|
|
| From | Message |
|---|
|
 Chaz
|
|
Jerry ...
... let me press the point further, and let's take the charity part out (for now), and let's dismiss our backgrounds (my own was arguably just as severe as yours). Plus we can argue about efficiencies of government separately. That said, (1) what happens (literally) to those who are not helped (with food, shelter, health ... to name three things we can discuss)? (2) Why are you singling out movie actors any more than, say, corporate executives, or those with inherited wealth, or the 'common man' (middle class)? (3) And why do you exempt yourself?
|
|
chaz
You must have forgotten all the times I have offered things that could/should be done to improve the economy so that there would be jobs available, so that people could get off food stamps and welfare, and so that we could raise the average income of people at the low end. It seems to me you always said that I was repeating myself and that (basically) I was boring you.
Have you forgotten those?
And, you tell me I should take one point in detail to discuss. Why can't you do that?
Oh well, I'll try again here.
Let's try discussing an important one... creating more jobs. After my suggestions, it will be your turn to make suggestions on creating more jobs, OK?
1) Let's Not raise taxes on individuals or businesses. Make more money available for business expansion and more sales to individuals.
2) Let's eliminate loopholes in the tax code so as to give all businesses and individuals an equal opportunity and not penalize individuals or businesses who do not have expensive lobbyists.
3) Let's reduce the cost of energy by making resources in the U.S. available to business at a lower cost, which will get passed on to consumers.
4) Let's reduce government regulation on business so that their reduced costs will be passed on to the consumer and business will be encouraged to bring jobs back into the country.
5) Let's lower the costs of business start up.
6) Let's allow the marketplace to determine the cost of doing business by eliminating or lowering government mandates such that products and services will improve to the consumer and costs will lower with the best companies surviving and prospering while the less adaptive will fail and be eliminated.
That is my quick overview.
What's yours?
|
|
Softy ...
... my questions were for Jerry. You have made your speculative list numerous times, and we all remember your suggestions ... which you keep repeating no matter what evidence there may be against them. I have indicated my own opinion often, which you have also forgotten.
As I've said before, there are things (e.g. tax loopholes) that we might agree upon. But your giving to business everything they want will not solve the problems you describe. Government will grow in size to keep corporations at bay, otherwise corporate money takes over ... as we have been witnessing for quite some time. I realize you feel that's OK; I do not.
|
|
chaz
This is the last part of your last post to me. You seem to be asking me to pick a topic (one topic) and discuss it. This was not for Jerry. Did you forget what you just wrote to me or were you just playing games and throwing darts?
I put in some effort (once again) in order to accommodate you. Please review what you wrote and let me know if you were sincere and simply forgot or if you were playing games. Thanks.
Chaz:
"And, when you list scores of things, it's hard to discuss any one point in detail. Pick one, and let's aim for a point of basic agreement or at least common ground. OK? Then we can move on to another point."
|
|
Softy ...
... and which point did you want to discuss? I'm willing to give my view on them again ... I just don't want to take the time it takes to write long responses that gets one of your repetitive responses.
I'll give this opinion once again ... with #2, I agree we need to improve greatly need to eliminate tax loopholes. And, to repeat, I asked you which ones would you suggest. Now let's continue this point further before going onto another.
|
|
chaz
Either you didn't read my responses to you or you read with NO comprehension. If you really want to discuss anything, like you said, I suggest you go back and re-read my post to you... you know... the one after you said I should select one particular topic.
You'll see that I did select one particular topic and I gave my views (some of them) on how to implement it. Then it became YOUR turn to discuss THAT particular topic.
|
|
Softy ...
... it's up to you. Take it wherever you want to.
|
|
chaz
You do understand that it is now YOUR turn, right. You asked and I gave a response. It is your turn to respond with something... let's make it a decent response OK? People are watching and waiting. You don't want everybody thinking you're an empty suit do you?
|
|
... I'm tired of your repetitions, your games, your rants and how disingenuous you've become. If you want to examine one specific point, we can; otherwise just go play with someone else.
|
|
How nice, obama will use children as his shield to push an agenda involving treachery against the constitution. Hmmmm, who else do we know that use children as human shields while trying to defeat freedom? Leave it to the left and their playbook "Never let a tradgedy go to waste". Very nice libs, very nice. Ya'll must be soooo proud of yourselves and your dictator in chief.
|
dmaestro
16-Jan-13, 07:06
|
I am very proud of him and how we boxed you in with our coalition. Astrologically as i have said Obama has a lucky star in that his enemies defeat themselves and that is why he is where he is. This is karma and destiny, chickens coming home to roost. If you are peaceful, demographics makes you increasingly irrelevant. And if you rebel violently, a country divided against itself cannot fulfill your agenda. Either way you lose And world history will record you as the bad guys
|
|
dmaestro
You crack me up. Are you a tweed coat professor or are you a student of one? Just curious if you try to teach nonsense or if you have been brainwashed to believe nonsense. In either case, "bless your heart", I feel so bad that you think obama actually cares about you. I hope you really never find out that he doesnt, it may crush you.
|
changeling
16-Jan-13, 07:15
|
I doubt Romney cared either Jerry!
|
|
I never claimed Romney did.
|
|
Jerry ...
... were you going to respond to my questions?
|
changeling
16-Jan-13, 07:24
|
I stand corrected. But no matter who gets elected at the top, it is hard to figure any of them actually care.
|
|
Chaz
... let me press the point further, and let's take the charity part out (for now), and let's dismiss our backgrounds (my own was arguably just as severe as yours). Plus we can argue about efficiencies of government separately. That said, (1) what happens (literally) to those who are not helped (with food, shelter, health ... to name three things we can discuss)? (2) Why are you singling out movie actors any more than, say, corporate executives, or those with inherited wealth, or the 'common man' (middle class)? (3) And why do you exempt yourself?
1. (literally), if you don't eat you go hungry. I think we can help kids and those that can't help themselves, but not lazy bastards that use foodstamps to buy marlboros instead of milk and diapers. If you don't have shelter, well you get cold and wet. It is very very hard to not be able to pay rent on at least a small apartment while on the government dime. Wellfare, foodstamps, and handouts average a $42,000 equivalent salary from a job. Healthcare. Maybe people should worry about healthcare first instead of blowing their money on an iPhone and cigarettes.
2. Not singling out movie actors, but they seem to have sooo much more to say and with some bogus authority, let them lead the way and then they can also take the credit.
3. I'm not understanding how I am exempting myself except to say that I have already paid more than my fair share. And I'm forced to pay more and more for people who do less and less. I just may become a democrat. quit my job and take my $42,000 from you and everyone else. why work hard? the harder you work, the more you are penalized, and the more you get to see people ruining this country with the fruits of your own labor.
|
|
changeling
I'll agree with that. I was just saying how sad it was that maestro seems to think that obama just cares for everyone like we are all his children or something. He's gonna have a breakdown if and when he ever stops drinking the kool aid and realizes he's just a pawn.
|
changeling
16-Jan-13, 07:35
|
I think he just likes to wind you all up, a bit!
|
dmaestro
16-Jan-13, 09:19
|
Just a little But seriously most agree in theory we want a system that rewards and maximizes use of talents for individual and societal benefit and disincentives other behaviors like freeloading. The devil is in the details of how we go about it. Until we can agree on measures that don't conflict and cancel each other out we are not going to progress much.
|
|
Jerry ....
IMHO ...
1 ... those without food and shelter become desperate and commit aberrant behaviors ... we don't have enough police to corral the masses if they have no opportunities (it's better to keep them fed and housed, otherwise we'd pay much more in different ways) ... I work with the disadvantaged, and large numbers are not as lucky and you and I. But, yes, we need to attend to misuse and fraud, and we need to create more innovative incentives to get people off the rolls.
2 ... movie stars may be conspicuous, but I trust the corporate CEOs less who buy their legislators behind the curtains with their billions and well-paid lobbyists ... but perhaps that's OK with you.
|
|
Jerry ...
3 ... we all feel we pay too much in taxes. I'm happy to live in a country that taxes its population than so many others (most European countries, for example). And, I have voted GOP or Libertarian all but once over the last 45 years.
Now maybe we can talk about what honest remedies we need to put in place to curb overextending the gov't. Are we on the same page yet?
|
|
Chaz
I'll have an honest discussion on this. Yes we all feel we pay too much in taxes, I will agree with. However I would make the distinction and know that I pay more than my fair share. And when I say fair share, not only dollars, but percentage on dollars earned. Real remedies are too archaic for the "progressives" who I honestly feel look to government as their beacon, their rock, and their direction in life. They want to be enslaved, which I am OK with until they also want to enslave me. I'm sure we have a few of the same pages.
|
|
Jerry ...
... it sounds like you trust the unelected CEOs of corporations a lot more than the elected representatives in government ... and that's your opinion which I will respect ... and respectfully disagree. I understand free enterprise, supply and demand, etc.; I was formerly in business myself. But the agenda of corporations control your life just as much if not more than gov't, and you have no say who runs them.
Regarding "fair share" ... it's a debatable point. IMHO, I believe that the fair share of those who have more is a larger fair share. We live in a country that takes care of the less advantaged; you and I pay for that ... and you and I have enough left over to live with some prosperity others in the World do not or cannot have.
I don't think gov't as the "beacon" but I certainly do not (under any circumstances) believe that corporations are a beacon either. I'm locked out of their board rooms and do not have access to their lobbying power or their cash. At least inside gov't I have some say (albeit little).
|
tat3225
17-Jan-13, 13:45
|
I think it's unfair to talk about American prosperity as though it was given to all of us. Sure, those of us who are born here were born with certain advantages in the sense that, for example, I was lucky to not be born a woman in Afghanistan. But, none of this would exist if Americans were apathetic. Big corporations, new products, endless parody's of YouTube videos.....all of these things exist because Americans make these things or are interested in things. A reality show isn't going to be profitable if people don't care about watching it. People who are apathetic and lazy won't support companies that sell board games and so on.
Everything here does not just spontaneously exist like air or water. Nations have proved this time and time and time again by forcefully industrializing. It's never as profitable as the United States because it's the people in this country who are industrious, not the other way around.
The government didn't build the railroads, or invent steel, or create bridges to connect railroads. It was not the government who suggested that earth could be moved to connect the gulf of mexico with the Pacific ocean. It was not the government who invented the internal combustion engine or nuclear reactors. It's people in the United States who come from all over who invent these things. It doesn't matter if the government funds them. The government could throw tons of money at people and it doesn't mean that anything great will come of it.
So anyway, this seems important to remember when thinking about social spending and "unfairness".
|
dmaestro
17-Jan-13, 14:29
|
No we don't like paying for waste and misaligned missions either. The disagreement is where the waste is.
|
|
lol
In all seriousness, it was sooo cold today, I literally saw a democrat at the office put his hands into his own pockets.
|
|
Jerry ...
... and he found them empty because the corporations had already robbed him blind.
|
|
tat ...
... there isn't disagreement about profit nor about innovation, and certainly we live in a country where industry has indeed prospered. What we're talking about are corporations who begin making their own rules, who buy legislators, who buy elections with their excess cash ... it's more about intent. And, it's not about one side or the other ... we need a balance between gov't and business, not one or the other being supreme. Right now, IMHO, it seems rather lopsided towards business (huge profits in 2012 BTW) while humanity suffered. I understand you will not agree with this observation ... and what's more important is that we can see both sides of the issue and work, through compromise and negotiation, toward workable solutions instead of taking sides, bickering, and looking for fights.
|
|
|
