Why does the right defend the wealthy class

[Sun Devil 92]

The right wing belong in an oven. Its their natural habitat.

And where does the left wing belong ?

 

[SAYIT]

Thom Hartmann: How America Killed Its Middle Class

Not a big fan of Alternet.....but this one makes a statement I think begs a question.

Piketty is right, especially about the importance of high marginal tax rates and inheritance taxes being necessary for the creation of a middle class that includes working-class people. Progressive taxation, when done correctly, pushes wages down to working people and reduces the incentives for the very rich to pillage their companies or rip off their workers. After all, why take another billion when 91 percent of it just going to be paid in taxes?

This is the main reason why, when GM was our largest employer and our working class were also in the middle class, CEOs only took home 30 times what working people did. The top tax rate for all the time America's middle class was created was between 74 and 91 percent. Until, of course, Reagan dropped it to 28 percent and working people moved from the middle class to becoming the working poor.

#############################

So, as we continue to let the rich just go nuts...what is it that isn't there to prevent them.

Why does the far right vote to protect the interest of the rich ?

The answer lies, in part, in the fact that the far left is no better. First, they suck off the rich like others.

Next, they won't make a rational case. They need conservatives to join them. And yet they, like some of the assholes on this board, do nothing but antagonize them.

And the rich just eat it up......

######################################

This thread originally got moved to Europe because I led in with an article about the European middle class.

But the comparison is bright as the day is long.

I bash the left.

I bash the right.

Regardless, this is a huge issue in my mind.

Now, if the left starts squawking about how the rich screw them over...I'd ask how they get away with it. They only get away with it because the government protects them.

The right yells...hands off. But this article flies in the face of that.

Yanno, I'm pretty staunchly anti-socialism yet I don't recall ever having defended "the wealthy class." I do recall rejecting all and any loony leftist braying that boils down to "I want free stuff and we gotta make the rich pay for it" as the childish pap it always is.

I also recall rejecting any attempt to limit anyone's freedom to pursue their dreams and best interest - as long as they comply with our laws - by using the levers of gov't to turn MY COUNTRY into another whiny, sniveling socialist shithole.

All in all your argument is just another baseless Straw Man intended to allow the whiny snivelers here to post their silliness.

Sorry, but you are just another in a long line of people who index right to that incorrect argument.

First, it isn't a strawman. The far right is partly big business (you know..hands off) using government to increase their advantage.

I don't advocate for free stuff....if you had read just a few posts back...you'd see that.

I advocate for government getting out of the way of business and allowing small guys to compete. That way they can legitimately go compete for the dollars the wealthy take in so easily.

I don't advocate for using government to tax the hell out of the wealthy. That would be the far left.

You just moved the goalposts. Your complaint wasn't about the far right but rather "the right."

I specifically debunked the premise of your OP ("Why does the right defend the wealthy class") by explaining that I (and most who reject socialism here) are not defending the wealthy but rather are defending the nature of our economic system ... having the freedom to pursue our dreams and best interests - as long as they comply with our laws - and enjoy the fruit of our endeavors without undo gov't meddling or restriction.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I know many who've tried to compete in some of their markets...and have been shut down or cut off because of unfair advantages.

What about Wal-Mart. Where is their competition ?

Target ? Don't make me laugh.

What "unfair" advantages does Wal-Mart have? Many cities will not allow Wal-Mart to build stores.

And many WILL.
Walmart is dominating Nassau County, a county that already has a 30+% Foreclosure Rate.

How is Wal-Mart responsible for that?

Please get away from this is an "attack" Wal-Mart thread.

The question has been asked....is Wal-Mart making good money ?

If so, why are there no competitors entering the market to get that money ?

Maybe there are ?

They still make a lot of money.....

Not a crime.....

Not a sin....

But doesn't NATURAL Economics teach that should not be the case.

There are competitors, but Wal-Mart does a better job.

Tell me what they do better ?

Do you know ?

I know that they have huge buying power.

I know people who have done business with them and have regretted it.

I know people who refused to do business with them and did fine.

I don't know anyone who has done business with them and enjoyed it. I am not saying they don't exist.

I also know they appear to have a world class distribution net-work.

They don't seem to care where they put their stores (in terms of what is around them).

I don't shop there unless I have to. I feel scuzzy just walking in the place.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Thom Hartmann: How America Killed Its Middle Class

Not a big fan of Alternet.....but this one makes a statement I think begs a question.

Piketty is right, especially about the importance of high marginal tax rates and inheritance taxes being necessary for the creation of a middle class that includes working-class people. Progressive taxation, when done correctly, pushes wages down to working people and reduces the incentives for the very rich to pillage their companies or rip off their workers. After all, why take another billion when 91 percent of it just going to be paid in taxes?

This is the main reason why, when GM was our largest employer and our working class were also in the middle class, CEOs only took home 30 times what working people did. The top tax rate for all the time America's middle class was created was between 74 and 91 percent. Until, of course, Reagan dropped it to 28 percent and working people moved from the middle class to becoming the working poor.

#############################

So, as we continue to let the rich just go nuts...what is it that isn't there to prevent them.

Why does the far right vote to protect the interest of the rich ?

The answer lies, in part, in the fact that the far left is no better. First, they suck off the rich like others.

Next, they won't make a rational case. They need conservatives to join them. And yet they, like some of the assholes on this board, do nothing but antagonize them.

And the rich just eat it up......

######################################

This thread originally got moved to Europe because I led in with an article about the European middle class.

But the comparison is bright as the day is long.

I bash the left.

I bash the right.

Regardless, this is a huge issue in my mind.

Now, if the left starts squawking about how the rich screw them over...I'd ask how they get away with it. They only get away with it because the government protects them.

The right yells...hands off. But this article flies in the face of that.

Yanno, I'm pretty staunchly anti-socialism yet I don't recall ever having defended "the wealthy class." I do recall rejecting all and any loony leftist braying that boils down to "I want free stuff and we gotta make the rich pay for it" as the childish pap it always is.

I also recall rejecting any attempt to limit anyone's freedom to pursue their dreams and best interest - as long as they comply with our laws - by using the levers of gov't to turn MY COUNTRY into another whiny, sniveling socialist shithole.

All in all your argument is just another baseless Straw Man intended to allow the whiny snivelers here to post their silliness.

Sorry, but you are just another in a long line of people who index right to that incorrect argument.

First, it isn't a strawman. The far right is partly big business (you know..hands off) using government to increase their advantage.

I don't advocate for free stuff....if you had read just a few posts back...you'd see that.

I advocate for government getting out of the way of business and allowing small guys to compete. That way they can legitimately go compete for the dollars the wealthy take in so easily.

I don't advocate for using government to tax the hell out of the wealthy. That would be the far left.

I specifically debunked the premise of your OP ("Why does the right defend the wealthy class") by explaining that I (and most who reject socialism here) are not defending the wealthy but rather are defending the nature of our economic system ... having the freedom to pursue our dreams and best interests - as long as they comply with our laws - and enjoy the fruit of our endeavors without undo gov't meddling or restriction.

No you didn't debunk anything. Rejecting socialism is not a "far right" ideal.

I am the one defending our system and I am telling you (from knowledge and experience) that big business fights our system by using the government to protect their positions...that is a barrier to entry.......

Did you agree with Obama bailing out GM ?

How about bailing out Wall Street ?

What about when big companies come to a city....cities use tax breaks to attract these companies....who is making up those taxes ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Thom Hartmann: How America Killed Its Middle Class

Not a big fan of Alternet.....but this one makes a statement I think begs a question.

Piketty is right, especially about the importance of high marginal tax rates and inheritance taxes being necessary for the creation of a middle class that includes working-class people. Progressive taxation, when done correctly, pushes wages down to working people and reduces the incentives for the very rich to pillage their companies or rip off their workers. After all, why take another billion when 91 percent of it just going to be paid in taxes?

This is the main reason why, when GM was our largest employer and our working class were also in the middle class, CEOs only took home 30 times what working people did. The top tax rate for all the time America's middle class was created was between 74 and 91 percent. Until, of course, Reagan dropped it to 28 percent and working people moved from the middle class to becoming the working poor.

#############################

So, as we continue to let the rich just go nuts...what is it that isn't there to prevent them.

Why does the far right vote to protect the interest of the rich ?

The answer lies, in part, in the fact that the far left is no better. First, they suck off the rich like others.

Next, they won't make a rational case. They need conservatives to join them. And yet they, like some of the assholes on this board, do nothing but antagonize them.

And the rich just eat it up......

######################################

This thread originally got moved to Europe because I led in with an article about the European middle class.

But the comparison is bright as the day is long.

I bash the left.

I bash the right.

Regardless, this is a huge issue in my mind.

Now, if the left starts squawking about how the rich screw them over...I'd ask how they get away with it. They only get away with it because the government protects them.

The right yells...hands off. But this article flies in the face of that.

Yanno, I'm pretty staunchly anti-socialism yet I don't recall ever having defended "the wealthy class." I do recall rejecting all and any loony leftist braying that boils down to "I want free stuff and we gotta make the rich pay for it" as the childish pap it always is.

I also recall rejecting any attempt to limit anyone's freedom to pursue their dreams and best interest - as long as they comply with our laws - by using the levers of gov't to turn MY COUNTRY into another whiny, sniveling socialist shithole.

All in all your argument is just another baseless Straw Man intended to allow the whiny snivelers here to post their silliness.

Sorry, but you are just another in a long line of people who index right to that incorrect argument.

First, it isn't a strawman. The far right is partly big business (you know..hands off) using government to increase their advantage.

I don't advocate for free stuff....if you had read just a few posts back...you'd see that.

I advocate for government getting out of the way of business and allowing small guys to compete. That way they can legitimately go compete for the dollars the wealthy take in so easily.

I don't advocate for using government to tax the hell out of the wealthy. That would be the far left.

You just moved the goalposts. Your complaint wasn't about the far right but rather "the right."

I specifically debunked the premise of your OP ("Why does the right defend the wealthy class") by explaining that I (and most who reject socialism here) are not defending the wealthy but rather are defending the nature of our economic system ... having the freedom to pursue our dreams and best interests - as long as they comply with our laws - and enjoy the fruit of our endeavors without undo gov't meddling or restriction.

I have no problem getting clear on definitions which can cause confusion.

I am saying that the right (which supposedly has conservatives in it) defends big busines in the name of "free enterprise" all the while big business is stabbing them and us in the back.

If big business wants to compete fairly....great.

But small business is the way many will find their way to wealth. I can't tell you many I know who can't afford to start a smal business because of the labor laws and regulation that make it near impossible for them.

 

[Andylusion]

Why do ignorant lefties rely on the the knee-jerk myth that the "right" caters to the wealthy with examples like freaking Clinton pardoning his friend, Mark Rich, while he was on the FBI's 10 most wanted and was the most notorious corporate crook at that time in history? Maybe the "right" supports the legitimate rich while the left supports the crooks.

O.K......nobody said the left wasn't corrupt too.

It' the far right that speaks out both sides of it's mouth.

Explain.

I have for pages on end....

Business hides under the skirts of the "far right" to make sure they keep their advantages using government.

Like name a 'government advantage' that the 'far right' promotes?

Because I honestly can't think of one off hand.

Surely you can't refer to tax advantages, because we'd like to lower taxes. If taxes were low or zero, there wouldn't be any 'tax advantages' to be had.

It surely isn't subsidies, because the far right is completely against any subsidies at all.

It surely isn't trade advantages, because we want free trade.

It can't regulatory advantages, because we want to deregulate.

So what specific example of government advantages supported by the far right are you referring to?

And maybe you have said it before, and I missed it. We are on page 21 after all, and I haven't been here for all 20 pages before. Sorry.

I have listed a bunch...some just recently....

Walmar's personal airport.

Research money to the tune of 10's of millions.

Government contracts that go to big businesses that get fat dumb and happy off of them.

If you didn't read the one about the resale of property to the rich for pennies on the dollar...you missed a goody.

I see it all the time.

How can YOU miss it ?

I'm confused. What's wrong with Walmart's personal airport, and how does that harm anyone?

We're against research grants. We've argued against that for ages.

You think government giving GM money for hybrid battery research is a right-wing cause? Isn't it Obama and the left-wing that says we need to fund research?

Who would you suggest government hire to build the crap they want? If you want that bridge built, or revamped, you have to hire a company to do. What are you doing to do? Recruit homeless?

Now I would agree we need to having government build less stuff. But again, who supports "infrastructure spending"? Isn't it the left-wing Obama crowd? Isn't it Pual Krugman and such that push "we need more infrastructure spending!"?

I don't know about the resale property... but generally you would expect the rich to buy it, given they by definition have the money to buy it. You expect beggars to buy it?

 

[bripat9643]

Why do ignorant lefties rely on the the knee-jerk myth that the "right" caters to the wealthy with examples like freaking Clinton pardoning his friend, Mark Rich, while he was on the FBI's 10 most wanted and was the most notorious corporate crook at that time in history? Maybe the "right" supports the legitimate rich while the left supports the crooks.

O.K......nobody said the left wasn't corrupt too.

It' the far right that speaks out both sides of it's mouth.

What you call the "far right" are actually establishment Republicans. RINOs, in other words. Handing out special privileges to favored businesses is not a policy endorsed by the right. It's endorsed by liberal Democrats and RINOs.

Definitions are important.....

Establishment Republicans are just that...they want their cake and eat it too. They play both sides.

A RINO, in my world is the same as a DINO. They tend to be moderates who equivocate on principle....depending on the issue.

I call the "far right" those who yack about being conservative....all the while stabbing us in the back.

I consider myself both liberal and conservative. I certainly don't see myself and far right or far left.

So you admit that the people you call "the far right" are not really conservative. They talk conservative and then vote liberal.

 

[Andylusion]

Thom Hartmann: How America Killed Its Middle Class

Not a big fan of Alternet.....but this one makes a statement I think begs a question.

Piketty is right, especially about the importance of high marginal tax rates and inheritance taxes being necessary for the creation of a middle class that includes working-class people. Progressive taxation, when done correctly, pushes wages down to working people and reduces the incentives for the very rich to pillage their companies or rip off their workers. After all, why take another billion when 91 percent of it just going to be paid in taxes?

This is the main reason why, when GM was our largest employer and our working class were also in the middle class, CEOs only took home 30 times what working people did. The top tax rate for all the time America's middle class was created was between 74 and 91 percent. Until, of course, Reagan dropped it to 28 percent and working people moved from the middle class to becoming the working poor.

#############################

So, as we continue to let the rich just go nuts...what is it that isn't there to prevent them.

Why does the far right vote to protect the interest of the rich ?

The answer lies, in part, in the fact that the far left is no better. First, they suck off the rich like others.

Next, they won't make a rational case. They need conservatives to join them. And yet they, like some of the assholes on this board, do nothing but antagonize them.

And the rich just eat it up......

######################################

This thread originally got moved to Europe because I led in with an article about the European middle class.

But the comparison is bright as the day is long.

I bash the left.

I bash the right.

Regardless, this is a huge issue in my mind.

Now, if the left starts squawking about how the rich screw them over...I'd ask how they get away with it. They only get away with it because the government protects them.

The right yells...hands off. But this article flies in the face of that.

Yanno, I'm pretty staunchly anti-socialism yet I don't recall ever having defended "the wealthy class." I do recall rejecting all and any loony leftist braying that boils down to "I want free stuff and we gotta make the rich pay for it" as the childish pap it always is.

I also recall rejecting any attempt to limit anyone's freedom to pursue their dreams and best interest - as long as they comply with our laws - by using the levers of gov't to turn MY COUNTRY into another whiny, sniveling socialist shithole.

All in all your argument is just another baseless Straw Man intended to allow the whiny snivelers here to post their silliness.

Sorry, but you are just another in a long line of people who index right to that incorrect argument.

First, it isn't a strawman. The far right is partly big business (you know..hands off) using government to increase their advantage.

I don't advocate for free stuff....if you had read just a few posts back...you'd see that.

I advocate for government getting out of the way of business and allowing small guys to compete. That way they can legitimately go compete for the dollars the wealthy take in so easily.

I don't advocate for using government to tax the hell out of the wealthy. That would be the far left.

You just moved the goalposts. Your complaint wasn't about the far right but rather "the right."

I specifically debunked the premise of your OP ("Why does the right defend the wealthy class") by explaining that I (and most who reject socialism here) are not defending the wealthy but rather are defending the nature of our economic system ... having the freedom to pursue our dreams and best interests - as long as they comply with our laws - and enjoy the fruit of our endeavors without undo gov't meddling or restriction.

I have no problem getting clear on definitions which can cause confusion.

I am saying that the right (which supposedly has conservatives in it) defends big busines in the name of "free enterprise" all the while big business is stabbing them and us in the back.

If big business wants to compete fairly....great.

But small business is the way many will find their way to wealth. I can't tell you many I know who can't afford to start a smal business because of the labor laws and regulation that make it near impossible for them.

Business does not generally want to compete fairly. Adam Smith never had good words for business people. And many times business is the biggest supporters of left-wing ideology.

Again, labor laws and regulation is a left-wing belief system, and I know some too. You seem to be claiming "right-wing this and that" and then listing off stuff that is most generally left-wing in orientation.

 

[bripat9643]

What "unfair" advantages does Wal-Mart have? Many cities will not allow Wal-Mart to build stores.

And many WILL.
Walmart is dominating Nassau County, a county that already has a 30+% Foreclosure Rate.

How is Wal-Mart responsible for that?

Please get away from this is an "attack" Wal-Mart thread.

The question has been asked....is Wal-Mart making good money ?

If so, why are there no competitors entering the market to get that money ?

Maybe there are ?

They still make a lot of money.....

Not a crime.....

Not a sin....

But doesn't NATURAL Economics teach that should not be the case.

There are competitors, but Wal-Mart does a better job.

Tell me what they do better ?

Do you know ?

I know that they have huge buying power.

I know people who have done business with them and have regretted it.

I know people who refused to do business with them and did fine.

I don't know anyone who has done business with them and enjoyed it. I am not saying they don't exist.

I also know they appear to have a world class distribution net-work.

They don't seem to care where they put their stores (in terms of what is around them).

I don't shop there unless I have to. I feel scuzzy just walking in the place.

Wal-Mart has the lowest prices exactly for the reason that companies don't like doing business with them. Wal-Mart squeezes it's vendors to get the lowest possible prices from them, which is how they are able to offer the lowest possible prices to their customers.

I Personally don't like shopping there precisely for the reason you mention: it's full of people I don't want to associate with. However, I still go there because I know I can get a low price there.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Why do ignorant lefties rely on the the knee-jerk myth that the "right" caters to the wealthy with examples like freaking Clinton pardoning his friend, Mark Rich, while he was on the FBI's 10 most wanted and was the most notorious corporate crook at that time in history? Maybe the "right" supports the legitimate rich while the left supports the crooks.

O.K......nobody said the left wasn't corrupt too.

It' the far right that speaks out both sides of it's mouth.

What you call the "far right" are actually establishment Republicans. RINOs, in other words. Handing out special privileges to favored businesses is not a policy endorsed by the right. It's endorsed by liberal Democrats and RINOs.

Definitions are important.....

Establishment Republicans are just that...they want their cake and eat it too. They play both sides.

A RINO, in my world is the same as a DINO. They tend to be moderates who equivocate on principle....depending on the issue.

I call the "far right" those who yack about being conservative....all the while stabbing us in the back.

I consider myself both liberal and conservative. I certainly don't see myself and far right or far left.

So you admit that the people you call "the far right" are not really conservative. They talk conservative and then vote liberal.

They don't vote liberal.

I have as much respect for true liberals as I do true conservatives.

They vote their best interests using government something it should not be used for.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Thom Hartmann: How America Killed Its Middle Class

Not a big fan of Alternet.....but this one makes a statement I think begs a question.

Piketty is right, especially about the importance of high marginal tax rates and inheritance taxes being necessary for the creation of a middle class that includes working-class people. Progressive taxation, when done correctly, pushes wages down to working people and reduces the incentives for the very rich to pillage their companies or rip off their workers. After all, why take another billion when 91 percent of it just going to be paid in taxes?

This is the main reason why, when GM was our largest employer and our working class were also in the middle class, CEOs only took home 30 times what working people did. The top tax rate for all the time America's middle class was created was between 74 and 91 percent. Until, of course, Reagan dropped it to 28 percent and working people moved from the middle class to becoming the working poor.

#############################

So, as we continue to let the rich just go nuts...what is it that isn't there to prevent them.

Why does the far right vote to protect the interest of the rich ?

The answer lies, in part, in the fact that the far left is no better. First, they suck off the rich like others.

Next, they won't make a rational case. They need conservatives to join them. And yet they, like some of the assholes on this board, do nothing but antagonize them.

And the rich just eat it up......

######################################

This thread originally got moved to Europe because I led in with an article about the European middle class.

But the comparison is bright as the day is long.

I bash the left.

I bash the right.

Regardless, this is a huge issue in my mind.

Now, if the left starts squawking about how the rich screw them over...I'd ask how they get away with it. They only get away with it because the government protects them.

The right yells...hands off. But this article flies in the face of that.

Yanno, I'm pretty staunchly anti-socialism yet I don't recall ever having defended "the wealthy class." I do recall rejecting all and any loony leftist braying that boils down to "I want free stuff and we gotta make the rich pay for it" as the childish pap it always is.

I also recall rejecting any attempt to limit anyone's freedom to pursue their dreams and best interest - as long as they comply with our laws - by using the levers of gov't to turn MY COUNTRY into another whiny, sniveling socialist shithole.

All in all your argument is just another baseless Straw Man intended to allow the whiny snivelers here to post their silliness.

Sorry, but you are just another in a long line of people who index right to that incorrect argument.

First, it isn't a strawman. The far right is partly big business (you know..hands off) using government to increase their advantage.

I don't advocate for free stuff....if you had read just a few posts back...you'd see that.

I advocate for government getting out of the way of business and allowing small guys to compete. That way they can legitimately go compete for the dollars the wealthy take in so easily.

I don't advocate for using government to tax the hell out of the wealthy. That would be the far left.

You just moved the goalposts. Your complaint wasn't about the far right but rather "the right."

I specifically debunked the premise of your OP ("Why does the right defend the wealthy class") by explaining that I (and most who reject socialism here) are not defending the wealthy but rather are defending the nature of our economic system ... having the freedom to pursue our dreams and best interests - as long as they comply with our laws - and enjoy the fruit of our endeavors without undo gov't meddling or restriction.

I have no problem getting clear on definitions which can cause confusion.

I am saying that the right (which supposedly has conservatives in it) defends big busines in the name of "free enterprise" all the while big business is stabbing them and us in the back.

If big business wants to compete fairly....great.

But small business is the way many will find their way to wealth. I can't tell you many I know who can't afford to start a smal business because of the labor laws and regulation that make it near impossible for them.

Business does not generally want to compete fairly. Adam Smith never had good words for business people. And many times business is the biggest supporters of left-wing ideology.

Again, labor laws and regulation is a left-wing belief system, and I know some too. You seem to be claiming "right-wing this and that" and then listing off stuff that is most generally left-wing in orientation.

Good with that.

Now, why does the right (even a lot of conservatives) defend big business.....?

Do they really think they are defending captialism ?

 

[bripat9643]

Why do ignorant lefties rely on the the knee-jerk myth that the "right" caters to the wealthy with examples like freaking Clinton pardoning his friend, Mark Rich, while he was on the FBI's 10 most wanted and was the most notorious corporate crook at that time in history? Maybe the "right" supports the legitimate rich while the left supports the crooks.

O.K......nobody said the left wasn't corrupt too.

It' the far right that speaks out both sides of it's mouth.

What you call the "far right" are actually establishment Republicans. RINOs, in other words. Handing out special privileges to favored businesses is not a policy endorsed by the right. It's endorsed by liberal Democrats and RINOs.

Definitions are important.....

Establishment Republicans are just that...they want their cake and eat it too. They play both sides.

A RINO, in my world is the same as a DINO. They tend to be moderates who equivocate on principle....depending on the issue.

I call the "far right" those who yack about being conservative....all the while stabbing us in the back.

I consider myself both liberal and conservative. I certainly don't see myself and far right or far left.

So you admit that the people you call "the far right" are not really conservative. They talk conservative and then vote liberal.

They don't vote liberal.

I have as much respect for true liberals as I do true conservatives.

They vote their best interests using government something it should not be used for.

You just said they "equivocate on principle" that they "stab us in the back." In other words, they vote against the conservative position. That means they vote liberal.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

O.K......nobody said the left wasn't corrupt too.

It' the far right that speaks out both sides of it's mouth.

What you call the "far right" are actually establishment Republicans. RINOs, in other words. Handing out special privileges to favored businesses is not a policy endorsed by the right. It's endorsed by liberal Democrats and RINOs.

Definitions are important.....

Establishment Republicans are just that...they want their cake and eat it too. They play both sides.

A RINO, in my world is the same as a DINO. They tend to be moderates who equivocate on principle....depending on the issue.

I call the "far right" those who yack about being conservative....all the while stabbing us in the back.

I consider myself both liberal and conservative. I certainly don't see myself and far right or far left.

So you admit that the people you call "the far right" are not really conservative. They talk conservative and then vote liberal.

They don't vote liberal.

I have as much respect for true liberals as I do true conservatives.

They vote their best interests using government something it should not be used for.

You just said they "equivocate on principle" that they "stab us in the back." In other words, they vote against the conservative position. That means they vote liberal.

Not hardly.

The world is not one or the other......

 

[Andylusion]

Yanno, I'm pretty staunchly anti-socialism yet I don't recall ever having defended "the wealthy class." I do recall rejecting all and any loony leftist braying that boils down to "I want free stuff and we gotta make the rich pay for it" as the childish pap it always is.

I also recall rejecting any attempt to limit anyone's freedom to pursue their dreams and best interest - as long as they comply with our laws - by using the levers of gov't to turn MY COUNTRY into another whiny, sniveling socialist shithole.

All in all your argument is just another baseless Straw Man intended to allow the whiny snivelers here to post their silliness.

Sorry, but you are just another in a long line of people who index right to that incorrect argument.

First, it isn't a strawman. The far right is partly big business (you know..hands off) using government to increase their advantage.

I don't advocate for free stuff....if you had read just a few posts back...you'd see that.

I advocate for government getting out of the way of business and allowing small guys to compete. That way they can legitimately go compete for the dollars the wealthy take in so easily.

I don't advocate for using government to tax the hell out of the wealthy. That would be the far left.

You just moved the goalposts. Your complaint wasn't about the far right but rather "the right."

I specifically debunked the premise of your OP ("Why does the right defend the wealthy class") by explaining that I (and most who reject socialism here) are not defending the wealthy but rather are defending the nature of our economic system ... having the freedom to pursue our dreams and best interests - as long as they comply with our laws - and enjoy the fruit of our endeavors without undo gov't meddling or restriction.

I have no problem getting clear on definitions which can cause confusion.

I am saying that the right (which supposedly has conservatives in it) defends big busines in the name of "free enterprise" all the while big business is stabbing them and us in the back.

If big business wants to compete fairly....great.

But small business is the way many will find their way to wealth. I can't tell you many I know who can't afford to start a smal business because of the labor laws and regulation that make it near impossible for them.

Business does not generally want to compete fairly. Adam Smith never had good words for business people. And many times business is the biggest supporters of left-wing ideology.

Again, labor laws and regulation is a left-wing belief system, and I know some too. You seem to be claiming "right-wing this and that" and then listing off stuff that is most generally left-wing in orientation.

Good with that.

Now, why does the right (even a lot of conservatives) defend big business.....?

Do they really think they are defending captialism ?

Again you haven't made the case yet.

Nothing you refer to is "conservative".

You say "the right" and then list off a bunch of left-wing causes supported by left-wingers.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Sorry, but you are just another in a long line of people who index right to that incorrect argument.

First, it isn't a strawman. The far right is partly big business (you know..hands off) using government to increase their advantage.

I don't advocate for free stuff....if you had read just a few posts back...you'd see that.

I advocate for government getting out of the way of business and allowing small guys to compete. That way they can legitimately go compete for the dollars the wealthy take in so easily.

I don't advocate for using government to tax the hell out of the wealthy. That would be the far left.

You just moved the goalposts. Your complaint wasn't about the far right but rather "the right."

I specifically debunked the premise of your OP ("Why does the right defend the wealthy class") by explaining that I (and most who reject socialism here) are not defending the wealthy but rather are defending the nature of our economic system ... having the freedom to pursue our dreams and best interests - as long as they comply with our laws - and enjoy the fruit of our endeavors without undo gov't meddling or restriction.

I have no problem getting clear on definitions which can cause confusion.

I am saying that the right (which supposedly has conservatives in it) defends big busines in the name of "free enterprise" all the while big business is stabbing them and us in the back.

If big business wants to compete fairly....great.

But small business is the way many will find their way to wealth. I can't tell you many I know who can't afford to start a smal business because of the labor laws and regulation that make it near impossible for them.

Business does not generally want to compete fairly. Adam Smith never had good words for business people. And many times business is the biggest supporters of left-wing ideology.

Again, labor laws and regulation is a left-wing belief system, and I know some too. You seem to be claiming "right-wing this and that" and then listing off stuff that is most generally left-wing in orientation.

Good with that.

Now, why does the right (even a lot of conservatives) defend big business.....?

Do they really think they are defending captialism ?

Again you haven't made the case yet.

Nothing you refer to is "conservative".

You say "the right" and then list off a bunch of left-wing causes supported by left-wingers.

I said right...not conservative.

I said even a lot of conservatives (who are confused).

Conservative values don't agree with this....

Yet the right does it.

 

[Andylusion]

ndy

You just moved the goalposts. Your complaint wasn't about the far right but rather "the right."

I specifically debunked the premise of your OP ("Why does the right defend the wealthy class") by explaining that I (and most who reject socialism here) are not defending the wealthy but rather are defending the nature of our economic system ... having the freedom to pursue our dreams and best interests - as long as they comply with our laws - and enjoy the fruit of our endeavors without undo gov't meddling or restriction.

I have no problem getting clear on definitions which can cause confusion.

I am saying that the right (which supposedly has conservatives in it) defends big busines in the name of "free enterprise" all the while big business is stabbing them and us in the back.

If big business wants to compete fairly....great.

But small business is the way many will find their way to wealth. I can't tell you many I know who can't afford to start a smal business because of the labor laws and regulation that make it near impossible for them.

Business does not generally want to compete fairly. Adam Smith never had good words for business people. And many times business is the biggest supporters of left-wing ideology.

Again, labor laws and regulation is a left-wing belief system, and I know some too. You seem to be claiming "right-wing this and that" and then listing off stuff that is most generally left-wing in orientation.

Good with that.

Now, why does the right (even a lot of conservatives) defend big business.....?

Do they really think they are defending captialism ?

Again you haven't made the case yet.

Nothing you refer to is "conservative".

You say "the right" and then list off a bunch of left-wing causes supported by left-wingers.

I said right...not conservative.

I said even a lot of conservatives (who are confused).

Conservative values don't agree with this....

Yet the right does it.

You still haven't shown that. You can say it over and over until you die, but you have not shown this.

 

[bripat9643]

What you call the "far right" are actually establishment Republicans. RINOs, in other words. Handing out special privileges to favored businesses is not a policy endorsed by the right. It's endorsed by liberal Democrats and RINOs.

Definitions are important.....

Establishment Republicans are just that...they want their cake and eat it too. They play both sides.

A RINO, in my world is the same as a DINO. They tend to be moderates who equivocate on principle....depending on the issue.

I call the "far right" those who yack about being conservative....all the while stabbing us in the back.

I consider myself both liberal and conservative. I certainly don't see myself and far right or far left.

So you admit that the people you call "the far right" are not really conservative. They talk conservative and then vote liberal.

They don't vote liberal.

I have as much respect for true liberals as I do true conservatives.

They vote their best interests using government something it should not be used for.

You just said they "equivocate on principle" that they "stab us in the back." In other words, they vote against the conservative position. That means they vote liberal.

Not hardly.

The world is not one or the other......

No one said it was, but there are conservative policies and liberal policies. Giving special privileges to big business is a liberal policy, not a "right wing" policies. Your use of the term "right wing" is totally incoherent.

 

[bripat9643]

You just moved the goalposts. Your complaint wasn't about the far right but rather "the right."

I specifically debunked the premise of your OP ("Why does the right defend the wealthy class") by explaining that I (and most who reject socialism here) are not defending the wealthy but rather are defending the nature of our economic system ... having the freedom to pursue our dreams and best interests - as long as they comply with our laws - and enjoy the fruit of our endeavors without undo gov't meddling or restriction.

I have no problem getting clear on definitions which can cause confusion.

I am saying that the right (which supposedly has conservatives in it) defends big busines in the name of "free enterprise" all the while big business is stabbing them and us in the back.

If big business wants to compete fairly....great.

But small business is the way many will find their way to wealth. I can't tell you many I know who can't afford to start a smal business because of the labor laws and regulation that make it near impossible for them.

Business does not generally want to compete fairly. Adam Smith never had good words for business people. And many times business is the biggest supporters of left-wing ideology.

Again, labor laws and regulation is a left-wing belief system, and I know some too. You seem to be claiming "right-wing this and that" and then listing off stuff that is most generally left-wing in orientation.

Good with that.

Now, why does the right (even a lot of conservatives) defend big business.....?

Do they really think they are defending captialism ?

Again you haven't made the case yet.

Nothing you refer to is "conservative".

You say "the right" and then list off a bunch of left-wing causes supported by left-wingers.

I said right...not conservative.

I said even a lot of conservatives (who are confused).

Conservative values don't agree with this....

Yet the right does it.

"Conservative" and "right wing" are virtually synonymous. If not, then what do you believe the difference to be? What does "right wing" mean when you use it?

 

[Indeependent]

Definitions are important.....

Establishment Republicans are just that...they want their cake and eat it too. They play both sides.

A RINO, in my world is the same as a DINO. They tend to be moderates who equivocate on principle....depending on the issue.

I call the "far right" those who yack about being conservative....all the while stabbing us in the back.

I consider myself both liberal and conservative. I certainly don't see myself and far right or far left.

So you admit that the people you call "the far right" are not really conservative. They talk conservative and then vote liberal.

They don't vote liberal.

I have as much respect for true liberals as I do true conservatives.

They vote their best interests using government something it should not be used for.

You just said they "equivocate on principle" that they "stab us in the back." In other words, they vote against the conservative position. That means they vote liberal.

Not hardly.

The world is not one or the other......

No one said it was, but there are conservative policies and liberal policies. Giving special privileges to big business is a liberal policy, not a "right wing" policies. Your use of the term "right wing" is totally incoherent.

So go ahead and name the Conservatives in Congress.
Then list those who are NOT on that list that FoxNews claims ARE Conservatives.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

ndy

I have no problem getting clear on definitions which can cause confusion.

I am saying that the right (which supposedly has conservatives in it) defends big busines in the name of "free enterprise" all the while big business is stabbing them and us in the back.

If big business wants to compete fairly....great.

But small business is the way many will find their way to wealth. I can't tell you many I know who can't afford to start a smal business because of the labor laws and regulation that make it near impossible for them.

Business does not generally want to compete fairly. Adam Smith never had good words for business people. And many times business is the biggest supporters of left-wing ideology.

Again, labor laws and regulation is a left-wing belief system, and I know some too. You seem to be claiming "right-wing this and that" and then listing off stuff that is most generally left-wing in orientation.

Good with that.

Now, why does the right (even a lot of conservatives) defend big business.....?

Do they really think they are defending captialism ?

Again you haven't made the case yet.

Nothing you refer to is "conservative".

You say "the right" and then list off a bunch of left-wing causes supported by left-wingers.

I said right...not conservative.

I said even a lot of conservatives (who are confused).

Conservative values don't agree with this....

Yet the right does it.

You still haven't shown that. You can say it over and over until you die, but you have not shown this.

Where is the right or conservatives on things like Obamacare ?

The effort to repal has already died....the federal government talking about repeal....BFD.

Where is the RNC and where are the leaders of the GOP in keeing the issue highlited (and I am not talking about complaining about it) ? I mean quietly figuring out how to shut it down ?