Why are Republicans desperate to have a billionaire "elite" to run their lives?

[JoeB131]

I saw a great bumper sticker today. "THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR BABIE'S DADDY" It's a shame Liberals just don't get it.

Was it actually spelled that way?

Because the spelling should be "Baby's daddy".

Sounds like a great case of "home-skule" republicans.


I agree that our welfare system has a lot of flaws, but the bigger flaw is that we've put the profits of big corporations over making sure every American has a job that they can sustain themselves with.

Again, Joe's first rule. When you dismantle the middle class, don't go whining about increased government dependence.

 

[JoeB131]

Companies absolutely should leave what's become a hostile environment and go somewhere more hospitable.

wtf is wrong with you. Were you born stupid or have you "developed" your stupidity?

And after the rethugs have their asses kicked in Nov, hostility towards Rethugs will rise. Will you please move somewhere else "more hospitable"?

why should businesses or people remain in hostile environments?

What do you consider a "hostile" environment?

Making sure you don't dump toxins into the water or air?

Making sure you aren't using child labor or that your workplace is safe for those who work there?

Actually being required to pay a fair wage?

The idea that if we just give in to their bad behavior, they might get a little better is kind of silly.

 

[Sunshine]

I saw a great bumper sticker today. "THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR BABIE'S DADDY" It's a shame Liberals just don't get it.

Was it actually spelled that way?

Because the spelling should be "Baby's daddy".

Sounds like a great case of "home-skule" republicans.


I agree that our welfare system has a lot of flaws, but the bigger flaw is that we've put the profits of big corporations over making sure every American has a job that they can sustain themselves with.

Again, Joe's first rule. When you dismantle the middle class, don't go whining about increased government dependence.

Well, that shows how many you've actually communicated with who refer to themselves in that context. None.

It's 'baby daddy.'

"He's my baby daddy.' 'I'm her baby daddy.'

You know, like Obama. He's Michelle's baby daddy!

 

[Katzndogz]

If you were able to take all the money the rich have, everything, including all assets, it would keep the government running for 11 hours. This is what communist governments have discovered. Without capitalism, once the rich have been divested of their wealth, there is no way to make sure the rich keep doing what they did to become rich. When republicans move somewhere more hospitable, they take their talent, their companies, their jobs with them. China is becoming more capitalistic for this very reason. So is Russia. So is India.

Tax revenue is raised when money is in motion. A nation's wealth is measured by it's Gross Domestic Product, what it makes, what it produces, and what is taxed. Not how much in taxes are raised. Money that is taxed is removed from motion. The more money is moved around the more it is taxed and the more revenue flows into the government. When money is removed from the financial flow as tax it no longer contributes to tax revenue. That's why redistribution programs fail. No one pays income tax on welfare, or WIC, or EBT cards. They might pay small local taxes, like sales taxes but that's not enough to support any of the programs that redistribute wealth.

The utopian goals of all progressive idealists from Plato to Karl Marx is that there be no money at all. No one would be paid for the work they do. They would work for the good of all. Liberals have to be interested in working for free while the government provides their housing, food, child care, transportation, clothing.

 

[Intense]

I really want to know. They defend someone who says he likes to fire people. They want leaders who promise to throw grandma under the bus and slash education. What is the goal? To "undiscover" fire? Cause it sure seems that way.

What are you talking about? Nobody's running my life, but me. Try growing up, cutting those strings, and making the most with the hand you are dealt. You don't need to be throwing Anyone under the bus. Snap out of it Man.

 

[Intense]

I saw a great bumper sticker today. "THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR BABIE'S DADDY" It's a shame Liberals just don't get it.

Was it actually spelled that way?

Because the spelling should be "Baby's daddy".

Sounds like a great case of "home-skule" republicans.


I agree that our welfare system has a lot of flaws, but the bigger flaw is that we've put the profits of big corporations over making sure every American has a job that they can sustain themselves with.

Again, Joe's first rule. When you dismantle the middle class, don't go whining about increased government dependence.

It could imply plural ownership.

 

[JoeB131]

I saw a great bumper sticker today. "THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR BABIE'S DADDY" It's a shame Liberals just don't get it.

Was it actually spelled that way?

Because the spelling should be "Baby's daddy".

Sounds like a great case of "home-skule" republicans.


I agree that our welfare system has a lot of flaws, but the bigger flaw is that we've put the profits of big corporations over making sure every American has a job that they can sustain themselves with.

Again, Joe's first rule. When you dismantle the middle class, don't go whining about increased government dependence.

Well, that shows how many you've actually communicated with who refer to themselves in that context. None.

It's 'baby daddy.'

"He's my baby daddy.' 'I'm her baby daddy.'

You know, like Obama. He's Michelle's baby daddy!

Okay, except that isn't the context of the misspelled bumper sticker. I don't think the government is getting people pregnant out of wedlock. (And if they are, I'm wondering what that job actually pays.)

Of course, most of the people I know still get married before they make babies, so I guess I don't communicate with people who use that kind of language.

I think it's kind of horrible that we have a society where that slang is commonly used because marriage has become passe, but again, I have to ask, whose fault is that?

Who destroyed the notion of the "breadwinner"? Hint- it was the guys who decided to move the breadwinner's job to China after busting up his union.

Now we have couples that don't get married, because theirs no advantage to it, and they are both working jobs that barely pay the rent and have to go to the government to make ends meet.

But a few rich douchebags are able to get their car elevators, that's the important thing, right?

 

[JoeB131]

I saw a great bumper sticker today. "THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR BABIE'S DADDY" It's a shame Liberals just don't get it.

Was it actually spelled that way?

Because the spelling should be "Baby's daddy".

Sounds like a great case of "home-skule" republicans.


I agree that our welfare system has a lot of flaws, but the bigger flaw is that we've put the profits of big corporations over making sure every American has a job that they can sustain themselves with.

Again, Joe's first rule. When you dismantle the middle class, don't go whining about increased government dependence.

It could imply plural ownership.

NOt to be a grammar Nazi here, but then it would be "Babies' Daddy". So it would still be wrong.

 

[Katzndogz]

I really want to know. They defend someone who says he likes to fire people. They want leaders who promise to throw grandma under the bus and slash education. What is the goal? To "undiscover" fire? Cause it sure seems that way.

What are you talking about? Nobody's running my life, but me. Try growing up, cutting those strings, and making the most with the hand you are dealt. You don't need to be throwing Anyone under the bus. Snap out of it Man.

To democrats, someone is going to run their lives, they can't envision a life of liberty where no one runs their lives. To them, the democrats will run their lives in subsistence where they will survive. Republicans will run their lives by jettisoning them unless they produce something.

I never quite understood the terror freedom means to democrats until this election.

 

[Gremlin-USA]

Why are Republicans desperate to have a billionaire "elite" to run their lives?

Billionare?

"Mitt Romney’s net worth is somewhere between $190 and $250 million, according to the candidate’s personal financial disclosure filed today with the Federal Election Commission and obtained by ABC News."

Romney Worth As Much As $250 Million - ABC News

Wealth Envy IMO is a Sickness


.

 

[JoeB131]

Why are Republicans desperate to have a billionaire "elite" to run their lives?

Billionare?

"Mitt Romney’s net worth is somewhere between $190 and $250 million, according to the candidate’s personal financial disclosure filed today with the Federal Election Commission and obtained by ABC News."

Romney Worth As Much As $250 Million - ABC News

Wealth Envy IMO is a Sickness


.

It's not about "wealth envy", it's about realizing the consequences of unbridled greed.

So, let's concede your point, Romney is only about a quarter of the way to being a "billionaire". of course, it's the billionaires who are bankrolling his campaign.

But how did these guys get there? By dismantling the middle class, by busting up good paying union shops and moving them to China. By demanding tax cuts that were made up by tax increases on working folks.

And that's the problem. America is not great becaue we have X number of billionaires or millionaires, it was great because average people used to be able to live a comfortable lifestyle working average jobs. Until someone realized they could get richer by taking those jobs away.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I really want to know. They defend someone who says he likes to fire people. They want leaders who promise to throw grandma under the bus and slash education. What is the goal? To "undiscover" fire? Cause it sure seems that way.

Are you really that daft? The President and the Government are NOT SUPPOSED TO RUN OUR LIVES! Why do you think many support Romney over Obama...its because obama has your viewpoint that the govt is there to care for us and run our lives cradle to grave while Romney believes in creating opportunities for people who WANT TO WORK HARD to get them.

This thread you made shows you don't have a firm understanding of the conservative mindset, if you want to keep talking about conservatives maybe you should understand them better.

 

[Avatar4321]

Why dont you do an exercise, if you were hostile to businesses, what would you do to put them out of business?

 

[Gremlin-USA]

It's not about "wealth envy", it's about realizing the consequences of unbridled greed.

So, let's concede your point, Romney is only about a quarter of the way to being a "billionaire". of course, it's the billionaires who are bankrolling his campaign.

But how did these guys get there? By dismantling the middle class, by busting up good paying union shops and moving them to China. By demanding tax cuts that were made up by tax increases on working folks.

And that's the problem. America is not great becaue we have X number of billionaires or millionaires, it was great because average people used to be able to live a comfortable lifestyle working average jobs. Until someone realized they could get richer by taking those jobs away.

I do not remember such outrage when a Kennedy was President or when one was in Congress of 40 years, oh but they were Democrats....

Are liberals afraid Romney will get rid of some unions, dismantle some Government waste, abolish a few welfare rats from the Taxpayer Tit?

We have tried the President with no real job experience, one that voted "present" most of his Political career... this time, it is time to vote for "change you can believe in"


.

 

[Gremlin-USA]

Are you really that daft? The President and the Government are NOT SUPPOSED TO RUN OUR LIVES! Why do you think many support Romney over Obama...its because obama has your viewpoint that the govt is there to care for us and run our lives cradle to grave while Romney believes in creating opportunities for people who WANT TO WORK HARD to get them.

This thread you made shows you don't have a firm understanding of the conservative mindset, if you want to keep talking about conservatives maybe you should understand them better.

Exactly..... I remember Valerie Jarrett (chair of Obama's transition team) saying "we will be ready to Rule from day one" I am sure we all know where she got that saying from.

Ever notice how puffy Obama gets when he does not get his way, kinda like a spoiled brat tyrant.....

.

 

[JoeB131]

It's not about "wealth envy", it's about realizing the consequences of unbridled greed.

So, let's concede your point, Romney is only about a quarter of the way to being a "billionaire". of course, it's the billionaires who are bankrolling his campaign.

But how did these guys get there? By dismantling the middle class, by busting up good paying union shops and moving them to China. By demanding tax cuts that were made up by tax increases on working folks.

And that's the problem. America is not great becaue we have X number of billionaires or millionaires, it was great because average people used to be able to live a comfortable lifestyle working average jobs. Until someone realized they could get richer by taking those jobs away.

I do not remember such outrage when a Kennedy was President or when one was in Congress of 40 years, oh but they were Democrats....

Are liberals afraid Romney will get rid of some unions, dismantle some Government waste, abolish a few welfare rats from the Taxpayer Tit?

We have tried the President with no real job experience, one that voted "present" most of his Political career... this time, it is time to vote for "change you can believe in"

.

I don't think Romney is going to actually do any of those things, and I'm not sure why you do.

Romney is pure and simple a member of the plutocratic wing. Which means he's going to dismantle as much of the government as it takes to make it easier for the people bankrolling his campaign to suck the last few dollars out of the working class.

I'm just not sure why so many working people are so okay with that.

 

[USMCSergeant]

Manufacturing is going overseas because our government is more interested in protecting corporate profits than American workers. Period.

Put appropriate tariffs and require labelling that tells folks what they are buying, and they won't. (I'd personally like to see "Made in China" labels with a tortured dissident on them being required for all items manufactured in China.)

Anyone who blames regulations for corporations screwing America and Americans are as contemptable as those who blame rape vicitms for dressing slutty. they almost don't deserve to be talked to.

Sorry, a 40% tax rate on someone making 300K is NOT unreasonable. They still have plenty of money. Especially since Social Security and Medicare are capped out at 100K.

Who are you to say they have plenty of money? How are you somehow qualified to say someone makes too much money? They've worked hard and became successful, just for you to think you're somehow intellectually superior and decide to redistribute their wealth. That, in my opinion, makes you no better than any thief. You have no idea how many children they are putting through college education, or how much they owe every year in propery taxes. Yet you'll vote for legislation to approve a 40% tax rate only because they make more money than you. Sickening.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I really want to know. They defend someone who says he likes to fire people. They want leaders who promise to throw grandma under the bus and slash education. What is the goal? To "undiscover" fire? Cause it sure seems that way.

Keeping with your "fire" metaphor, honest to gawd, what I really think is that talking to rw's is like throwing marshmallows at a forest fire.

These are not people who want what is best for our country. They are like their addlepated "leaders" in that they want only to defeat this upstart and uppity niggra. They see the good he has done and hate him for it. They want, SO desperately, to believe what they recognize as crap coming from the R's, that they will blindly do as Norquist/Rove/Koch tells them because its easier than looking out for their own family's best interests.

The r's are buying this election and they could well win. The rest of us will lose but that's okay because they will still find some bass-ackward way to blame Obama.

 

[JoeB131]

Manufacturing is going overseas because our government is more interested in protecting corporate profits than American workers. Period.

Put appropriate tariffs and require labelling that tells folks what they are buying, and they won't. (I'd personally like to see "Made in China" labels with a tortured dissident on them being required for all items manufactured in China.)

Anyone who blames regulations for corporations screwing America and Americans are as contemptable as those who blame rape vicitms for dressing slutty. they almost don't deserve to be talked to.

Sorry, a 40% tax rate on someone making 300K is NOT unreasonable. They still have plenty of money. Especially since Social Security and Medicare are capped out at 100K.

Who are you to say they have plenty of money? How are you somehow qualified to say someone makes too much money? They've worked hard and became successful, just for you to think you're somehow intellectually superior and decide to redistribute their wealth. That, in my opinion, makes you no better than any thief. You have no idea how many children they are putting through college education, or how much they owe every year in propery taxes. Yet you'll vote for legislation to approve a 40% tax rate only because they make more money than you. Sickening.

The problem with the "I deserve these billions because I worked hard" is absolue bullshit.

No, someone else worked hard, you just collected the rewards because an unfair system allows you to.

Nobody is personally doing 12 million worth of work.

And this is a distinctly American thing, BTW. In Europe or Japan, you would never have a CEO making an 8 figure salary.

In Japan or Germany, CEO pay was only 11 or 12 times what an average worker makes. In the US it was 475 times.

Ratio of CEO Pay to Average Worker by Country | Creativeconflictwisdom's Blog

In 1980, the average CEO made 44 times what the average worker made. By 2005, it had grown to 411 times. It shrank breifly to 263 by 2009, but it has been creeping up again since.

CEO Compensation: US and other countries

 

[thereisnospoon]

Most business owners are clueless.

Our only two businessman Presidents. Herbert Hoover and George W. Bush.

Nuff said.

What are you? The janitor at the Secret Service?

Your stats:


My stats:

Total Posts: 5,907

Posts Per Day: 6.81

Find all posts by Sunshine
Find all threads started by Sunshine

I actually have employment and don't post on company time. What a difference!

well, I actually type quicky... but most of my posts are between 6 AM and 7 30 AM or after 6 PM and before 10 PM.

I wish I had a government job. They still have decent benefits and solid management.

Now, um, what does that have to do with my point? My point - two Businessmen were president, and they were both EPIC FAILURES!!!! I'll leave you to figure it out.

Your problem is you are worried about what others are doing.