business... Get another job... or move to another country... Similar to your tenants choice to live elsewhere. It isn't apples and oranges, it is very similar. You just don't like the thought of YOU being the "tenant"

Once again, apples and oranges.

If my tenants don't like the way I do things, they can move down the street if another unit is available, or easily within five or ten miles from where they live. But you say if I don't like the way government does things, I should pack my bags, leave my family and friends, and move to another country? You call that an equal comparison?

All things considered they are pretty close... Yes if you can see the relation that you And your property has with the government and their/our United States

There's no comparison, and only a bootlicking douche bag would claim there was. The federal government doesn't own my house, my street, my town or my state. The federal government doesn't even have authority to own property other than what's strictly needed to perform its functions.

You pump out the most unbelievable horseshit into this forum and then expect other forum members to treat it like it's some kind of received wisdom that they are obligated to treat with respect. It's shit, caca, manure, horse squeeze.

Ok genius, then answer the question... What happens to you and your house if you don't pay taxes?

The same thing as when somebody sues you and you don't pay such as running up an outstanding balance with a creditor like a hospital or nursing home.

Wrong, you should know this mr landlord. If you don't pay your property taxes the delinquent amount is held as a lien against the property and may be forclosed upon and sold by the government.

Does that sound like you own the property or does it sound like you have a "landlord" in the deal. Sorry man, we are all leasing our rights to own property and do business in this country from the institution that really owns both. It's how the system works