The EPA: Dr. Mengele would be proud

[mamooth]

So the final lesson is that Dave has the government tit to suckle, hence he can sit here and post Nazi fantasies all day long.

Aren't we all lucky?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Are you a sock for Joey?

 

[daveman]

So the final lesson is that Dave has the government tit to suckle, hence he can sit here and post Nazi fantasies all day long.

Aren't we all lucky?

Check the timestamps, dumbass.

I have a job. Try it sometime. It's fun and rewarding, and you won't be a drain on society!

 

[JoeB131]

What is it about progressives that they believe people merely breathing is enough to earn money, and a person who dedicates twenty years of his/her life in uniform doesn't deserve the pension the government contracted with him for?

Explain this rationally, Pinko. If you can. I'm betting you can't.

For every year of those 20 years, you got a paycheck, you got subsidized housing, you got free food or subsidized food, you got professional training and subsidized education. In short, when you were doing the work, you were compensated for it, just like every other person who works. Probably far better than most people.

Yet you think something more is deserved because you worked there for 20 years. Frankly, people get let go from places after 20 years without so much as a severence check. I've seen it happen.

And, yes, in a humane society, we don't let children starve because their parents are poor. I know this HORRIFIES you to no end, and you'll scream about communism and stuff.

But here's the thing. That child can't really change his situation. You are more than capable of working.

Just not seeing how you are more deserving than that child is of government largress.

So...you think the government should back out of the terms of the contract it signed with me...because it hurts your feelings.

As I keep saying: Tough shit for you, huh?

No, I'm pointing out that deals are made to be broken when we can't afford them.

You are the one here bitching that the government is broke, and they shouldn't raise the debt ceiling, and they shouldn't raise taxes.

So once you eliminate those options, then something has to be cut.

So let a poor kid starve or make a retiree who is still capable of holding down a job work?

Hmmmm.

Morally, this should be pretty easy. But ask yourself. What would Jesus Cut?

 

[JoeB131]

Well...let's add military pensions to the LONG list of things Joey knows little or nothing about! An honorably-discharged service member will get a pension after serving more than ten years.

Well, it was 20 when I was in... if they changed the rules to get guys to go along with four deployments to Afghanistan, it's news to me.

Ten years for a partial pension, 20 for a full pension.

But my point was, Dave will scream ALL DAY about how them welfare people don't deserve food stamps because we are broke, but dammit, Dave damned well better get his pension check every month.

Yer stupid...not that THAT is news. He signed a contract...he simply wants the other party to live up to said contract. I understand that you are still bitter that you got RIF'd, but please stop blaming others for your idiocy.

Okay, he signed a contract.

But as you say, we are broke.

So it seems to me that if Dave has a job, he really doesn't need a welfare check for work he already did.

 

[JoeB131]

You are completely unable to comprehend the notion of "earning", aren't you?

Most progressives are. It's why they don't think stealing is wrong.

When the Poor Steal it's called "Crime".

When the Rich Steal, it's called "Profits".

I'm still wondering what those AIG Executives who got their government subsidized bonuses did to "earn" them. I don't think you should reward people for defrauding consumers and wrecking the economy.

I don't think so, either.

But you believe profits are theft. Profit doesn't defraud anyone, and neither does it wreck the economy.

Why do you want to punish people who make money from their efforts?

Oh, yes...because you're a greedy, lazy bastard who wants other people's stuff.

Tough shit for you.

The point was, those big companies made a "profit" by arranging mortgages that were garbage, and selling them off to investors who found out they were buying junk bonds.

And not a one of them went to jail.
Few of them lost their jobs, most of them got to keep their ill-gotten gains, and a few of them even got bonuses the tax payers paid for.

but, man, that kid who knocks over a liquor Store, we need totally throw him in prison for life!

 

[daveman]

For every year of those 20 years, you got a paycheck, you got subsidized housing, you got free food or subsidized food, you got professional training and subsidized education. In short, when you were doing the work, you were compensated for it, just like every other person who works. Probably far better than most people.

Yet you think something more is deserved because you worked there for 20 years. Frankly, people get let go from places after 20 years without so much as a severence check. I've seen it happen.

And, yes, in a humane society, we don't let children starve because their parents are poor. I know this HORRIFIES you to no end, and you'll scream about communism and stuff.

But here's the thing. That child can't really change his situation. You are more than capable of working.

Just not seeing how you are more deserving than that child is of government largress.

So...you think the government should back out of the terms of the contract it signed with me...because it hurts your feelings.

As I keep saying: Tough shit for you, huh?

No, I'm pointing out that deals are made to be broken when we can't afford them.

You are the one here bitching that the government is broke, and they shouldn't raise the debt ceiling, and they shouldn't raise taxes.

So once you eliminate those options, then something has to be cut.

So let a poor kid starve or make a retiree who is still capable of holding down a job work?

Hmmmm.

It's funny you think those are the only two things government spends money on.

How about foreign aid to nations who hate us? That's nothing but waste right there.

Morally, this should be pretty easy. But ask yourself. What would Jesus Cut?

You have adequate demonstrated you have no morals, by making excuses for Communist regimes murdering millions of people.

 

[daveman]

Well, it was 20 when I was in... if they changed the rules to get guys to go along with four deployments to Afghanistan, it's news to me.

Ten years for a partial pension, 20 for a full pension.

But my point was, Dave will scream ALL DAY about how them welfare people don't deserve food stamps because we are broke, but dammit, Dave damned well better get his pension check every month.

Yer stupid...not that THAT is news. He signed a contract...he simply wants the other party to live up to said contract. I understand that you are still bitter that you got RIF'd, but please stop blaming others for your idiocy.

Okay, he signed a contract.

But as you say, we are broke.

So it seems to me that if Dave has a job, he really doesn't need a welfare check for work he already did.

Yes, but you're a retard who thinks he should get a check for doing nothing.

 

[daveman]

When the Poor Steal it's called "Crime".

When the Rich Steal, it's called "Profits".

I'm still wondering what those AIG Executives who got their government subsidized bonuses did to "earn" them. I don't think you should reward people for defrauding consumers and wrecking the economy.

I don't think so, either.

But you believe profits are theft. Profit doesn't defraud anyone, and neither does it wreck the economy.

Why do you want to punish people who make money from their efforts?

Oh, yes...because you're a greedy, lazy bastard who wants other people's stuff.

Tough shit for you.

The point was, those big companies made a "profit" by arranging mortgages that were garbage, and selling them off to investors who found out they were buying junk bonds.

And not a one of them went to jail.
Few of them lost their jobs, most of them got to keep their ill-gotten gains, and a few of them even got bonuses the tax payers paid for.

but, man, that kid who knocks over a liquor Store, we need totally throw him in prison for life!

And of course the people who bought houses they couldn't afford (was that at gunpoint?) are in no way responsible.

In retard prog reasoning, that is.

 

[JoeB131]

[
It's funny you think those are the only two things government spends money on.

How about foreign aid to nations who hate us? That's nothing but waste right there.

I agree entirely, but that wasn't the question. Your argument is that we can't raise the debt ceiling because we've maxed out our cards. It would seem that making payments to people who have jobs, who are able bodied, who in some cases make good salaries, would be a good place to start.

[

Morally, this should be pretty easy. But ask yourself. What would Jesus Cut?

You have adequate demonstrated you have no morals, by making excuses for Communist regimes murdering millions of people.

[/quote]

Ohhh, I hit a nerve, did I?

Pointing out why things happen in history isn't a "moral" issue. Stuff happens. Communist regimes do what everyone else who wins a civil war does- make life miserable for the losers.

SO let's try again, and see if you can give a straight answer.

If you have to make a cut, is it more moral to cut payments to able-bodied professionals or poor children who are starving?

What would Jesus Cut?

 

[JoeB131]

I don't think so, either.

But you believe profits are theft. Profit doesn't defraud anyone, and neither does it wreck the economy.

Why do you want to punish people who make money from their efforts?

Oh, yes...because you're a greedy, lazy bastard who wants other people's stuff.

Tough shit for you.

The point was, those big companies made a "profit" by arranging mortgages that were garbage, and selling them off to investors who found out they were buying junk bonds.

And not a one of them went to jail.
Few of them lost their jobs, most of them got to keep their ill-gotten gains, and a few of them even got bonuses the tax payers paid for.

but, man, that kid who knocks over a liquor Store, we need totally throw him in prison for life!

And of course the people who bought houses they couldn't afford (was that at gunpoint?) are in no way responsible.

In retard prog reasoning, that is.

So you think they should all live in cardboard boxes?

Just asking.

I do think that the middle class family that bought a McMansion hoping to flip it in a couple years was part of the problem.

But only because the afforementioned bankers told them that was what they could do and wrote them out loans on that basis.

The problem is, the Real Estate Market collapse didn't just kill the guy who bought the house he didn't need, it killed those of us who lived within our means as well.