The Lazy Poor

[PoliticalChic]

Pc is as dumb as a box of rocks but the box of rocks has better morals

One person's rocks is another person's diamonds.

You have the same IQ as the average diamond.

Feel better?

I'm certain you meant to write 'flawless.'

 

[Foxfyre]

When the life of a person, her/his time, is considered as nothing, values are stood on their head.

An autobiography.


As was true of Franz Kafka, so much of your writing becomes clear based on the above.

I didn't see the quoted post by there4eyeM, but will respond to it here.

Do not confuse the value of a person and/or his time as being what that person and/or his time is worth to an employer with a business to run. These are two entirely different things. A person might be Ghandi reincarnated with a Nobel Prize and be a genius with multiple degrees, but if he can't fit a 2 x 4 into place or drive a straight nail with a hammer, he and/or his time is not worth anything to the guy who needs to hire a carpenter.

But when there are ten carpenters applying for the same job, two factors are at work. First, the economy is weak meaning that there is less money available to buy the builder's product and he can't command the best price for it. So he can't pay as high wages as he might need to pay to provide incentive to have good people come to work for him. And because there is an over abundance of labor, he doesn't have to. It is a buyer's market for the employer.

But when the economy is good and we are closer to full employment, it is a seller's market for the qualified carpenter. Now he can command a very good wage for his time and expertise though he cannot command more than the employer can afford and still make a reasonable profit.

The 'lazy' poor as described in the OP are those who don't bother to acquire skills and references to make themselves valuable to an employer but who feel entitled to be paid as though they had. Even when they don't work. They feel just being alive entitles them to what others earn.

 

[buckeye45_73]

are you now claiming your not a christain?

Are you obsessed with me?

The fame I must live with, I guess.....

calling a liar a liar is fact not obession

When you actually have facts or a thought, let us know, TM I have never seen you say anything remotely intelligent...you just agree with Obama.....he says lynch black folks, you'd agree

 

[buckeye45_73]

produce the quote from me you claim exists

'she has promoted ideas that include things like "most people are bad".'


Wanna take that back, you naughty thing?

You clearly said you thought people are not good.


why do you pretend you didnt when the facts are clear?

Alot of people are stupid.....here's a question TM, if people are good, why do we have laws???????? Think about it!

 

[poet]

1. This is Star Parker: "Parker was born to mostly absent parents and raised in a nonreligious home; she says she was raised "by the secular 'I'm okay, you're okay' doctrine that says people should be allowed to make their own rules and shouldn't judge other people's lives."

She lived in Japan for three years and returned to the U.S., moving to East St. Louis, Illinois, at twelve, at which point she says she "just joined right in" with the "anger and tension among blacks" in the area.[4] "I bought into the lie that there was nothing in America for me except institutional racism and glass ceilings that would keep me from getting promoted," she said.[4]

She said that after one arrest for shoplifting, her white high school guidance counselor told her "not to worry about it, because I was a 'victim of racism, lashing out at society.'" [5] After attending church at the behest of her friends, she embraced Christianity and began turning her life around.[4]"
Star Parker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




2. In her book, "Uncle Sam's Plantation," Star Parker makes the point that there are several kinds of poor people. In one particularly poignant passage, she relates her own journey as one of the 'lazy poor.'

"Let me make sure that I understand you correctly," I inquired of the welfare caseworker as I presented her with my pregnancy confirmation note from a doctor. "All I have to do for you to send me $465 a month, $176 worth of food stamps, and 100% free medical and dental assistance is keep this baby. As long as I don't have a bank account, find a job, or get married, I qualify for aid? Where do I sign up?"

3. It was like winning the lottery....I had been looking for a way to finance my laziness. Now, at 23, I had finally found a source of income that did not require work.






4. I would steal money from my mother's purse...steal property and money from neighbors or local merchants....I lusted after the finest designer labels...and blamed racism, my parents, and any other excuse society would allow me to use for my laziness. My attitude of victimization, coupled with my unwillingness to develop the habits necessary to attain financial independence, led me further into poverty.

a. The root cause of this poverty is the perverse, counterproductive incentives arising from the welfare system itself. Charles Murray’s “Losing Ground” documented this effect using social indicators such as work, marriage, legitimacy, crime, and alcohol and drug abuse, and showing how the massive increase in government welfare programs worsened the problem.

b. Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence. From Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.





5. The lazy poor are the one poverty group for which a central government must facilitate welfare services through guilt and manipulation of the rest of the populace. This is because taxpayers generally despise this poverty group because, no matter how expensive the welfare programs are, the lazy poor always want more. They depend on the pity of liberal politicians to redistribute wealth, so that they can get what they want with little effort and no personal responsibility.

6. Compare this group to the economically challenged poor, whose tax payments offset most of the government benefits they might receive: no, the social consequences, and social costs due to the actions of the lazy poor are a financial drain on our entire tax system.

7. These are the "I couldn't care less" poor, the 'refuse to work' poor, and those poor who claim welfare benefits as their 'entitlement.' Some politicians believe they are doing these folks a favor by addicting them to a government-subsidized life. These are people who will be forever impoverished: they have bought the lie that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, and, therefore, they can demand that Uncle Sam fuels, or at least feels, their pain.





8. Dr. Thomas Sowell points out another sort of 'poor,' who aren't really poor. The terms ‘the rich’ and ‘the poor’ are seldom defined. Thus, there are mistakes in understanding the difference between the flow of income during a given year, and what has been accumulated. Similarly, the poor are usually defined in terms of current income, rather than how much they have or have not accumulated. Income and wealth are not the same thing. So, government definitions based on income can be misleading.
For many hand-wringing, bleeding-heat Liberals the following distinctions escape them.
Too nuanced, or requires actual thought.

a. Some who have low income, but are hardly poor are the spouse of a rich or affluent husband or wife.

b. Affluent or wealthy speculators, investors, or business owners having an off year.

c. Students who graduate in the middle of the year, and, therefore, earn half of what they would have.

d. Doctors or other professionals just starting out.

e. Those still living at home with folks who are wealthy or affluent. Or retirees in the reverse situation.
From "Economic Facts and Fallacies," Thomas Sowell



I hope it's not too late for something to be done to change the direction of this nation.

Right wing propaganda from the mouths and pens of Stephin Fetchits and Aunt Susies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. This is Star Parker: "Parker was born to mostly absent parents and raised in a nonreligious home; she says she was raised "by the secular 'I'm okay, you're okay' doctrine that says people should be allowed to make their own rules and shouldn't judge other people's lives."

She lived in Japan for three years and returned to the U.S., moving to East St. Louis, Illinois, at twelve, at which point she says she "just joined right in" with the "anger and tension among blacks" in the area.[4] "I bought into the lie that there was nothing in America for me except institutional racism and glass ceilings that would keep me from getting promoted," she said.[4]

She said that after one arrest for shoplifting, her white high school guidance counselor told her "not to worry about it, because I was a 'victim of racism, lashing out at society.'" [5] After attending church at the behest of her friends, she embraced Christianity and began turning her life around.[4]"
Star Parker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




2. In her book, "Uncle Sam's Plantation," Star Parker makes the point that there are several kinds of poor people. In one particularly poignant passage, she relates her own journey as one of the 'lazy poor.'

"Let me make sure that I understand you correctly," I inquired of the welfare caseworker as I presented her with my pregnancy confirmation note from a doctor. "All I have to do for you to send me $465 a month, $176 worth of food stamps, and 100% free medical and dental assistance is keep this baby. As long as I don't have a bank account, find a job, or get married, I qualify for aid? Where do I sign up?"

3. It was like winning the lottery....I had been looking for a way to finance my laziness. Now, at 23, I had finally found a source of income that did not require work.






4. I would steal money from my mother's purse...steal property and money from neighbors or local merchants....I lusted after the finest designer labels...and blamed racism, my parents, and any other excuse society would allow me to use for my laziness. My attitude of victimization, coupled with my unwillingness to develop the habits necessary to attain financial independence, led me further into poverty.

a. The root cause of this poverty is the perverse, counterproductive incentives arising from the welfare system itself. Charles Murray’s “Losing Ground” documented this effect using social indicators such as work, marriage, legitimacy, crime, and alcohol and drug abuse, and showing how the massive increase in government welfare programs worsened the problem.

b. Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence. From Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.





5. The lazy poor are the one poverty group for which a central government must facilitate welfare services through guilt and manipulation of the rest of the populace. This is because taxpayers generally despise this poverty group because, no matter how expensive the welfare programs are, the lazy poor always want more. They depend on the pity of liberal politicians to redistribute wealth, so that they can get what they want with little effort and no personal responsibility.

6. Compare this group to the economically challenged poor, whose tax payments offset most of the government benefits they might receive: no, the social consequences, and social costs due to the actions of the lazy poor are a financial drain on our entire tax system.

7. These are the "I couldn't care less" poor, the 'refuse to work' poor, and those poor who claim welfare benefits as their 'entitlement.' Some politicians believe they are doing these folks a favor by addicting them to a government-subsidized life. These are people who will be forever impoverished: they have bought the lie that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, and, therefore, they can demand that Uncle Sam fuels, or at least feels, their pain.





8. Dr. Thomas Sowell points out another sort of 'poor,' who aren't really poor. The terms ‘the rich’ and ‘the poor’ are seldom defined. Thus, there are mistakes in understanding the difference between the flow of income during a given year, and what has been accumulated. Similarly, the poor are usually defined in terms of current income, rather than how much they have or have not accumulated. Income and wealth are not the same thing. So, government definitions based on income can be misleading.
For many hand-wringing, bleeding-heat Liberals the following distinctions escape them.
Too nuanced, or requires actual thought.

a. Some who have low income, but are hardly poor are the spouse of a rich or affluent husband or wife.

b. Affluent or wealthy speculators, investors, or business owners having an off year.

c. Students who graduate in the middle of the year, and, therefore, earn half of what they would have.

d. Doctors or other professionals just starting out.

e. Those still living at home with folks who are wealthy or affluent. Or retirees in the reverse situation.
From "Economic Facts and Fallacies," Thomas Sowell



I hope it's not too late for something to be done to change the direction of this nation.

Right wing propaganda from the mouths and pens of Stephin Fetchits and Aunt Susies.

But, heck....you don't seem to be able to find any errors you'd care to confront.....?


Know what that means?
You're a windbag.



http://www.usmessageboard.com/education/291236-black-studies-really.html

 

[Agit8r]

1. This is Star Parker: "Parker was born to mostly absent parents and raised in a nonreligious home; she says she was raised "by the secular 'I'm okay, you're okay' doctrine that says people should be allowed to make their own rules and shouldn't judge other people's lives."

She lived in Japan for three years and returned to the U.S., moving to East St. Louis, Illinois, at twelve, at which point she says she "just joined right in" with the "anger and tension among blacks" in the area.[4] "I bought into the lie that there was nothing in America for me except institutional racism and glass ceilings that would keep me from getting promoted," she said.[4]

She said that after one arrest for shoplifting, her white high school guidance counselor told her "not to worry about it, because I was a 'victim of racism, lashing out at society.'" [5] After attending church at the behest of her friends, she embraced Christianity and began turning her life around.[4]"
Star Parker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




2. In her book, "Uncle Sam's Plantation," Star Parker makes the point that there are several kinds of poor people. In one particularly poignant passage, she relates her own journey as one of the 'lazy poor.'

"Let me make sure that I understand you correctly," I inquired of the welfare caseworker as I presented her with my pregnancy confirmation note from a doctor. "All I have to do for you to send me $465 a month, $176 worth of food stamps, and 100% free medical and dental assistance is keep this baby. As long as I don't have a bank account, find a job, or get married, I qualify for aid? Where do I sign up?"

3. It was like winning the lottery....I had been looking for a way to finance my laziness. Now, at 23, I had finally found a source of income that did not require work.






4. I would steal money from my mother's purse...steal property and money from neighbors or local merchants....I lusted after the finest designer labels...and blamed racism, my parents, and any other excuse society would allow me to use for my laziness. My attitude of victimization, coupled with my unwillingness to develop the habits necessary to attain financial independence, led me further into poverty.

a. The root cause of this poverty is the perverse, counterproductive incentives arising from the welfare system itself. Charles Murray’s “Losing Ground” documented this effect using social indicators such as work, marriage, legitimacy, crime, and alcohol and drug abuse, and showing how the massive increase in government welfare programs worsened the problem.

b. Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence. From Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.





5. The lazy poor are the one poverty group for which a central government must facilitate welfare services through guilt and manipulation of the rest of the populace. This is because taxpayers generally despise this poverty group because, no matter how expensive the welfare programs are, the lazy poor always want more. They depend on the pity of liberal politicians to redistribute wealth, so that they can get what they want with little effort and no personal responsibility.

6. Compare this group to the economically challenged poor, whose tax payments offset most of the government benefits they might receive: no, the social consequences, and social costs due to the actions of the lazy poor are a financial drain on our entire tax system.

7. These are the "I couldn't care less" poor, the 'refuse to work' poor, and those poor who claim welfare benefits as their 'entitlement.' Some politicians believe they are doing these folks a favor by addicting them to a government-subsidized life. These are people who will be forever impoverished: they have bought the lie that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, and, therefore, they can demand that Uncle Sam fuels, or at least feels, their pain.





8. Dr. Thomas Sowell points out another sort of 'poor,' who aren't really poor. The terms ‘the rich’ and ‘the poor’ are seldom defined. Thus, there are mistakes in understanding the difference between the flow of income during a given year, and what has been accumulated. Similarly, the poor are usually defined in terms of current income, rather than how much they have or have not accumulated. Income and wealth are not the same thing. So, government definitions based on income can be misleading.
For many hand-wringing, bleeding-heat Liberals the following distinctions escape them.
Too nuanced, or requires actual thought.

a. Some who have low income, but are hardly poor are the spouse of a rich or affluent husband or wife.

b. Affluent or wealthy speculators, investors, or business owners having an off year.

c. Students who graduate in the middle of the year, and, therefore, earn half of what they would have.

d. Doctors or other professionals just starting out.

e. Those still living at home with folks who are wealthy or affluent. Or retirees in the reverse situation.
From "Economic Facts and Fallacies," Thomas Sowell



I hope it's not too late for something to be done to change the direction of this nation.

Right wing propaganda from the mouths and pens of Stephin Fetchits and Aunt Susies.

But, heck....you don't seem to be able to find any errors you'd care to confront.....?


Know what that means?
You're a windbag.



http://www.usmessageboard.com/education/291236-black-studies-really.html

The most obvious error is that "the direction of America" has changed considerably since 1979 (when the above Star Parker anecdote took place)

 

[PoliticalChic]

Right wing propaganda from the mouths and pens of Stephin Fetchits and Aunt Susies.

But, heck....you don't seem to be able to find any errors you'd care to confront.....?


Know what that means?
You're a windbag.



http://www.usmessageboard.com/education/291236-black-studies-really.html

The most obvious error is that "the direction of America" has changed considerably since 1979 (when the above Star Parker anecdote took place)

Is it your contention that the category of poor herein identified as 'the lazy poor' has ceased to exist subsequent to 1979?

Or, that the Clinton welfare reform reduced same, considerably.
If that is your argument,....it was certainly true....

....until the mistake-in-the-White House obviated the work requirement of said bill.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When the life of a person, her/his time, is considered as nothing, values are stood on their head.

An autobiography.


As was true of Franz Kafka, so much of your writing becomes clear based on the above.

I didn't see the quoted post by there4eyeM, but will respond to it here.

Do not confuse the value of a person and/or his time as being what that person and/or his time is worth to an employer with a business to run. These are two entirely different things. A person might be Ghandi reincarnated with a Nobel Prize and be a genius with multiple degrees, but if he can't fit a 2 x 4 into place or drive a straight nail with a hammer, he and/or his time is not worth anything to the guy who needs to hire a carpenter.

But when there are ten carpenters applying for the same job, two factors are at work. First, the economy is weak meaning that there is less money available to buy the builder's product and he can't command the best price for it. So he can't pay as high wages as he might need to pay to provide incentive to have good people come to work for him. And because there is an over abundance of labor, he doesn't have to. It is a buyer's market for the employer.

But when the economy is good and we are closer to full employment, it is a seller's market for the qualified carpenter. Now he can command a very good wage for his time and expertise though he cannot command more than the employer can afford and still make a reasonable profit.

The 'lazy' poor as described in the OP are those who don't bother to acquire skills and references to make themselves valuable to an employer but who feel entitled to be paid as though they had. Even when they don't work. They feel just being alive entitles them to what others earn.

This post:
"When the life of a person, her/his time, is considered as nothing,...."

I was poking fun at him as though that was his autobiography.


4eyes, it seems, is the subject of several of of the tales of Leopold von Sacher-Masoch.

 

[poet]

1. This is Star Parker: "Parker was born to mostly absent parents and raised in a nonreligious home; she says she was raised "by the secular 'I'm okay, you're okay' doctrine that says people should be allowed to make their own rules and shouldn't judge other people's lives."

She lived in Japan for three years and returned to the U.S., moving to East St. Louis, Illinois, at twelve, at which point she says she "just joined right in" with the "anger and tension among blacks" in the area.[4] "I bought into the lie that there was nothing in America for me except institutional racism and glass ceilings that would keep me from getting promoted," she said.[4]

She said that after one arrest for shoplifting, her white high school guidance counselor told her "not to worry about it, because I was a 'victim of racism, lashing out at society.'" [5] After attending church at the behest of her friends, she embraced Christianity and began turning her life around.[4]"
Star Parker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




2. In her book, "Uncle Sam's Plantation," Star Parker makes the point that there are several kinds of poor people. In one particularly poignant passage, she relates her own journey as one of the 'lazy poor.'

"Let me make sure that I understand you correctly," I inquired of the welfare caseworker as I presented her with my pregnancy confirmation note from a doctor. "All I have to do for you to send me $465 a month, $176 worth of food stamps, and 100% free medical and dental assistance is keep this baby. As long as I don't have a bank account, find a job, or get married, I qualify for aid? Where do I sign up?"

3. It was like winning the lottery....I had been looking for a way to finance my laziness. Now, at 23, I had finally found a source of income that did not require work.






4. I would steal money from my mother's purse...steal property and money from neighbors or local merchants....I lusted after the finest designer labels...and blamed racism, my parents, and any other excuse society would allow me to use for my laziness. My attitude of victimization, coupled with my unwillingness to develop the habits necessary to attain financial independence, led me further into poverty.

a. The root cause of this poverty is the perverse, counterproductive incentives arising from the welfare system itself. Charles Murray’s “Losing Ground” documented this effect using social indicators such as work, marriage, legitimacy, crime, and alcohol and drug abuse, and showing how the massive increase in government welfare programs worsened the problem.

b. Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence. From Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.





5. The lazy poor are the one poverty group for which a central government must facilitate welfare services through guilt and manipulation of the rest of the populace. This is because taxpayers generally despise this poverty group because, no matter how expensive the welfare programs are, the lazy poor always want more. They depend on the pity of liberal politicians to redistribute wealth, so that they can get what they want with little effort and no personal responsibility.

6. Compare this group to the economically challenged poor, whose tax payments offset most of the government benefits they might receive: no, the social consequences, and social costs due to the actions of the lazy poor are a financial drain on our entire tax system.

7. These are the "I couldn't care less" poor, the 'refuse to work' poor, and those poor who claim welfare benefits as their 'entitlement.' Some politicians believe they are doing these folks a favor by addicting them to a government-subsidized life. These are people who will be forever impoverished: they have bought the lie that poor people are poor because rich people are rich, and, therefore, they can demand that Uncle Sam fuels, or at least feels, their pain.





8. Dr. Thomas Sowell points out another sort of 'poor,' who aren't really poor. The terms ‘the rich’ and ‘the poor’ are seldom defined. Thus, there are mistakes in understanding the difference between the flow of income during a given year, and what has been accumulated. Similarly, the poor are usually defined in terms of current income, rather than how much they have or have not accumulated. Income and wealth are not the same thing. So, government definitions based on income can be misleading.
For many hand-wringing, bleeding-heat Liberals the following distinctions escape them.
Too nuanced, or requires actual thought.

a. Some who have low income, but are hardly poor are the spouse of a rich or affluent husband or wife.

b. Affluent or wealthy speculators, investors, or business owners having an off year.

c. Students who graduate in the middle of the year, and, therefore, earn half of what they would have.

d. Doctors or other professionals just starting out.

e. Those still living at home with folks who are wealthy or affluent. Or retirees in the reverse situation.
From "Economic Facts and Fallacies," Thomas Sowell



I hope it's not too late for something to be done to change the direction of this nation.

Right wing propaganda from the mouths and pens of Stephin Fetchits and Aunt Susies.

But, heck....you don't seem to be able to find any errors you'd care to confront.....?


Know what that means?
You're a windbag.



http://www.usmessageboard.com/education/291236-black-studies-really.html

It's all error. If rightwing propaganda-ists said it...it's all error, and not truth. And I doubt if you're really an American. We know you're not blond or Supergirl, don't we?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Right wing propaganda from the mouths and pens of Stephin Fetchits and Aunt Susies.

But, heck....you don't seem to be able to find any errors you'd care to confront.....?


Know what that means?
You're a windbag.



http://www.usmessageboard.com/education/291236-black-studies-really.html

It's all error. If rightwing propaganda-ists said it...it's all error, and not truth. And I doubt if you're really an American. We know you're not blond or Supergirl, don't we?

1. If you ever has the opportunity of formal schooling, you will have instruction in how to form a critique.
What you have done in this case, is verify my statement that you're just a windbag.


2. Hint: find some specific error in the OP.
Now....if you can't....that suggests that there are none, and, in fact, it is your perspective that is erroneous.

3.BTW....this is a public message board. I carry out all business in public. Ask whatever you wish in a post, not a pm.

a. " We know you're not blond or Supergirl, don't we?"
My profile pic has always been available to all...even windbags.

b. Actually, I have been blonde in the past.
Why, pray tell, is my hair color important to you?

c. Intellectually, in comparison to you....I sure am a supergirl.

 

[JoeB131]

[

No. My attitude is I worked for mine, and I am grateful for the opportunity to do so. And I'm grateful that I prospered sufficiently to give you an opportunity to work for yours.

Your attitude seems to be that you are entitled to mine because I have more than you do and/or because the government says you can have what is mine without working for it.

And that is sort of the concept of this thread isn't it? Those who want what others have without working for it fit somewhere in the category of 'lazy' and such people rarely prosper as much as those who measure self esteem in how much they accomplish, and not in what they can demand from others.

No, the problem is, the people doing the dividing aren't doing it fairly.

It's like this. Let's say we all set out to back a pie.

I provided the flour
You provided the Oven.
PC provided the eggs
Agitator did the Mixing
Poet brought the sugar.

And then Mitt Romney comes along and says all five of us only get a little slice and he gets half the cake because he controls the knife.

This is modern conservatism today. And this is why even people like me, who voted Republican in every election since 1980, are rejecting it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[

No. My attitude is I worked for mine, and I am grateful for the opportunity to do so. And I'm grateful that I prospered sufficiently to give you an opportunity to work for yours.

Your attitude seems to be that you are entitled to mine because I have more than you do and/or because the government says you can have what is mine without working for it.

And that is sort of the concept of this thread isn't it? Those who want what others have without working for it fit somewhere in the category of 'lazy' and such people rarely prosper as much as those who measure self esteem in how much they accomplish, and not in what they can demand from others.

No, the problem is, the people doing the dividing aren't doing it fairly.

It's like this. Let's say we all set out to back a pie.

I provided the flour
You provided the Oven.
PC provided the eggs
Agitator did the Mixing
Poet brought the sugar.

And then Mitt Romney comes along and says all five of us only get a little slice and he gets half the cake because he controls the knife.

This is modern conservatism today. And this is why even people like me, who voted Republican in every election since 1980, are rejecting it.

And this is why you are appropriately named Erroneous Joe.

"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab.

Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. "
Guess Who Really Pays the Taxes ? The American Magazine


Somehow, your posts

a. show the resentment of one not satisfied with the nest he has built for himself

and

b. fabrication about those who you resent.

 

[Darkwind]

Pc is as dumb as a box of rocks but the box of rocks has better morals

if pc is dumb as a box of rocks why does she own you in every debate I read so far?

She has actually owned every liberal on this forum......So much so I'm thinking she has a slave addiction...

hehe.


J/K PC......

 

[Againsheila]

[

No. My attitude is I worked for mine, and I am grateful for the opportunity to do so. And I'm grateful that I prospered sufficiently to give you an opportunity to work for yours.

Your attitude seems to be that you are entitled to mine because I have more than you do and/or because the government says you can have what is mine without working for it.

And that is sort of the concept of this thread isn't it? Those who want what others have without working for it fit somewhere in the category of 'lazy' and such people rarely prosper as much as those who measure self esteem in how much they accomplish, and not in what they can demand from others.

No, the problem is, the people doing the dividing aren't doing it fairly.

It's like this. Let's say we all set out to back a pie.

I provided the flour
You provided the Oven.
PC provided the eggs
Agitator did the Mixing
Poet brought the sugar.

And then Mitt Romney comes along and says all five of us only get a little slice and he gets half the cake because he controls the knife.

This is modern conservatism today. And this is why even people like me, who voted Republican in every election since 1980, are rejecting it.

And this is why you are appropriately named Erroneous Joe.

"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab.

Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. "
Guess Who Really Pays the Taxes ? The American Magazine


Somehow, your posts

a. show the resentment of one not satisfied with the nest he has built for himself

and

b. fabrication about those who you resent.

Since the top 10% owns more than 90% of the wealth, they should be paying 90% of the taxes. Instead, you'd rather tax people who have nothing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No, the problem is, the people doing the dividing aren't doing it fairly.

It's like this. Let's say we all set out to back a pie.

I provided the flour
You provided the Oven.
PC provided the eggs
Agitator did the Mixing
Poet brought the sugar.

And then Mitt Romney comes along and says all five of us only get a little slice and he gets half the cake because he controls the knife.

This is modern conservatism today. And this is why even people like me, who voted Republican in every election since 1980, are rejecting it.

And this is why you are appropriately named Erroneous Joe.

"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab.

Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. "
Guess Who Really Pays the Taxes ? The American Magazine


Somehow, your posts

a. show the resentment of one not satisfied with the nest he has built for himself

and

b. fabrication about those who you resent.

Since the top 10% owns more than 90% of the wealth, they should be paying 90% of the taxes. Instead, you'd rather tax people who have nothing.

1. There is no federal policy for taxing what is already owned.

2. ....therefore, taxes become the main bar to becoming wealthy.

3. Rather than bloviating, perhaps you'd show where the following is true: "Instead, you'd rather tax people...."

4. If you'd ask, I'd be more than willing to share my beliefs, so that you don't have to imagine them.

5. This might be something to think about:
Joseph gathered very much grain: It seems it was customary for Pharaoh to take 10% of the grain in Egypt as a tax. Essentially, Joseph doubled the taxes over the next seven years (Genesis 41:34 mentions one-fifth, that is, 20%).

 

[Wyatt earp]

No, the problem is, the people doing the dividing aren't doing it fairly.

It's like this. Let's say we all set out to back a pie.

I provided the flour
You provided the Oven.
PC provided the eggs
Agitator did the Mixing
Poet brought the sugar.

And then Mitt Romney comes along and says all five of us only get a little slice and he gets half the cake because he controls the knife.

This is modern conservatism today. And this is why even people like me, who voted Republican in every election since 1980, are rejecting it.

And this is why you are appropriately named Erroneous Joe.

"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab.

Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. "
Guess Who Really Pays the Taxes ? The American Magazine


Somehow, your posts

a. show the resentment of one not satisfied with the nest he has built for himself

and

b. fabrication about those who you resent.

Since the top 10% owns more than 90% of the wealth, they should be paying 90% of the taxes. Instead, you'd rather tax people who have nothing.

and why would they do that? they would just close up there companys and retire to bora bora or someplace and tell you to fuck off.... see how it works?

 

[Againsheila]

And this is why you are appropriately named Erroneous Joe.

"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab.

Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. "
Guess Who Really Pays the Taxes ? The American Magazine


Somehow, your posts

a. show the resentment of one not satisfied with the nest he has built for himself

and

b. fabrication about those who you resent.

Since the top 10% owns more than 90% of the wealth, they should be paying 90% of the taxes. Instead, you'd rather tax people who have nothing.

and why would they do that? they would just close up there companys and retire to bora bora or someplace and tell you to fuck off.... see how it works?

And the big corporation conglomerates would be gone and the mom and pop operations would make a comeback. It's a win win.

 

[Darkwind]

Since the top 10% owns more than 90% of the wealth, they should be paying 90% of the taxes. Instead, you'd rather tax people who have nothing.

and why would they do that? they would just close up there companys and retire to bora bora or someplace and tell you to fuck off.... see how it works?

And the big corporation conglomerates would be gone and the mom and pop operations would make a comeback. It's a win win.

You missed a little something there.

R&D, production, supply chain management, customer relation management, but most importantly, safe products across a wide spectrum

That is just the first 5 items on the list....there are 15 others.

Mom and Pop cannot provide. In addition, I am almost dead certain that the American people are going to flock to you in droves at the lowering of their standard of life.

yeah...go you.

 

[Againsheila]

and why would they do that? they would just close up there companys and retire to bora bora or someplace and tell you to fuck off.... see how it works?

And the big corporation conglomerates would be gone and the mom and pop operations would make a comeback. It's a win win.

You missed a little something there.

R&D, production, supply chain management, customer relation management, but most importantly, safe products across a wide spectrum

That is just the first 5 items on the list....there are 15 others.

Mom and Pop cannot provide. In addition, I am almost dead certain that the American people are going to flock to you in droves at the lowering of their standard of life.

yeah...go you.

You think R&D would die? You think customer relations would get worse? They're as bad as they can get and our government currently pays for more than 70% of R&D on new drugs, I don't know about the rest but private charities take care of a good deal as well. Safe products? You mean like our chicken that they just announced has contained traces of arsenic for decades? The food from China that contains poison? I can't imagine anyone could do worse than what we have today. Somehow I think not having McDonald's would be a step up. Anything else, we'll find a way to provide. Americans did it before and the top 10% didn't own most of our wealth. We can do that again.