Makers vs Takers? Nope. How about "Contributors" vs "Non-Contributors"

[OODA_Loop]

Under your logic.....

A Navy SEAL is a "taker", since he creates 0 jobs, and lives off government pay.

A strip club owner is a "maker", since he creates jobs and doesnt live off government pay.

So, Navy SEAL's are less valuable to society than strip club owners under your makers vs takers ideal. Right?

SEALS and business owners have different values to society.

 

[bucs90]

Under your logic.....

A Navy SEAL is a "taker", since he creates 0 jobs, and lives off government pay.

A strip club owner is a "maker", since he creates jobs and doesnt live off government pay.

So, Navy SEAL's are less valuable to society than strip club owners under your makers vs takers ideal. Right?

SEALS and business owners have different values to society.

Exactly right. Which is why it is so disgusting that the right wing tries to define a citizen's worth to society through simply how much they make in salary, and how much they pay in taxes, and whether or not they recieve a check of any form from the government.

Its so much more complex than that, but the right wing is basing it's ideology off easy bumper sticker size slogans and quotes.

But by the right wings "makers vs takers" logic, a SEAL is a taker and a strip club owner is a maker. And they keep pushing that makers vs takers bumper sticker slogan.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Exactly right. Which is why it is so disgusting that the right wing tries to define a citizen's worth to society through simply how much they make in salary, and how much they pay in taxes, and whether or not they recieve a check of any form from the government.

A citizen's worth is not how much he makes but what he adds to society at the output of his own hand or in your SEAL example, the output of his very life.

 

[Katzndogz]

just so we're clear on this, day-traders are parasitically skimming off our retirement savings, so they would literally be takers.

Bullshit. "Taking" requires the use of force. Day traders don't force anyone to sell them stocks or buy stocks from them. Taking by one private citizen from another is against the law. We call it theft, robbery or fraud. Only the government can take, so the only takers are people who use the government to do their bidding.

Under your logic.....

A Navy SEAL is a "taker", since he creates 0 jobs, and lives off government pay.

A strip club owner is a "maker", since he creates jobs and doesnt live off government pay.

So, Navy SEAL's are less valuable to society than strip club owners under your makers vs takers ideal. Right?

The Seal performs a service. The takers do nothing, they perform no services, they produce no products. They are like my step granddaughter. Her occupation is spreading her legs because each child is a raise in "pay". Her avocation is smoking pot all day. That's a taker.

 

[bucs90]

Bullshit. "Taking" requires the use of force. Day traders don't force anyone to sell them stocks or buy stocks from them. Taking by one private citizen from another is against the law. We call it theft, robbery or fraud. Only the government can take, so the only takers are people who use the government to do their bidding.

Under your logic.....

A Navy SEAL is a "taker", since he creates 0 jobs, and lives off government pay.

A strip club owner is a "maker", since he creates jobs and doesnt live off government pay.

So, Navy SEAL's are less valuable to society than strip club owners under your makers vs takers ideal. Right?

The Seal performs a service. The takers do nothing, they perform no services, they produce no products. They are like my step granddaughter. Her occupation is spreading her legs because each child is a raise in "pay". Her avocation is smoking pot all day. That's a taker.

But the right wing has labeled a LOT of people who also do a service as "takers", simply because they work for a government rather than create jobs. You cant just redefine the term now. They have called "takers" anyone who doesnt pay federal income tax, and thus, making the "makers vs takers" worth defined as simply how much money you earn.

I agree.... a person who purposely refuses to work and only collect government welfare checks for a living is indeed a parasite to society.

 

[Stephanie]

Under your logic.....

A Navy SEAL is a "taker", since he creates 0 jobs, and lives off government pay.

A strip club owner is a "maker", since he creates jobs and doesnt live off government pay.

So, Navy SEAL's are less valuable to society than strip club owners under your makers vs takers ideal. Right?

The Seal performs a service. The takers do nothing, they perform no services, they produce no products. They are like my step granddaughter. Her occupation is spreading her legs because each child is a raise in "pay". Her avocation is smoking pot all day. That's a taker.

But the right wing has labeled a LOT of people who also do a service as "takers", simply because they work for a government rather than create jobs. You cant just redefine the term now. They have called "takers" anyone who doesnt pay federal income tax, and thus, making the "makers vs takers" worth defined as simply how much money you earn.

I agree.... a person who purposely refuses to work and only collect government welfare checks for a living is indeed a parasite to society.

omg, but the right wing this, the right wing that...and then you agree

 

[editec]

So, Im personally redefining the "makers vs takers" nonsense. Its Contributor vs Non-Contributor. Someone is either adding something good to America, or they are not. Thats what really matters.........not just the number that is on your tax filing.

I think that's a very sensible approach, actually.

Especially sensible if you also recognize that the nature of society has ALWAYS been so divided.

Especially sensible if you also recognize that the nature of our CHANGING SOCIETY is inevitably leaving more and more of the population becoming people for whom making economically counted contributions to society is virtually impossible.

As society finds efficiencies, being a productive human laborer becomes increasingly harder for most of us.

 

[Katzndogz]

The right labeled nothing. The left did that, then attributed it to the right. Like they always do.

 

[Stephanie]

What was that pretty name Nance Pelosi called people who didn't want to buy insurance from ObamaCare and all the left agreed and started calling them that also?

I think it was, FREELOADERS... just because they didn't want to be FORCED to buy something

so bucky, you can give it a REST about who is a Contributor or non-Contributor...we are now FORCED to contribute to the lovely government, through ObamaCare..well not all, those of us who work and the ones who can afford their own insurance...the rest will be, subsidised by US

 

[bucs90]

The Seal performs a service. The takers do nothing, they perform no services, they produce no products. They are like my step granddaughter. Her occupation is spreading her legs because each child is a raise in "pay". Her avocation is smoking pot all day. That's a taker.

But the right wing has labeled a LOT of people who also do a service as "takers", simply because they work for a government rather than create jobs. You cant just redefine the term now. They have called "takers" anyone who doesnt pay federal income tax, and thus, making the "makers vs takers" worth defined as simply how much money you earn.

I agree.... a person who purposely refuses to work and only collect government welfare checks for a living is indeed a parasite to society.

omg, but the right wing this, the right wing that...and then you agree

Thats right. I've always agreed with that. When I told the GOP to fuck off, everyone assumed I became (or always was) a raging liberal. Not so. The GOP just got to whacky and radical for me, and I now enjoy mocking them and watching that party crash and burn.


The GOP today is kinda like a football team who got beat, and the opposing coach ran up the score, like the great college coach Steve Spurrier did at Florida. They would bitch and whine about him running up the score, when in reality, they should've just stopped his teams.

The GOP bitches about what the left is doing. When in fact, they should've just not gotten so radical as to scare off half the country. The GOP is where it is because of themselves. Not because of Democrats or "takers".

 

[PredFan]

I've was reading about yet another "takers" comment some idiot right winger made. And I thought about that jackass Romney and his 47% comment that so many right wingers agreed with. And I came to a conclusion.

There is no such thing as "Makers vs Takers". Just positive contributors vs negative contributors. You are either adding something positive to society, or, adding something negative. There really isn't much in between. For example:

Under the Republican "maker vs taker" argument, a Navy SEAL would be a taker. He makes a modest salary, probably under 40K. He lives off a government paycheck. He creates ZERO jobs. Thats right. A SEAL would be a taker. So would a teacher. She doesnt create one single job, and also lives off government checks. But they contribute a lot of positive to our society. They are Contributors.

Under the Republican "maker vs taker" argument, a strip club owner is a "maker". He opens a business. Creates dozens of jobs. He doesnt make his money off govt checks. But, he is a negative contributor to society. Filth, drugs, violence, morals. But in the right wing's definition of worth, he is worth more than a SEAL or teacher.

A trust fund baby who grows up pampered in life, then gets a job as, say, well, trading stocks and living off that is a "maker" to Republicans. He doesnt really create jobs, he indirectly does by buying stocks maybe. But he earns incredible wealth by, well, being born wealthy and owning stock. And he pays high taxes and doesnt get govt checks. But does he make a positive contribution to society? Maybe. Depends what he does with his free time.

You may have uber wealthy "makers" who poach smaller companies, and end up slashing more jobs than they actually create. A net negative due to their harm to so many people's lives out of greed.

You may have someone like, say, University of Alabama football coach Nick Saban. A millionaire coach, who has lived almost his entire life off government checks at public universities (Mich. State, LSU, Alabama), and he creates 0 jobs. BUT...look at how many young mens lives he has touched, by instilling discipline, work ethic, a structured environment, a drive to succeed. Those lessons are worth more than money can define. A net positive.



So, Im personally redefining the "makers vs takers" nonsense. Its Contributor vs Non-Contributor. Someone is either adding something good to America, or they are not. Thats what really matters.........not just the number that is on your tax filing.

I stopped reading at the term "Negative Contributer". It doesn't get dumber than that.

No you didnt. You read it all, you just didnt have a good argument to come back with.

But yes, everyone contributes something to society. Those contributions are either positive or negative. Its quite an easy concept.

You say it's not "Taking" it's "negative contributing", that's as stupid as "undocumented alien" and no I didn't read it any further than that. You can't counter an idiotic post with a good argument.

 

[bucs90]

What was that pretty name Nance Pelosi called people who didn't want to buy insurance from ObamaCare and all the left agreed and started calling them that also?

I think it was, FREELOADERS... just because they didn't want to be FORCED to buy something

so bucky, you can give it a REST..

I think she was referring to people who dont have insurance, then show up to the ER for dumb shit like a common cold, knowing they'll get treatment, then leave with no intention on paying their bill. Then, the doctors and ER's raise their prices through the roof, causing ALL of our premiums to go up, becuase they recover that loss through people like you and I who DO have insurance.

So yeah, she was right about that. Many people freeload off the ER. And you and I pay for it. Im tired of the free ride, aren't you? Lets FORCE the freeloaders to own up to their own care, and get their own damn insurance.

 

[bucs90]

I stopped reading at the term "Negative Contributer". It doesn't get dumber than that.

No you didnt. You read it all, you just didnt have a good argument to come back with.

But yes, everyone contributes something to society. Those contributions are either positive or negative. Its quite an easy concept.

You say it's not "Taking" it's "negative contributing", that's as stupid as "undocumented alien" and no I didn't read it any further than that. You can't counter an idiotic post with a good argument.

Ah, but by not reading it, you miss the whole point. The two aren't the same with different definitions, they are two different nouns all together.

Some contribute negatively to society, but aren't "takers". Some are "takers" (by the right's definition of not paying federal income tax), but, contribute a lot of positive to society.

You missed the whole point by not reading it. Typical right wing behavior. Put up a wall, refuse to debate and discuss. If it wont fit on a bumper sticker, its too complex to discuss right?

 

[PredFan]

No you didnt. You read it all, you just didnt have a good argument to come back with.

But yes, everyone contributes something to society. Those contributions are either positive or negative. Its quite an easy concept.

You say it's not "Taking" it's "negative contributing", that's as stupid as "undocumented alien" and no I didn't read it any further than that. You can't counter an idiotic post with a good argument.

Ah, but by not reading it, you miss the whole point. The two aren't the same with different definitions, they are two different nouns all together.

Some contribute negatively to society, but aren't "takers". Some are "takers" (by the right's definition of not paying federal income tax), but, contribute a lot of positive to society.

You missed the whole point by not reading it. Typical right wing behavior. Put up a wall, refuse to debate and discuss. If it wont fit on a bumper sticker, its too complex to discuss right?

Well, now you've given me a synopsis and proven that I was correct. It's complete non-sense.

 

[Katzndogz]

What was that pretty name Nance Pelosi called people who didn't want to buy insurance from ObamaCare and all the left agreed and started calling them that also?

I think it was, FREELOADERS... just because they didn't want to be FORCED to buy something

so bucky, you can give it a REST..

I think she was referring to people who dont have insurance, then show up to the ER for dumb shit like a common cold, knowing they'll get treatment, then leave with no intention on paying their bill. Then, the doctors and ER's raise their prices through the roof, causing ALL of our premiums to go up, becuase they recover that loss through people like you and I who DO have insurance.

So yeah, she was right about that. Many people freeload off the ER. And you and I pay for it. Im tired of the free ride, aren't you? Lets FORCE the freeloaders to own up to their own care, and get their own damn insurance.

That would work IF someone without insurance were simply turned away from the emergency room. Just send them home. But we don't do that. Someone without insurance will still be treated at the emergency rooms just as they always have.

 

[Stephanie]

What was that pretty name Nance Pelosi called people who didn't want to buy insurance from ObamaCare and all the left agreed and started calling them that also?

I think it was, FREELOADERS... just because they didn't want to be FORCED to buy something

so bucky, you can give it a REST..

I think she was referring to people who dont have insurance, then show up to the ER for dumb shit like a common cold, knowing they'll get treatment, then leave with no intention on paying their bill. Then, the doctors and ER's raise their prices through the roof, causing ALL of our premiums to go up, becuase they recover that loss through people like you and I who DO have insurance.

So yeah, she was right about that. Many people freeload off the ER. And you and I pay for it. Im tired of the free ride, aren't you? Lets FORCE the freeloaders to own up to their own care, and get their own damn insurance.

nope, she wasn't... but if that help you to justify it, have at it

 

[Harry Dresden]

But the right wing has labeled a LOT of people who also do a service as "takers", simply because they work for a government rather than create jobs. You cant just redefine the term now. They have called "takers" anyone who doesnt pay federal income tax, and thus, making the "makers vs takers" worth defined as simply how much money you earn.

I agree.... a person who purposely refuses to work and only collect government welfare checks for a living is indeed a parasite to society.

omg, but the right wing this, the right wing that...and then you agree

Thats right. I've always agreed with that. When I told the GOP to fuck off, everyone assumed I became (or always was) a raging liberal. Not so. The GOP just got to whacky and radical for me, and I now enjoy mocking them and watching that party crash and burn.


The GOP today is kinda like a football team who got beat, and the opposing coach ran up the score, like the great college coach Steve Spurrier did at Florida. They would bitch and whine about him running up the score, when in reality, they should've just stopped his teams.

The GOP bitches about what the left is doing. When in fact, they should've just not gotten so radical as to scare off half the country. The GOP is where it is because of themselves. Not because of Democrats or "takers".

yea....and anybody now who doesn't agree with you is now a "righty"....which is what die hards do on both sides.....so either....
1....you were never a Republican.....always were a Democrat.....
2....you have gone from being a Staunch Rep. to a staunch Dem.....which i doubt happens to often.....
3....your just full of shit.....
like i said earlier Buc.......your bullshit is as about as convincing as Dean and Dudlys is....

 

[Ava]

Bullshit. "Taking" requires the use of force. Day traders don't force anyone to sell them stocks or buy stocks from them. Taking by one private citizen from another is against the law. We call it theft, robbery or fraud. Only the government can take, so the only takers are people who use the government to do their bidding.

"Only government can take?" The Newtown shooter took lives. Bonnie and Clyde took money from banks. The examples are endless, and none of them worked for the government.

The later two examples broke the law. "Only government can take legally" is what I should have said.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the most paternal and dangerous mayor in America would agree with your statement about government.

“There are powers that only governments can exercise. Results only governments can achieve ... government at all levels must make healthy solutions the default social option. That is the government’s highest duty.” --Michael Bloomberg

No, but it IS one of the easiest ones for you to gain national attention.

With so many problems facing New York, the dear almost lifelong, "Liberal-at-heart" Mayor Michael Bloomberg really does believe that government’s highest calling is not staying out of people’s way but restricting their liberties to supposedly keep them safe.

Go away....nanny daddy. Take your billions you made in business and go. We know you are a short man needing to feel taller, but concentrating on policies that restrict Americans to consume what they want, is not only counter-productive, it is not government's job!


But we know you don't care about that, either, and as long as you have no leader-in-chief in the WH you and other Liberals will continue to push your not-so-note worthy agendas, that strike at the very heart of the of the freedoms of hard-working Americans and the free market system, that has fed most of our country's families for over two hundred years.

 

[bucs90]

omg, but the right wing this, the right wing that...and then you agree

Thats right. I've always agreed with that. When I told the GOP to fuck off, everyone assumed I became (or always was) a raging liberal. Not so. The GOP just got to whacky and radical for me, and I now enjoy mocking them and watching that party crash and burn.


The GOP today is kinda like a football team who got beat, and the opposing coach ran up the score, like the great college coach Steve Spurrier did at Florida. They would bitch and whine about him running up the score, when in reality, they should've just stopped his teams.

The GOP bitches about what the left is doing. When in fact, they should've just not gotten so radical as to scare off half the country. The GOP is where it is because of themselves. Not because of Democrats or "takers".

yea....and anybody now who doesn't agree with you is now a "righty"....which is what die hards do on both sides.....so either....
1....you were never a Republican.....always were a Democrat.....
2....you have gone from being a Staunch Rep. to a staunch Dem.....which i doubt happens to often.....
3....your just full of shit.....
like i said earlier Buc.......your bullshit is as about as convincing as Dean and Dudlys is....

Why shouldnt I? The radical right wing movement and its members are disgusting to me. Not the people, like me, who still tend to hold a lot of right of center views but also told the GOP to fuck off. But the people who still worship Glenn Beck, the GOP, and the rest of the bullshit that the Republicans have fed people for the last 20 years.

So yeah, if a person is still ignorant enough to remain a staunch Republican supporter, then I'm gonna talk shit to them.

 

[Stephanie]

Thats right. I've always agreed with that. When I told the GOP to fuck off, everyone assumed I became (or always was) a raging liberal. Not so. The GOP just got to whacky and radical for me, and I now enjoy mocking them and watching that party crash and burn.


The GOP today is kinda like a football team who got beat, and the opposing coach ran up the score, like the great college coach Steve Spurrier did at Florida. They would bitch and whine about him running up the score, when in reality, they should've just stopped his teams.

The GOP bitches about what the left is doing. When in fact, they should've just not gotten so radical as to scare off half the country. The GOP is where it is because of themselves. Not because of Democrats or "takers".

yea....and anybody now who doesn't agree with you is now a "righty"....which is what die hards do on both sides.....so either....
1....you were never a Republican.....always were a Democrat.....
2....you have gone from being a Staunch Rep. to a staunch Dem.....which i doubt happens to often.....
3....your just full of shit.....
like i said earlier Buc.......your bullshit is as about as convincing as Dean and Dudlys is....

Why shouldnt I? The radical right wing movement and its members are disgusting to me. Not the people, like me, who still tend to hold a lot of right of center views but also told the GOP to fuck off. But the people who still worship Glenn Beck, the GOP, and the rest of the bullshit that the Republicans have fed people for the last 20 years.

So yeah, if a person is still ignorant enough to remain a staunch Republican supporter, then I'm gonna talk shit to them.

everybody is a radical to you if they are a Republican..stop blowing smoke our asses, nobody cares about the shit you talk about others