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.

(Forbes)   The looming crisis of liberalism   (forbes.com) divider line 405
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

4335 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Nov 2012 at 7:31 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-14 03:47:10 PM
"Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.
 
2012-11-14 03:50:10 PM

Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.


We won. Get over it.
 
2012-11-14 03:51:15 PM

Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.


Isn't it the right wing thats usually whining about how tax rates are "unfair"? But "fairness" isn't part of their platform, I guess.
 
2012-11-14 03:52:10 PM

Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.


www.parentinghq.com

/seems to me like it's the Rapeublicans crying like spoiled children because reality is being unfair to them.
 
2012-11-14 03:53:05 PM

ricewater_stool: Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.

We won. Get over it.


I know we did. I voted for Obama. Can you believe it? Someone can be critical of someone and still think that they are the best choice?
 
2012-11-14 03:55:10 PM

Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.


You would prefer the "unfairness" of the Republicans? As in, "I got mine, fark you"?
 
2012-11-14 03:55:11 PM

kronicfeld: Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.

Isn't it the right wing thats usually whining about how tax rates are "unfair"? But "fairness" isn't part of their platform, I guess.


Well Obama has admitted that he's merely doing it as class warfare. He's stated that although raising the taxes on the rich, and specifically the Buffet Rule, won't do much of anything, it's "about fairness." So, in other words, he knows that taxing the rich more doesn't solve anything, but it fulfills some sort of vague idea of "fairness" because some people shouldn't have more than everyone else.
 
2012-11-14 03:55:59 PM
Understanding that Obama's efforts to "transform America" are not simply rooted in anti-colonialist Kenyan soil, as propounded in the movie, 2016 recognizes the full extent of Obama's pedigree and the power of the Progressive movement.

And that's where I knew we didn't have to take this guy seriously.
 
2012-11-14 03:56:02 PM
More Regressive whining

/must be a day ending in Y
 
2012-11-14 03:56:03 PM

ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.

You would prefer the "unfairness" of the Republicans? As in, "I got mine, fark you"?


As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.
 
2012-11-14 03:58:08 PM

Silly Jesus: Well Obama has admitted that he's merely doing it as class warfare. He's stated that although raising the taxes on the rich, and specifically the Buffet Rule, won't do much of anything, it's "about fairness." So, in other words, he knows that taxing the rich more doesn't solve anything, but it fulfills some sort of vague idea of "fairness" because some people shouldn't have more than everyone else.


Horse shiat. He isn't taxing the rich for fairness. Ending the tax cuts will help with the deficit. And class warfare is what has been done to the lower and middle class for most of the last thirty years. Redistribution of wealth to the uppermost earners is still redistribution of wealth.

A level playing field is all we should ask for and is all he is trying to accomplish. You can still be insanely rich in this country.
 
2012-11-14 03:58:26 PM

Silly Jesus: Well Obama has admitted that he's merely doing it as class warfare.


I don't think you should use that phrase anymore until you can define it correctly.

Silly Jesus: He's stated that although raising the taxes on the rich, and specifically the Buffet Rule, won't do much of anything


No, he hasn't. It will raise a crapload more of income than killing Big Bird will reduce outgo.

Silly Jesus: So, in other words, he knows that taxing the rich more doesn't solve anything, but it fulfills some sort of vague idea of "fairness" because some people shouldn't have more than everyone else.


No, he has not said these things, and no one (except right-wing shills) is reporting that he has.
 
2012-11-14 04:00:02 PM
i291.photobucket.com
i291.photobucket.com
i291.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-14 04:03:14 PM

Silly Jesus: As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.


This is why you should not use the term "Class Warfare." You start to sound like "Papa" John Shnatter screaming from his $40 million mansion about cutting employee hours rather than provide his workers with healthcare, when it will cost him less than a nickel a pizza.
 
2012-11-14 04:05:06 PM

ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: Well Obama has admitted that he's merely doing it as class warfare.

I don't think you should use that phrase anymore until you can define it correctly.

Silly Jesus: He's stated that although raising the taxes on the rich, and specifically the Buffet Rule, won't do much of anything

No, he hasn't. It will raise a crapload more of income than killing Big Bird will reduce outgo.

Silly Jesus: So, in other words, he knows that taxing the rich more doesn't solve anything, but it fulfills some sort of vague idea of "fairness" because some people shouldn't have more than everyone else.

No, he has not said these things, and no one (except right-wing shills) is reporting that he has.


Please explain the class warfare thing to me...other than that, I concede the other points. I can't find the source of where I heard the Obama quote. Perhaps I am wrong.
 
2012-11-14 04:05:21 PM

Aarontology: And that's where I knew we didn't have to take this guy seriously.


Really? I hit that point along about line 2:

"Kesler brings to his analysis the perspective of the distinctive Claremont political philosophy which is grounded in the founding principles as articulated in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. "
 
2012-11-14 04:06:47 PM

ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.

This is why you should not use the term "Class Warfare." You start to sound like "Papa" John Shnatter screaming from his $40 million mansion about cutting employee hours rather than provide his workers with healthcare, when it will cost him less than a nickel a pizza.


He's not a charity. It doesn't matter if it would cost him a penny a year. That's his business and his decision. If people want to freely and willingly exchange their time and services for his money without healthcare then that is their decision.

Whenever someone says the word "fair," start counting how many words pass before the person starts talking about taking money from somebody else.
 
2012-11-14 04:08:32 PM

ox45tallboy: Aarontology: And that's where I knew we didn't have to take this guy seriously.

Really? I hit that point along about line 2:

"Kesler brings to his analysis the perspective of the distinctive Claremont political philosophy which is grounded in the founding principles as articulated in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. "


I thought I'd give him a chance.
 
2012-11-14 04:09:10 PM
So has Silly Jesus shown any receipts from the charity yet?
 
2012-11-14 04:12:25 PM

Aarontology: So has Silly Jesus shown any receipts from the charity yet?


You are truly a one trick pony.
 
2012-11-14 04:12:39 PM
Yawn, someone selling their crappy book.

So, let's talk about the actual issue: companies are making all time record profits and aren't hiring. How do we change that? I think the solution is for aggressive, high taxes with mitigating breaks for infrastructure development, hiring and research. This encourages reinvestment of wealth, and if companies are taxes on all US profits, then they have an incentive to not move overseas.
 
2012-11-14 04:12:57 PM
i36.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-14 04:13:26 PM

Silly Jesus: ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.

You would prefer the "unfairness" of the Republicans? As in, "I got mine, fark you"?

As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.


If you are stupid enough to think they got theirs on a level playing field, yes. The rich have enacted class warfare on the rest of us over decades. The deck is completely stacked in their favor, and it is damn time we shuffle it.
 
2012-11-14 04:13:59 PM

Silly Jesus: Whenever someone says the word "fair," start counting how many words pass before the person starts talking about taking money from somebody else.


I went to the state fair; it cost me $20 just to get in....DAMMIT, HE'S RIGHT!
 
2012-11-14 04:14:09 PM

Silly Jesus: Aarontology: So has Silly Jesus shown any receipts from the charity yet?

You are truly a one trick pony.


So the answer is no. You have not, and will not make good on your word.
 
2012-11-14 04:14:25 PM

Silly Jesus: ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.

You would prefer the "unfairness" of the Republicans? As in, "I got mine, fark you"?

As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.


Who got theirs in a complete vacuum of societal assistance?
 
2012-11-14 04:15:32 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: Silly Jesus: Well Obama has admitted that he's merely doing it as class warfare. He's stated that although raising the taxes on the rich, and specifically the Buffet Rule, won't do much of anything, it's "about fairness." So, in other words, he knows that taxing the rich more doesn't solve anything, but it fulfills some sort of vague idea of "fairness" because some people shouldn't have more than everyone else.

Horse shiat. He isn't taxing the rich for fairness. Ending the tax cuts will help with the deficit. And class warfare is what has been done to the lower and middle class for most of the last thirty years. Redistribution of wealth to the uppermost earners is still redistribution of wealth.

A level playing field is all we should ask for and is all he is trying to accomplish. You can still be insanely rich in this country.


It's a drop in the bucket. It's a political strategy. You've seen how wound up people on fark get when you mention "tax the rich!" They have fairgasms. If you were to take every cent above $250,000 (tax the wealthy at 100%) you would fund the federal government for 141 days. This is a ten year plan. 141 days out of ten years...and that's at 100%.
 
2012-11-14 04:16:39 PM

ox45tallboy: Aarontology: And that's where I knew we didn't have to take this guy seriously.

Really? I hit that point along about line 2:


I knew as soon as I saw it was a link to Forbes
 
2012-11-14 04:16:52 PM

Relatively Obscure: Silly Jesus: ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.

You would prefer the "unfairness" of the Republicans? As in, "I got mine, fark you"?

As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.

Who got theirs in a complete vacuum of societal assistance?


Certainly not the kids at St. Judes which silly jesus lied about donating to in this thread.

Link
 
2012-11-14 04:16:58 PM

vartian: Silly Jesus: ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.

You would prefer the "unfairness" of the Republicans? As in, "I got mine, fark you"?

As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.

If you are stupid enough to think they got theirs on a level playing field, yes. The rich have enacted class warfare on the rest of us over decades. The deck is completely stacked in their favor, and it is damn time we shuffle it.


You have any specifics? What did evil Bill Gates do to screw you over? Buffett?
 
2012-11-14 04:17:52 PM

Silly Jesus: ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.

This is why you should not use the term "Class Warfare." You start to sound like "Papa" John Shnatter screaming from his $40 million mansion about cutting employee hours rather than provide his workers with healthcare, when it will cost him less than a nickel a pizza.

He's not a charity. It doesn't matter if it would cost him a penny a year. That's his business and his decision. If people want to freely and willingly exchange their time and services for his money without healthcare then that is their decision.

Whenever someone says the word "fair," start counting how many words pass before the person starts talking about taking money from somebody else.


Who cares? He's whining like a little baby about something insignificant.

Fundamentally, the right-wing weirdos are going to have to come to terms with the fact that taxes exist and will continue to exist. That said, there's absolutely no good reason why someone who makes massive piles of cash should keep more, as a percentage of that, than someone who makes comparatively little money. Fairness, equitability, whatever you call it, trickle down is a failure and it is time for it to end.
 
2012-11-14 04:18:49 PM

Silly Jesus: Please explain the class warfare thing to me...other than that, I concede the other points. I can't find the source of where I heard the Obama quote. Perhaps I am wrong.


The whole "class warfare" thing came about as an attack from the right, handed down in Talking Points to Republicans who were scheduled for press conferences or appearances, and Talking Heads on right-wing media. It came from wherever the hell these things usually come from (your guess is as good as mine; I have this vision of a dark monastery in the mountains of Utah populated by monks taken into service on their fourteenth birthday, schooled in Ayn Rand and whatever perversion of Jeffersonian economics they teach at such places, and placed into "group think" rooms lit by lamps burning smelly pig fat, and denied food until they come up with some way of phrasing Republican ideology that doesn't cause those hearing it to recoil in horror. And then it shows up in the fax machines the next day.)

Anyways, the idea is that the general population are the "plebes" and they're angry at the "bourgeoisie" for not giving them enough. It is "class warfare" for anyone to suggest that the "bourgeoisie" might think about sharing more to the "plebes", as the "bourgeoisie" somehow deserve everything they have, and the plebes should count themselves lucky for what they are allowed to keep.

While Obama has used the phrase in campaign stops and the like, he has only used it in response to those who were using it to criticize him, as a way of defining the criticism he was refuting.
 
2012-11-14 04:18:51 PM

Aarontology: Silly Jesus: Aarontology: So has Silly Jesus shown any receipts from the charity yet?

You are truly a one trick pony.

So the answer is no. You have not, and will not make good on your word.


That was my answer? Why'd you even need to ask then? You can just answer all future questions to me yourself since you're privy to that information.
 
2012-11-14 04:19:45 PM

Relatively Obscure: Silly Jesus: ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.

You would prefer the "unfairness" of the Republicans? As in, "I got mine, fark you"?

As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.

Who got theirs in a complete vacuum of societal assistance?


So I deserve some of Bill Gate's money because I'm society?
 
2012-11-14 04:20:16 PM

Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.


Teehee.
 
2012-11-14 04:20:19 PM

Silly Jesus: above $250,000 (tax the wealthy at 100%) you would fund the federal government for 141 days.


It's a start. Now let's close all the loopholes on the rich, remove incentives from companies that ship jobs over seas, take away subsidies from massive agro farms, cut military spending by about a fourth, take away tax breaks for companies making record profits like oil and natural gas...it really starts to add up. I'm glad we're in this together.
 
2012-11-14 04:20:36 PM

Silly Jesus: Aarontology: Silly Jesus: Aarontology: So has Silly Jesus shown any receipts from the charity yet?

You are truly a one trick pony.

So the answer is no. You have not, and will not make good on your word.

That was my answer? Why'd you even need to ask then? You can just answer all future questions to me yourself since you're privy to that information.


So yes or no? Have you donated anything at all like you said you would?
 
2012-11-14 04:22:47 PM

ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: Please explain the class warfare thing to me...other than that, I concede the other points. I can't find the source of where I heard the Obama quote. Perhaps I am wrong.

The whole "class warfare" thing came about as an attack from the right, handed down in Talking Points to Republicans who were scheduled for press conferences or appearances, and Talking Heads on right-wing media. It came from wherever the hell these things usually come from (your guess is as good as mine; I have this vision of a dark monastery in the mountains of Utah populated by monks taken into service on their fourteenth birthday, schooled in Ayn Rand and whatever perversion of Jeffersonian economics they teach at such places, and placed into "group think" rooms lit by lamps burning smelly pig fat, and denied food until they come up with some way of phrasing Republican ideology that doesn't cause those hearing it to recoil in horror. And then it shows up in the fax machines the next day.)

Anyways, the idea is that the general population are the "plebes" and they're angry at the "bourgeoisie" for not giving them enough. It is "class warfare" for anyone to suggest that the "bourgeoisie" might think about sharing more to the "plebes", as the "bourgeoisie" somehow deserve everything they have, and the plebes should count themselves lucky for what they are allowed to keep.

While Obama has used the phrase in campaign stops and the like, he has only used it in response to those who were using it to criticize him, as a way of defining the criticism he was refuting.


So the cheers that he gets when he says "we're going to tax the wealthy" aren't indicative of his attempt to play one class against the other? The characterizations of Romney which constantly referred to his wealth weren't meant to create distrust of and derision for the wealthy?
 
2012-11-14 04:24:34 PM

vartian: Silly Jesus: above $250,000 (tax the wealthy at 100%) you would fund the federal government for 141 days.

It's a start. Now let's close all the loopholes on the rich, remove incentives from companies that ship jobs over seas, take away subsidies from massive agro farms, cut military spending by about a fourth, take away tax breaks for companies making record profits like oil and natural gas...it really starts to add up. I'm glad we're in this together.


That's fine if we do all of that...but it seems pretty obvious that only one of those (tax the evil rich) is on the forefront of their agenda, and it's merely a drop in the bucket. It should be susceptible to the same criticism that Romney got for talking about Big Bird.
 
2012-11-14 04:25:14 PM

Aarontology: Silly Jesus: Aarontology: Silly Jesus: Aarontology: So has Silly Jesus shown any receipts from the charity yet?

You are truly a one trick pony.

So the answer is no. You have not, and will not make good on your word.

That was my answer? Why'd you even need to ask then? You can just answer all future questions to me yourself since you're privy to that information.

So yes or no? Have you donated anything at all like you said you would?


Yes. I am donating weekly until the amount is paid.
 
2012-11-14 04:26:41 PM

Silly Jesus: Whenever someone says the word "fair," start counting how many words pass before the person starts talking about taking money from somebody else.


See, kids, this right here is a classic Republican trick. Because the "rich" person has possession of something, he must already deserve it. Therefore, by questioning the circumstances by which he came by it, you are "taking what's his".

The equivalent would be the five-year-old who grabs almost all the candy from the bowl before anyone else got any. Then, when one of the kids at the end of the row who didn't get any candy says it's not fair, he receives the reply, "Well, what would be fair? To take some candy away from the first kid? That's *his* candy!"

You're going to have to do better than that here. Those talking points might make you sound like John Galt Personified over on Free Republic, here they make you look rather poorly educated in rational debate techniques.
 
2012-11-14 04:28:00 PM
I cover economic/political issues with liberty as my polar star.

That's about as far as I got.
 
2012-11-14 04:28:13 PM

Silly Jesus: Yes. I am donating weekly until the amount is paid.


Do you have any receipts proving this?
 
2012-11-14 04:30:39 PM

Aarontology: Silly Jesus: Yes. I am donating weekly until the amount is paid.

Do you have any receipts proving this?


No.
 
2012-11-14 04:32:27 PM

Silly Jesus: Relatively Obscure: Silly Jesus: ox45tallboy: Silly Jesus: "Fairness," an elusive idea normally exploited by spoiled children, is now the foundation of the Democratic Party's economic policy.

You would prefer the "unfairness" of the Republicans? As in, "I got mine, fark you"?

As opposed to "you got yours, now give me some because I deserve it and it's fair?" Sure.

Who got theirs in a complete vacuum of societal assistance?

So I deserve some of Bill Gate's money because I'm society?


He's certainly benefited immensely from things which we paid for. Where should the money to run society come from? I'm all for cutting back on how much we spend, but I'm not for asking those with the absolute least to make the lion's share of sacrifices.
 
2012-11-14 04:37:26 PM

Silly Jesus: It's a drop in the bucket. It's a political strategy. You've seen how wound up people on fark get when you mention "tax the rich!" They have fairgasms. If you were to take every cent above $250,000 (tax the wealthy at 100%) you would fund the federal government for 141 days. This is a ten year plan. 141 days out of ten years...and that's at 100%.


No one has suggested taxing the wealthy at 100%. And in your idiotic little statement, you act if all other taxes would be ended while this 100% would be going on. They wouldn't. The ultra-rich have a lot of money, but they are a very small class. Of course taking all their dough wouldn't fund the government for long, besides the fact of it being an abhorrent and silly idea. You would still have the hundreds of millions of dollars coming in from the middle class.

We are only talking about putting tax levels back to how they were during the Reagan era, that magical time Republicans cream their jeans over.
 
2012-11-14 04:40:18 PM

Silly Jesus: So the cheers that he gets when he says "we're going to tax the wealthy" aren't indicative of his attempt to play one class against the other?


See? Again with the clever phrasing and twisted logic here. The tax structure is already in place with the advantage to the already wealthy, making it more difficult than ever to break into that kind of wealth. Business owners find new ways every day to reduce labor costs by eliminating paid overtime and hiring "contractors" rather than employees, just to name a few. Obama isn't "playing one class against each other". the classes are already played against one another. Just because he's taking a side in a conflict which has been going on for far longer than he has been in politics does not mean he is to blame for the conflict.

Silly Jesus: The characterizations of Romney which constantly referred to his wealth weren't meant to create distrust of and derision for the wealthy?


Actually, no. The plebes don't hate wealth, they hate people who use it for bad things. Warren Buffett and Bill Gates (today, not the Bill Gates from the 1990's) are hailed as good people because they are using their wealth for Good Things. They hate hearing about "handouts" and "entitlements" to the lazy people, and when they go to the HR office at their job, they are handed a Medicaid application instead of Health Insurance forms. They hate seeing people like Mitt Romney make money from closing a company instead of not making as much money by keeping it open and keeping people working.
 
2012-11-14 04:41:07 PM

Silly Jesus: That's fine if we do all of that...but it seems pretty obvious that only one of those (tax the evil rich) is on the forefront of their agenda, and it's merely a drop in the bucket. It should be susceptible to the same criticism that Romney got for talking about Big Bird.


445 million to PBS, per year, is nothing compared to what you are talking about. It isn't even on the same planet.
 
2012-11-14 04:41:46 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: Silly Jesus: It's a drop in the bucket. It's a political strategy. You've seen how wound up people on fark get when you mention "tax the rich!" They have fairgasms. If you were to take every cent above $250,000 (tax the wealthy at 100%) you would fund the federal government for 141 days. This is a ten year plan. 141 days out of ten years...and that's at 100%.

No one has suggested taxing the wealthy at 100%. And in your idiotic little statement, you act if all other taxes would be ended while this 100% would be going on. They wouldn't. The ultra-rich have a lot of money, but they are a very small class. Of course taking all their dough wouldn't fund the government for long, besides the fact of it being an abhorrent and silly idea. You would still have the hundreds of millions of dollars coming in from the middle class.

We are only talking about putting tax levels back to how they were during the Reagan era, that magical time Republicans cream their jeans over.


Without hyperbolic bullsh*t, they have no arguments at all
 
2012-11-14 04:42:51 PM
Oh look.. another "journalist" who thinks that Obama is a liberal.
 
Displayed 50 of 405 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report