Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C-SPAN)   Ryan believes in "upward mobility" through voluntary giving from the rich. 'Cause when we think of social compassion, we think of rich people   (c-span.org) divider line 109
    More: Unlikely, upward mobility, compassion, wealths  
•       •       •

1016 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Oct 2012 at 3:09 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



109 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-25 12:09:08 PM  
Well, we've waited thirty years, so that wealth should start trickling down soon.
 
2012-10-25 12:14:04 PM  
Sure. Let's supply money through church organizations and continue to indoctrinate people into religion.

Check these statistics out (from Link) - keep in mind it's from 2005:

Religion was by far the largest amount of charity, accounting for 36% (93.2 billion out of 260 billion) every year.

70 percent of the United States' food pantries are run by faith-based nonprofits. 

Lest people forget that everything is a gift from God. You know, like rape.
 
2012-10-25 12:16:22 PM  
The more these people talk about their economic ideas, the harder it is to distinguish it from feudalism.
 
2012-10-25 12:17:41 PM  
Because that's what Jesus would do.
 
2012-10-25 12:24:51 PM  
Omigosh! 3rd approved link! HIGH FIVES FOR EVERYONE!

My friend posted this on FB. He's a Republican, but I actually think he may be voting for Obama this year. But he was in total agreement with Ryan otherwise.

Don't get me wrong, welfare does need to be re-worked very much. But the concept that somehow the rich will take care of us "little people" is historically inaccurate. I mean, talk about how to create an oligarchy.
 
2012-10-25 12:30:42 PM  

Lollipop165: Omigosh! 3rd approved link! HIGH FIVES FOR EVERYONE!

My friend posted this on FB. He's a Republican, but I actually think he may be voting for Obama this year. But he was in total agreement with Ryan otherwise.

Don't get me wrong, welfare does need to be re-worked very much. But the concept that somehow the rich will take care of us "little people" is historically inaccurate. I mean, talk about how to create an oligarchy.


I dunno, the 19th century was pretty shiatty to be poor, but rich people in power did what they could to bequeath assets to things to help the poor, and some rich folk even dedicated their lives in public service to change society so the poor could count on more from life than being a slave to an industrialist.

I guess there are 2 types of people. Nice people and bastards, and they come in rich and poor varieties. Now that we average schlubs have the power we have to be careful we don't give it back to the bastard ultra-rich group.
 
2012-10-25 12:40:16 PM  
What does he propose after 'beg'? Roll over?

/Play dead?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-25 12:40:52 PM  

Slaxl: Lollipop165: Omigosh! 3rd approved link! HIGH FIVES FOR EVERYONE!

My friend posted this on FB. He's a Republican, but I actually think he may be voting for Obama this year. But he was in total agreement with Ryan otherwise.

Don't get me wrong, welfare does need to be re-worked very much. But the concept that somehow the rich will take care of us "little people" is historically inaccurate. I mean, talk about how to create an oligarchy.

I dunno, the 19th century was pretty shiatty to be poor, but rich people in power did what they could to bequeath assets to things to help the poor, and some rich folk even dedicated their lives in public service to change society so the poor could count on more from life than being a slave to an industrialist.

I guess there are 2 types of people. Nice people and bastards, and they come in rich and poor varieties. Now that we average schlubs have the power we have to be careful we don't give it back to the bastard ultra-rich group.


No they didn't. Maybe a few did, but the Robber Barons weren't called that for nothing.
 
2012-10-25 12:42:00 PM  

Slaxl: I guess there are 2 types of people. Nice people and bastards, and they come in rich and poor varieties. Now that we average schlubs have the power we have to be careful we don't give it back to the bastard ultra-rich group.


You think the average slubs have power right now? I dunno about that...

Of course philanthropy comes in all shapes and sizes.

But there was also a recent study done (and posted on Fark) showing that lower income people actually give a higher percentage of their earnings to charity than higher income people. Anyone have that link?
 
2012-10-25 12:44:29 PM  

vpb: Slaxl: Lollipop165: Omigosh! 3rd approved link! HIGH FIVES FOR EVERYONE!

My friend posted this on FB. He's a Republican, but I actually think he may be voting for Obama this year. But he was in total agreement with Ryan otherwise.

Don't get me wrong, welfare does need to be re-worked very much. But the concept that somehow the rich will take care of us "little people" is historically inaccurate. I mean, talk about how to create an oligarchy.

I dunno, the 19th century was pretty shiatty to be poor, but rich people in power did what they could to bequeath assets to things to help the poor, and some rich folk even dedicated their lives in public service to change society so the poor could count on more from life than being a slave to an industrialist.

I guess there are 2 types of people. Nice people and bastards, and they come in rich and poor varieties. Now that we average schlubs have the power we have to be careful we don't give it back to the bastard ultra-rich group.

No they didn't. Maybe a few did, but the Robber Barons weren't called that for nothing.


Yeah, maybe a few did, so we agree, nice rich people, and bastard rich people. Where's our disagreement?
 
2012-10-25 12:50:10 PM  
While these guys were reading Ayn Rand, did anyone ever think of sliding them a copy of Dickens?
 
2012-10-25 01:01:21 PM  
cdn.motinetwork.net

/seems appropriate
//got nothing else
 
2012-10-25 01:05:57 PM  
So, as of right now, there is enough private/persona wealth to literally lift everyone above the poverty line.

/waiting...
 
2012-10-25 01:08:35 PM  
Who built most of this country's great hospitals, universities, libraries, museums, and concert halls?
 
2012-10-25 01:15:55 PM  

vernonFL: Who built most of this country's great hospitals, universities, libraries, museums, and concert halls?


Union labor
 
2012-10-25 01:20:13 PM  

vernonFL: Who built most of this country's great hospitals, universities, libraries, museums, and concert halls?


Charitable foundations set up by rich folks some of whom may have had good intentions but mostly as tax shelters.
 
2012-10-25 01:21:03 PM  

vernonFL: Who built most of this country's great hospitals, universities, libraries, museums, and concert halls?


Rich robber barons that stepped around the poor people lying in the street to get to the dedication ceremony where the city fathers could express their gratitude to them.
 
2012-10-25 01:40:47 PM  
New slogan for Ryan!

Republicans Are Prosperity Engineers!
 
2012-10-25 02:12:30 PM  
Rich people are the result of a robust economy, not the cause.
 
2012-10-25 02:19:28 PM  
The U.S. is routinely ranked as the most charitable nation in the world. I don't think poor people are keeping us at #1
 
2012-10-25 02:24:44 PM  

Contrabulous Flabtraption: The U.S. is routinely ranked as the most charitable nation in the world. I don't think poor people are keeping us at #1


Actually it is the middle class that is doing that. Here's the article I was looking for earlier:

Link
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-25 02:27:58 PM  

Slaxl: vpb: Slaxl: Lollipop165: Omigosh! 3rd approved link! HIGH FIVES ....

Yeah, maybe a few did, so we agree, nice rich people, and bastard rich people. Where's our disagreement?


Oh. I thought you meant like a significant percentage.
 
2012-10-25 02:38:58 PM  

Slaxl: Lollipop165: Omigosh! 3rd approved link! HIGH FIVES FOR EVERYONE!

My friend posted this on FB. He's a Republican, but I actually think he may be voting for Obama this year. But he was in total agreement with Ryan otherwise.

Don't get me wrong, welfare does need to be re-worked very much. But the concept that somehow the rich will take care of us "little people" is historically inaccurate. I mean, talk about how to create an oligarchy.

I dunno, the 19th century was pretty shiatty to be poor, but rich people in power did what they could to bequeath assets to things to help the poor, and some rich folk even dedicated their lives in public service to change society so the poor could count on more from life than being a slave to an industrialist.

I guess there are 2 types of people. Nice people and bastards, and they come in rich and poor varieties. Now that we average schlubs have the power we have to be careful we don't give it back to the bastard ultra-rich group.


The point isn't that 'some did'

The point is that 'not enough did'

Which was what led to the C19 being totally farking balls for most people.
 
2012-10-25 02:41:26 PM  

Contrabulous Flabtraption: The U.S. is routinely ranked as the most charitable nation in the world. I don't think poor people are keeping us at #1


1) It's routinely ranked as the most charitable nation in the world if you count donating to churches.

1a) Which is a cock stuck in a toaster level of stupidity

2) Increasing people's wealth tends, on average, to reduce both their generosity and empathy

So as a result Paul Ryan's idea is based on a bad reading of both psychology and history.
 
2012-10-25 03:02:37 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: vernonFL: Who built most of this country's great hospitals, universities, libraries, museums, and concert halls?

Union labor


COMMIES!!
 
2012-10-25 03:06:24 PM  

vernonFL: Who built most of this country's great hospitals, universities, libraries, museums, and concert halls?


Ron Burgundy
 
2012-10-25 03:10:24 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Rich people are the result of a robust economy, not the cause.



This may be the most gogent and concise rebuttal of the whole "Job creators" narative that I've ever seen.

You win an infinite supply of Internets.
 
2012-10-25 03:10:59 PM  
And it would help if I could spell "cogent."
 
2012-10-25 03:12:08 PM  
Yeah, history is chock-full of rich aristocrats personally and voluntarily encouraging the upwards mobility of the peasants.
 
2012-10-25 03:12:15 PM  

vpb: Well, we've waited thirty years, so that wealth should start trickling down soon.


The wealth is trickling down in the countries where it's kept. Caymans, Switzerland, Luxembourg...
 
2012-10-25 03:12:52 PM  

Lollipop165: Don't get me wrong, welfare does need to be re-worked very much.


What welfare? How exactly does it "need to be reworked"?
 
2012-10-25 03:13:08 PM  
Yeah, we all know how Ryan supports charity- by using them as props when it's a convenient means to advance his agenda.
 
2012-10-25 03:13:41 PM  

vpb: Well, we've waited thirty years, so that wealth should start trickling down soon.


Just rename it pitch drop economics.


Wait for it.......
 
2012-10-25 03:13:57 PM  
So "picking winners and losers" is reserved for only the rich, huh?
 
2012-10-25 03:14:10 PM  
To make up for the proposed cuts in Food Stamps in the Ryan budget, "every church in the country would have to come up with approximately $50,000 dedicated to feeding people -- every year for the next 10 years." Churches and other non-profits using donations from wealthy philanthropists certainly play a role, but you simply cannot expect voluntary giving to just take over. Part of the mission of government is to maintain a genuine safety net for those that need it. In times of economic difficulty as we had with the Great Recession, you would expect more reliance on this safety net, and there would be even more with the R/R budget.
 
2012-10-25 03:14:14 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: Lollipop165: Don't get me wrong, welfare does need to be re-worked very much.

What welfare? How exactly does it "need to be reworked"?


Corporate. More.
 
2012-10-25 03:14:39 PM  
No one ever got rich by giving their money away.

/just sayin'
 
2012-10-25 03:15:30 PM  

Snapper Carr: vpb: Well, we've waited thirty years, so that wealth should start trickling down soon.

Just rename it pitch drop economics.


Wait for it.......


Though upon further reflection - the pitch drop experiment has yielded a couple of 3 drops since 1979 so it's actually ahead of trickle down.
 
2012-10-25 03:16:32 PM  
The GOP wants our tax policy to resemble a casino......sure there are a handful of folks that can hit the jackpot and they love to showcase these people but everyone else loses their life savings to the owners.
 
2012-10-25 03:17:57 PM  

give me doughnuts: This may be the most gogent and concise rebuttal of the whole "Job creators" narative that I've ever seen.


I felt the same way when I first read it. It's the introduction to this, which is just as good.

First, rich people are the result of a robust economy, not the cause. The United States is proof of this. The United States did not become the world's leading economic power because the rich elites of the world came here and invested. It became an economic power because it had conditions that attracted capable, hard-working but mostly poor (at first) people. "Give me your tired, your poor..." is not just an aphorism, it's the formula that led the U.S. to its heights of power. And what distinguished the United States at the height of its economic power was not that it had a huge cadre of rich elites that drove the economy, but that it had a robust and growing middle class. Whichever way the causality runs, it is indisputable that the country was stronger when the wealth was spread wide rather than piled high.

Link
 
2012-10-25 03:19:33 PM  

Somacandra: To make up for the proposed cuts in Food Stamps in the Ryan budget, "every church in the country would have to come up with approximately $50,000 dedicated to feeding people -- every year for the next 10 years." Churches and other non-profits using donations from wealthy philanthropists certainly play a role, but you simply cannot expect voluntary giving to just take over. Part of the mission of government is to maintain a genuine safety net for those that need it. In times of economic difficulty as we had with the Great Recession, you would expect more reliance on this safety net, and there would be even more with the R/R budget.


That's not allowing for the fact that Churches have more freedom to kick the bums out of the system. And by "bums," of course, I'm referring to anyone they don't personally like or have a low chance of converting.

/excludes St. Vincent de Paul
 
2012-10-25 03:20:55 PM  
When people are willing to withdraw charity money from a soup kitchen for the horrible crime of saying "we don't endorse ANY politician, and we regret that someone made us look like we did", then I don't have a lot of faith in people giving generously.
 
2012-10-25 03:21:00 PM  
mitt Romney has given more to his church than B.O has given to charity.
 
2012-10-25 03:21:56 PM  

Free_Chilly_Willy: mitt Romney has given more to his church cult and anti-gay hate group than B.O has given to charity.

 
2012-10-25 03:22:29 PM  
Paul Ryan is the guy who wants to turn Social Security and Medicare into a voucher system.
 
2012-10-25 03:22:37 PM  

Free_Chilly_Willy: mitt Romney has given more to his church than B.O has given to charity.


If the Mormon church is a charity then I'm a porn star because I once saw a boobie.
 
2012-10-25 03:23:47 PM  
Voluntary donations worked so well in the past that the government had to step in and actually do something that worked.
 
2012-10-25 03:24:20 PM  

Free_Chilly_Willy: mitt Romney has given more to his church than B.O has given to charity.


mitt Romney has ridden more dancing horses than B.O has played games of shuffleboard. 

mitt Romney has gone to more zoos than B.O has eaten smorrebrods.

mitt Romney has played Superman 64 more times than B.O has flicked pennies at hunchbacks.
 
2012-10-25 03:25:00 PM  

ghare: Voluntary donations worked so well in the past that the government had to step in and actually do something that worked.

 

And that should be that.
 
2012-10-25 03:25:29 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Free_Chilly_Willy: mitt Romney has given more to his church than B.O has given to charity.

If the Mormon church is a charity then I'm a porn star because I once saw a boobie.


Can you imagine the level of derp there would be if Obama gave 20% of his income to Trinity United in Chicago?
 
Displayed 50 of 109 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report