Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nor can you deny that you wish to take from the individual
Nor have I. Taking from one individual won't do it though. You have to take from the class and redistribute it. That's what made the great american middle class. Not doing it is what is eroding the great american middle class.
America was a superpower under such a system as I advocate.
America became a super power under the New Deal which was in large measure, a redistribution of wealth. America is declining before your eyes under the system that you advocate.
Reality, but you want none of it.
Do you even know the slightest thing of my philosophy?
Only what you put forth for public consumption. You're duped by faux moralism and inane rhetoric. The only cure i can see for you is in pain.
You are kidding, aren't you?
The Great Society concept was not from the New Deal. That cash cow re-distribution program was initiated by Lyndon Johnson and Tip O'Neill.
And it has been a colossal failure.
Wealth that is re-distributed is never appreciated. Take a look at all of the social programs and all have failed as after trillions of government cash these folks ARE WORSE off now than when they fended for themselves.
Redistribution sets a bad example for citizens. It makes them believe they ARE ENTITLED to other's production and the rewards of such.
Wealth is never to be redistributed. It is to be earned.
Nor can you deny that you wish to take from the individual
Nor have I. Taking from one individual won't do it though. You have to take from the class and redistribute it. That's what made the great american middle class. Not doing it is what is eroding the great american middle class.
America was a superpower under such a system as I advocate.
America became a super power under the New Deal which was in large measure, a redistribution of wealth. America is declining before your eyes under the system that you advocate.
Reality, but you want none of it.
Do you even know the slightest thing of my philosophy?
Only what you put forth for public consumption. You're duped by faux moralism and inane rhetoric. The only cure i can see for you is in pain.
You are kidding, aren't you?
The Great Society concept was not from the New Deal. That cash cow re-distribution program was initiated by Lyndon Johnson and Tip O'Neill.
And it has been a colossal failure.
Wealth that is re-distributed is never appreciated. Take a look at all of the social programs and all have failed as after trillions of government cash these folks ARE WORSE off now than when they fended for themselves.
Redistribution sets a bad example for citizens. It makes them believe they ARE ENTITLED to other's production and the rewards of such.
Wealth is never to be redistributed. It is to be earned.
How can you make such asinine statements? Millions of elderly Americans have been able to retire and live out their lives longer because of access to health care and in dignity without dependency .
Honestly, you right wingers need to go to Church. You might be able to prevent a very warm eternity.
The single most common attribute seems to be large sums of moneyWonder what the common factor is in the highest wealth group. Anybody wanna bet it's not education. LOL
I bet you squezzed your pea brain for 5 minutes to get that gem out.
There is no reasoning with the unreasonable.Unequal distribution as it exists is only bad if you think oligarchy, oppressive caste systems, and starving children are bad things.
Guess I'm not surprised you have no problems with any of it.
OK, I thought MikeK had the dumbest post of the day on another thread. But you truly take the cake here.
So unequal distribution of wealth and income only occurs because one class oppresses the other and causes children to starve? I guess pointing out that people have different abilities would be futile. Yes, of course it would.
Your worldview cannot imagine a fat man standing next to a thin man without thinking that the fat man got that way by taking something from the other person.
Unequal distribution as it exists is only bad if you think oligarchy, oppressive caste systems, and starving children are bad things.
Guess I'm not surprised you have no problems with any of it.
OK, I thought MikeK had the dumbest post of the day on another thread. But you truly take the cake here.
So unequal distribution of wealth and income only occurs because one class oppresses the other and causes children to starve? I guess pointing out that people have different abilities would be futile. Yes, of course it would.
Your worldview cannot imagine a fat man standing next to a thin man without thinking that the fat man got that way by taking something from the other person.
Fail. What my worldview cannot do is say THIS:
is okay.
Nor can you deny that you wish to take from the individual
Nor have I. Taking from one individual won't do it though. You have to take from the class and redistribute it. That's what made the great american middle class. Not doing it is what is eroding the great american middle class.
America was a superpower under such a system as I advocate.
America became a super power under the New Deal which was in large measure, a redistribution of wealth. America is declining before your eyes under the system that you advocate.
Reality, but you want none of it.
Do you even know the slightest thing of my philosophy?
Only what you put forth for public consumption. You're duped by faux moralism and inane rhetoric. The only cure i can see for you is in pain.
You are kidding, aren't you?
The Great Society concept was not from the New Deal. That cash cow re-distribution program was initiated by Lyndon Johnson and Tip O'Neill.
And it has been a colossal failure.
Wealth that is re-distributed is never appreciated. Take a look at all of the social programs and all have failed as after trillions of government cash these folks ARE WORSE off now than when they fended for themselves.
Redistribution sets a bad example for citizens. It makes them believe they ARE ENTITLED to other's production and the rewards of such.
Wealth is never to be redistributed. It is to be earned.
The recipients of redistribution are never satisfied, as you can tell by reading what their proxies always post here.
You are kidding, aren't you?
The Great Society concept was not from the New Deal. That cash cow re-distribution program was initiated by Lyndon Johnson and Tip O'Neill.
And it has been a colossal failure.
Wealth that is re-distributed is never appreciated. Take a look at all of the social programs and all have failed as after trillions of government cash these folks ARE WORSE off now than when they fended for themselves.
Redistribution sets a bad example for citizens. It makes them believe they ARE ENTITLED to other's production and the rewards of such.
Wealth is never to be redistributed. It is to be earned.
How can you make such asinine statements? Millions of elderly Americans have been able to retire and live out their lives longer because of access to health care and in dignity without dependency .
Honestly, you right wingers need to go to Church. You might be able to prevent a very warm eternity.
So what? Those programs are insolvent. The country is $13T in debt. Is that your definition of "without dependency?"
How can you make such asinine statements? Millions of elderly Americans have been able to retire and live out their lives longer because of access to health care and in dignity without dependency .
Honestly, you right wingers need to go to Church. You might be able to prevent a very warm eternity.
So what? Those programs are insolvent. The country is $13T in debt. Is that your definition of "without dependency?"
According to the CBO, entitlements (which include Medicare)make up only 10% of the deficit.
Try again.
In other words, confiscation of wealth government deems excessive to do with as government dictates.
And here we have a case study in wingnuttery. Notice how the wingnut does not take issue with anything that was actually said. Notice how he attempts to fit what was said into his spoon fed dogma. Now, one could take his strawman at face value, that I am advocating economy by governemnt dictate or one could actually think a little.
How about some examples of this eeeeevil spending done by "dictate of government. A road. I mean, what could possibly be more evil than a road? I've got it! Clearly sewer systems are more evil than roads. Even more evil still? How about schools. OOOOooo, eeeevil.
But, the wingnut would just retreat in to secondary dogma regarding the relative eeeevilness of national as opposed to local government. Again, one could take the dogma at face value or one could actually think a little.
What monstrous eeeeevil does the federal government do by dictate? Hmmm, they form a military. They make things like rural electrification and the interstate highway system. They provide wildly popular social programs like Social Security and Medicare.
EEEeeeeevil.
So, not only does the wingnuts strawman not address the real world problems with the mal distribution of wealth, the rhetoric isn't even remotely reminiscent of the real world
I guess that's why we call them wingnuts.
Thereisnospoon:Only takers, non-producers and freeloaders think in terms of redistribution.
I'm richer than you spoony. Wanna bet? You're advocating for my pocketbook over yours, idiot.
