The W
Views: 99942901
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.10.07 0254
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Jim Jeffords Worst Nightmare and General Election Thoughts
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3(1982 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (60 total)
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 386/1759
EXP: 4929777
For next: 63093

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1315 days
Last activity: 81 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#41 Posted on 7.11.02 1800.40
Reposted on: 7.11.09 1801.40
The point is that a stockboy who works extra hard so that he can make more money and not have to be a stockboy anymore should not be punished for that hard work.
I am sure that there are many hard working stockboys. I am talking about the ones that do more to move on.. whether it be outside of work or in...
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 141

Posts: 193/6335
EXP: 33455350
For next: 664748

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 2 days
#42 Posted on 7.11.02 1907.09
Reposted on: 7.11.09 1907.09
Hey Moe, about the CEOs who make tons of money. Should Lee Iacoca (however you spell it) not be rewarded for his hard work? He went to college, was a designer, and worked his way up the ladder. Nobody made him CEO of Chrysler "just because". He worked and worked and was REWARDED with a CEO position. Then, he saves the Company from bankruptcy and closing down.

I dont believe THAT was simple work

Physical labor doenst make a job "Hard work" it just makes it PHYSICAL work. being a Neuro sugeon, on the "hard working stockboy" scale, isnt that hard, but requires more effort to get to the point where you CAN be a Neuro Surgeon, than it takes to become the stockboy.

And, FLAT TAX is the only FAIR TAX!
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst
Level: 50

Posts: 187/561
EXP: 891516
For next: 55808

Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 82 days
Last activity: 82 days
#43 Posted on 7.11.02 2054.26
Reposted on: 7.11.09 2058.28

When are all you money grubbing Republicans going to wise up? Just because you EARNED your money, doesn't mean you have any right to it. I mean, if some "stock-boy" or "broom-pusher" or "trash picker" wants to spend his free money on beer and pot instead of a college education, and spend his extra time drinking beer and smoking pot instead of studying hard to better his life and get a better job, who are we to judge? For shame! Not only can we NOT judge those underachieving dopers in this country, but we MUST SUPPORT them! It is us hard working Americans who need to better ourselves that so the government can steal our hard earned dollars to spend on crackheads and potheads who would rather zone out than better themselves.
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 740/2108
EXP: 6615605
For next: 35085

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 4 hours
#44 Posted on 7.11.02 2235.54
Reposted on: 7.11.09 2243.37
Yes, that's it. You've found out our secret agenda. All we actually want is to steal your hard-earned dollars to support crackheads. Except for Junior's nephew, her family can afford to support her themsleves.

If Lee Iacocca was the rule and not the exception, sure. However, please tell me how the guys who screw up their job walk away with millions. I mean, if I get laid off (which is looking like a distinct possibility here in New York) I don't even get two weeks pay and health insurance coverage. And I'm in a Union.

It's not making money through hard work that I'm criticizing. Read my original points. It's the fact that these people's lazy spoiled kids are allowed to keep this money with an amazing lack of it. Only in elite republican fantasy land is everyone "self-made." To hear W. talk, his daddy was a coal miner, not the president. And the one guy who actually DID work his ass off to become president and make something of himself is the person republicans hate more than anyone. Not surprising. You don't have to dig too deep to uncover the elite's hypocracy. They believe some people who are obviously entitled to run America, and some aren't.

There is a very good article about this in the New York Times magazine. I'm sure you conservatives can just this once lower yourself to read the Times. You've got to register, but I promise they won't put you on Barbra Streisand's mailing list.

Damn it, it's over a week old so it'll cost you a few bucks. But's it's a very good article about hte declining middle-calss in America.

http://query.nytimes.com/search/abstract?res=FA0F1EF83A5E0C738EDDA90994DA404482
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 686/3029
EXP: 11258088
For next: 213357

Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 12 days
AIM:  
#45 Posted on 7.11.02 2323.56
Reposted on: 7.11.09 2325.24
    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    The point is that a stockboy who works extra hard so that he can make more money and not have to be a stockboy anymore should not be punished for that hard work.
    I am sure that there are many hard working stockboys. I am talking about the ones that do more to move on.. whether it be outside of work or in...



Well, I suppose the stockboy could decide to better himself, save up some money and head off to college. Oh wait, I forgot. The stockboy is making minimum wage which is, in many cases, not even enough to live on and buy food with, let alone pay for a higher education with. But you guys are against raising the minimum wage, too.

At least he can get some major tax breaks on his tuition after he finally saves up enough money (round about age 75), right? No, you're against that, too.

What he needs to do is somehow alter the space-time continuim and make himself born to more sucessful parents, then he'd have the money to do whatever he wants and could afford to have such a cavalier "well if they worked harder they wouldn't be poor" attitude himself.

Not to mention the fact that he could get into the school of his choice then. Hell, if his daddy went to the school, they *have* to take him. I know of one prominent politician who was a self-admitted "C" student who got into Yale because of his daddy and he's even against affirmative action. Remember, it's only wrong if it helps blacks.

EDIT: Made this a little less inflammatory, just to keep it from veering the conversation the wrong way again.

(edited by OlFuzzyBastard on 8.11.02 0028)
kazhayashi81
Potato korv
Level: 54

Posts: 257/677
EXP: 1183025
For next: 50852

Since: 17.6.02
From: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Since last post: 2701 days
Last activity: 2651 days
AIM:  
#46 Posted on 8.11.02 0021.33
Reposted on: 8.11.09 0022.09

    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard

    Well, I suppose the stockboy could decide to better himself, save up some money and head off to college. Oh wait, I forgot. The stockboy is making minimum wage which is, in many cases, not even enough to live on and buy food with, let alone pay for a higher education with. But you guys are against raising the minimum wage, too.



Wait... it's not like there are... *gasp*... LOANS to pay for college so that when he would get that degree to better himself, he could pay for it THEN instead of NOW. Or.. grants, financial aids, or scholarship programs he can apply through and apply himself so that he could get some help pay for college. That would be so great if there were those... Wait.. there are. And if all he can make is 5.50(or whatever the minimum wage is now) at his job, maybe... *gasp again*.. he could FIND ANOTHER JOB THAT PAYS MORE THAN MINIMUM FUCKING WAGE. If someone doesn't have the intellect, drive, or is unwilling to take the time to better themselves instead of expecting the government to do it for them, then fuck them, they deserve to be a stockboy for life.

I sell Kirby Vacuum Cleaners for a living. If I go out, I sell high deals, then I make money. If I went out, I burned houses, pissed people off, and never sold anything, I wouldn't. My drive and my hard work effects my income directly, and personally, I think more jobs should be like that.
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 141

Posts: 197/6335
EXP: 33455350
For next: 664748

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 2 days
#47 Posted on 8.11.02 0103.02
Reposted on: 8.11.09 0105.08
Moe, I am so close to agreeing with most of what you say. But I dont understand the theory that an offspring should be punished financially because his parents left him money. If it was a bag of flour that was left, would you say that, since he didnt make the flour himself, he should give it away, or have it taken away?


OFB, why is it peoples responsibility to pay for those who cant or wont do for themselves?
I agree that college should be cheaper. An education is WAY to expensive to attain these days, and I think it is a way to keep poor people from achieving, but really, why should the richer people in the country have to foot the bill for the poorer people? I just dont get it.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 388/1759
EXP: 4929777
For next: 63093

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1315 days
Last activity: 81 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#48 Posted on 8.11.02 0300.40
Reposted on: 8.11.09 0305.21
I have no college degree, and I am making more than minimum wage...
The point is that with time and effort, ANYONE can make more than minimum wage. ANYONE. And if they do not want to, more power to them! BUT, they should not be entitled to a "cut" of the cash that others have earned. That is just bullshit. I mean, seriously... are you prepared to give up half of YOUR income because some beggar wants a cut of it?
True story- I lived in Tucson for a number of years (working MINIMUM wage, I might ad) and my roomate at thetime was working at a Circle K. Every day, they would see a bum sitting on the street-corner, begging. One day the manager of the Circle K comes out and tells the guy that if he gets cleaned up, he will hire him.
"Will you pay me $200 a day?"
Well, of course not.
"Sorry, that is what I make out here."
This is the kind of person you would be supporting if you got your way. My point is that everyone who works should pay their fair share of taxes. Period. YES, people who make more money should and do pay more. That is the way things work. But they should also benefit more from a tax-cut (in dollars) because they are PAYING MORE IN THE FIRST PLACE! I am sorry, I cannot see how it is their responsibility to shell out more cash just because they make more and can "afford it." What is the point of working hard, investing your money to provide jobs and industry, if your money will be taken from you simply because "you can afford it?"
I have a great idea! lets just make this country one GIANT welfare state where 10% of the people pay and work to support the other 90%... because they can afford it! Lets see how well the country runs then!

(edited by Pool-Boy on 8.11.02 0101)
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 558/4700
EXP: 21583063
For next: 253599

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1269 days
Last activity: 1066 days
#49 Posted on 8.11.02 0607.18
Reposted on: 8.11.09 0609.17

    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard[quotemid I know of one prominent politician who was a self-admitted "C" student who got into Yale because of his daddy and he's even against affirmative action. Remember, it's only wrong if it helps blacks.


But enough about Al Gore...
cranlsn
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 137/1207
EXP: 2844698
For next: 25060

Since: 18.3.02
From: Sussex, WI

Since last post: 13 days
Last activity: 10 hours
#50 Posted on 8.11.02 0833.37
Reposted on: 8.11.09 0846.24
All right...I've been trying to stay out of this because,
A. To those who will agree with me, I'll be preaching to the choir.

B. To those who disagree, I'm not going to change your mind anyway.

So...without further ado, here's my two cents worth to add to the quagmire.

I couldn't figure out how to quote from multiple posts, so bear with me as I paraphrase...

Someone here said something along the lines of taxing inheritances...umm doesn't this already happen? Why would you want to tax them more? I have worked very hard for my money, and God willing I'll be able to save up money to give my kids an inheritance. Not so they can be "lazy bastards", but so that they're life can be better than mine. I see nothing wrong or EVIL with that! Even if I somehow manage to save millions (which is very doubtful).

As for minimum wage jobs, they are there for a reason. That reason is NOT for supporting a family. They are intended for a teenager, someone living at home, i.e. someone with no large responsibilities. In my experience, if there is no one interested in earning minimum wage, the employer will pay more to get someone to fill the position. Case in point...in our area there isn't a fast food restaurant paying less than $1.50 - $2.00 above minimum. Beyond that there are hundreds of jobs in our area, that don't require a college degree, that pay well above that.

Back to I believe the "original" point of this thread. Two points. One...Jeffords will be afforded the worst scut work that Trent Lott can find for him. Maybe he can become Daschle's personal assistant and take notes on how to be an ineffective leader.

As to the Republican control of Washington... We've got control and the GOP can finally start getting some of their agenda through, some of their judicial nominations through, and actual work will be getting done. It's their ball now, and we've at least got the chance now to show the world what W's plans can do. With Daschle and his obstructionists in the Senate, absolutely nothing, bad or good, was getting done.

Finally...guys...it's not all black and white. Not ALL people on welfare or in low paying jobs are lazy and worthless. Likewise, not ALL millionares are evil, conniving elitists. Like most issues, the truth is somewhere in between. It's just my firm belief that conservative policies are the best way to handle this nations problems and make the country better for EVERYONE, not just the "have nots".
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 688/3029
EXP: 11258088
For next: 213357

Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 12 days
AIM:  
#51 Posted on 8.11.02 0858.44
Reposted on: 8.11.09 0859.05
I'm sorry... "W's plans". LOL, that's a good one. What would those plans be, exactly? To watch a baseball game and take a nap?
cranlsn
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 140/1207
EXP: 2844698
For next: 25060

Since: 18.3.02
From: Sussex, WI

Since last post: 13 days
Last activity: 10 hours
#52 Posted on 8.11.02 0919.38
Reposted on: 8.11.09 0920.02

    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    I'm sorry... "W's plans". LOL, that's a good one. What would those plans be, exactly? To watch a baseball game and take a nap?


Thanks for the quick reply, I was wondering what part of the post you'd choose to take out of context and make a joke of....

O.K...how about

* Cutting taxes
* Raising military wages
* Homeland security, without the Dems neutering it!
* Incentives for companies to invest in the economy.
* Appointment of Federal judges to balance the preponderance of liberals now on the bench.

Shall I continue?

These might not be ideas that you agree with, but at least now we'll get the chance to see if they are good or bad ideas.
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst
Level: 50

Posts: 189/561
EXP: 891516
For next: 55808

Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 82 days
Last activity: 82 days
#53 Posted on 8.11.02 0935.49
Reposted on: 8.11.09 0938.31

    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    I'm sorry... "W's plans". LOL, that's a good one. What would those plans be, exactly? To watch a baseball game and take a nap?



Sounds good to me. It sure beats the hell out of the Democrats' plans which are to steal more of my money. W can have all the nap time he wants as long as I get my tax cut.
Fletch
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 85/89
EXP: 56203
For next: 2148

Since: 17.7.02
From: Columbus, Ohio

Since last post: 4366 days
Last activity: 4363 days
#54 Posted on 8.11.02 1000.27
Reposted on: 8.11.09 1006.55
    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    Way to come in late Fletch


I'm nothing if not... uh... what was I saying?


    Originally posted by Pool-Boy

    The point is that with time and effort, ANYONE can make more than minimum wage. ANYONE. And if they do not want to, more power to them! BUT, they should not be entitled to a "cut" of the cash that others have earned. That is just bullshit. I mean, seriously... are you prepared to give up half of YOUR income because some beggar wants a cut of it?
    True story- I lived in Tucson for a number of years (working MINIMUM wage, I might ad) and my roomate at thetime was working at a Circle K. Every day, they would see a bum sitting on the street-corner, begging. One day the manager of the Circle K comes out and tells the guy that if he gets cleaned up, he will hire him. "Will you pay me $200 a day?" Well, of course not. "Sorry, that is what I make out here." This is the kind of person you would be supporting if you got your way. My point is that everyone who works should pay their fair share of taxes. Period. YES, people who make more money should and do pay more. That is the way things work. But they should also benefit more from a tax-cut (in dollars) because they are PAYING MORE IN THE FIRST PLACE! I am sorry, I cannot see how it is their responsibility to shell out more cash just because they make more and can "afford it." What is the point of working hard, investing your money to provide jobs and industry, if your money will be taken from you simply because "you can afford it?" I have a great idea! lets just make this country one GIANT welfare state where 10% of the people pay and work to support the other 90%... because they can afford it! Lets see how well the country runs then!



Please don't take this personally, but I have a very hard time reading post of yours like this without ample grains of salt.

For the most part you've basically made two points in this thread:

1) Sure, when you look at the rich you see a few bad eggs. But we shouldn't punish the majority that are good just because of a few bad ones which abuse the system.

2) Sure, when you look at the poor and lower middle-class you see decent folk who work hard to improve their lot. But this group as a whole deserves little to no relief because of the few bad ones which abuse the system.

Just whose payroll are you on?

The rub: we're both looking for fair play. We're just wearing different glasses and looking in opposite directions.


    Originally posted by Moe Gates
    To hear W. talk, his daddy was a coal miner, not the president.


Or that Vesting Order 248 didn't state that Prescott Bush traded with the Nazi's after '41

My father (who at one point was a coal miner) says those exact words quite often. And I laughed and noded just as much when I read them here.


    Originally posted by Moe Gates
    And the one guy who actually DID work his ass off to become president and make something of himself is the person republicans hate more than anyone. Not surprising. You don't have to dig too deep to uncover the elite's hypocracy. They believe some people who are obviously entitled to run America, and some aren't.


Bra-fucking-vo! Thanks for reading and typing my mind.


    Originally posted by Grimis

    But enough about Al Gore...



Lefty that I am (He admitted it! Seize him!) I couldn't help but laugh at this...


    Originally posted by cranlsn
    As to the Republican control of Washington... We've got control and the GOP can finally start getting some of their agenda through, some of their judicial nominations through, and actual work will be getting done. It's their ball now, and we've at least got the chance now to show the world what W's plans can do. With Daschle and his obstructionists in the Senate, absolutely nothing, bad or good, was getting done.

    Finally...guys...it's not all black and white. Not ALL people on welfare or in low paying jobs are lazy and worthless. Likewise, not ALL millionares are evil, conniving elitists. Like most issues, the truth is somewhere in between. It's just my firm belief that conservative policies are the best way to handle this nations problems and make the country better for EVERYONE, not just the "have nots".



Wow. I've never read an opinion here (including my own) put so decently and succinctly. While I do disagree with you, you still deserve a "Thanks" and a thumbs up.

Edit: Me like grammar and spelling. They is good.

(edited by Fletch on 8.11.02 1103)
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 1130/3273
EXP: 12776097
For next: 315256

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 198 days
Last activity: 198 days
#55 Posted on 8.11.02 1037.25
Reposted on: 8.11.09 1037.40
One quick question for everyone who has posted the words "steal" and "my money" in this thread. Some of you agree with a flat tax. So do I. So here's the question:

After you implement the flat tax, do you expect the government to downsize it's budget, continue defecit spending, or what? Moe's plan gets rid of ALL INCOME TAX. The government is not stealing any of your income. But of course to keep the government afloat he has to supplement that money from somewhere.... Where would you like that money to come from?

-Jag
cranlsn
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 144/1207
EXP: 2844698
For next: 25060

Since: 18.3.02
From: Sussex, WI

Since last post: 13 days
Last activity: 10 hours
#56 Posted on 8.11.02 1045.00
Reposted on: 8.11.09 1047.24

    Originally posted by Jaguar
    One quick question for everyone who has posted the words "steal" and "my money" in this thread. Some of you agree with a flat tax. So do I. So here's the question:

    After you implement the flat tax, do you expect the government to downsize it's budget, continue defecit spending, or what? Moe's plan gets rid of ALL INCOME TAX. The government is not stealing any of your income. But of course to keep the government afloat he has to supplement that money from somewhere.... Where would you like that money to come from?

    -Jag



If a flat tax were ever enacted, yes I would expect government to downsize. Without crippling taxes on the people and companies supplying the jobs that run the economy, there wouldn't be a gigantic need for many of the government run programs that we now have.

In addition, in a better economy, more people are employed and making better wages, AND spending more of said money, thereby driving the economy. It's a big circle.

More people, making more money, means more tax income. Put another way, more people paying a fair tax adds up to more money than a few people paying draconian taxes.

I'm not against taxes, it's a necessary evil to run our country in the fashion we've become used to, i.e. freedom & democracy. I AM against paying more and more money for increasingly ineffective social programs however. And no that doesn't mean I'm against "poor people", it means I think there are better ways to be charitible in the private sector without government help/interference.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 391/1759
EXP: 4929777
For next: 63093

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1315 days
Last activity: 81 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#57 Posted on 8.11.02 1219.53
Reposted on: 8.11.09 1223.05
LOL na- I think the lower income people should not be REWARDED for being poorer. You say relief, I call it punishment. Those with higher income worked for their own relief- they worked harder to NO LONGER be in the position that the lower income put them in. It took time, sacrifice, and hard work, an EXTRA effort. This country cannot rely on hand-outs. Let them work harder for their own financial relief.
This is not to say I think they should be ignored. Relief should now come through a re-distrabution of wealth, rather a continuation of programs designed to help them get back on their feet- unemployment, social security, welfare (provided these programs are managed properly, and continously updated to reflect the needs of the time)... and aid with more TANGIBLE items like food banks that are paid for by PRIVATE donors (you know, the evil rich people that want to burn the homeless?). It is not the federal government's job to provide relief for the masses like that- that is the responsibility of local and county governments for the most part. Why must the federal government have its fingers in everything to make you people happy?
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 746/2108
EXP: 6615605
For next: 35085

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 4 hours
#58 Posted on 8.11.02 1433.21
Reposted on: 8.11.09 1434.08
So are you in favor of lower Federal Taxes and higher Local taxes? That's fair enough I suppose, as long as you make sure that folks who work in the city and live in the suburbs also pay some of that tax where they work.

As for the "private funding," that relies on the fact that enough rich actually do fund this stuff. That's a little unrealistic. Elite GOP fantasy-land:

"Don't worry, rich people will support all this stuff voluntarily. As soon as the CEO's get their tax-cut, they're sure to run tight to the food bank to donate. But of course if they decide to buy a yacht instead, that's just as good becuase is gives those people more jobs as yacht-makers. Trickle-down and all."
cranlsn
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 156/1207
EXP: 2844698
For next: 25060

Since: 18.3.02
From: Sussex, WI

Since last post: 13 days
Last activity: 10 hours
#59 Posted on 8.11.02 1452.15
Reposted on: 8.11.09 1455.24

    Originally posted by MoeGates
    br>
    "Don't worry, rich people will support all this stuff voluntarily. As soon as the CEO's get their tax-cut, they're sure to run tight to the food bank to donate. But of course if they decide to buy a yacht instead, that's just as good becuase is gives those people more jobs as yacht-makers. Trickle-down and all."



OK...the flip side of this in Liberal Land:

"It's obvious that those 'rich' people aren't spending their money the right way. Since we're so enlightened we NEED to tax them disproportionately and give the money to the RIGHT people. Like the yacht makers that had be laid off since we ate all of the owners profits up with taxes."

Conservative fiscal policies help EVERYONE, yes, with "trickle-down and all". Jobs = income = income taxes. More jobs = larger tax base.

Higher taxes on "rich" corporations = less jobs due to layoffs required to keep corporations open = less income taxes. Less jobs = smaller tax base.

We can argue this back and forth for 100 more posts. I cannot agree that more government taxation and involvement is the solution to "what ails us".
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 861/7534
EXP: 43739270
For next: 562492

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 479 days
Last activity: 479 days
#60 Posted on 8.11.02 1836.44
Reposted on: 8.11.09 1840.21

    Originally posted by Fletch
      Originally posted by Pool-Boy
      Way to come in late Fletch


    I'm nothing if not... uh... what was I saying?


      Originally posted by Pool-Boy

      The point is that with time and effort, ANYONE can make more than minimum wage. ANYONE. And if they do not want to, more power to them! BUT, they should not be entitled to a "cut" of the cash that others have earned. That is just bullshit. I mean, seriously... are you prepared to give up half of YOUR income because some beggar wants a cut of it?
      True story- I lived in Tucson for a number of years (working MINIMUM wage, I might ad) and my roomate at thetime was working at a Circle K. Every day, they would see a bum sitting on the street-corner, begging. One day the manager of the Circle K comes out and tells the guy that if he gets cleaned up, he will hire him. "Will you pay me $200 a day?" Well, of course not. "Sorry, that is what I make out here." This is the kind of person you would be supporting if you got your way. My point is that everyone who works should pay their fair share of taxes. Period. YES, people who make more money should and do pay more. That is the way things work. But they should also benefit more from a tax-cut (in dollars) because they are PAYING MORE IN THE FIRST PLACE! I am sorry, I cannot see how it is their responsibility to shell out more cash just because they make more and can "afford it." What is the point of working hard, investing your money to provide jobs and industry, if your money will be taken from you simply because "you can afford it?" I have a great idea! lets just make this country one GIANT welfare state where 10% of the people pay and work to support the other 90%... because they can afford it! Lets see how well the country runs then!



    Please don't take this personally, but I have a very hard time reading post of yours like this without ample grains of salt.

    For the most part you've basically made two points in this thread:

    1) Sure, when you look at the rich you see a few bad eggs. But we shouldn't punish the majority that are good just because of a few bad ones which abuse the system.

    2) Sure, when you look at the poor and lower middle-class you see decent folk who work hard to improve their lot. But this group as a whole deserves little to no relief because of the few bad ones which abuse the system.

    Just whose payroll are you on?

    The rub: we're both looking for fair play. We're just wearing different glasses and looking in opposite directions.


      Originally posted by Moe Gates
      To hear W. talk, his daddy was a coal miner, not the president.


    Or that Vesting Order 248 didn't state that Prescott Bush traded with the Nazi's after '41

    My father (who at one point was a coal miner) says those exact words quite often. And I laughed and noded just as much when I read them here.


      Originally posted by Moe Gates
      And the one guy who actually DID work his ass off to become president and make something of himself is the person republicans hate more than anyone. Not surprising. You don't have to dig too deep to uncover the elite's hypocracy. They believe some people who are obviously entitled to run America, and some aren't.


    Bra-fucking-vo! Thanks for reading and typing my mind.


      Originally posted by Grimis

      But enough about Al Gore...



    Lefty that I am (He admitted it! Seize him!) I couldn't help but laugh at this...


      Originally posted by cranlsn
      As to the Republican control of Washington... We've got control and the GOP can finally start getting some of their agenda through, some of their judicial nominations through, and actual work will be getting done. It's their ball now, and we've at least got the chance now to show the world what W's plans can do. With Daschle and his obstructionists in the Senate, absolutely nothing, bad or good, was getting done.

      Finally...guys...it's not all black and white. Not ALL people on welfare or in low paying jobs are lazy and worthless. Likewise, not ALL millionares are evil, conniving elitists. Like most issues, the truth is somewhere in between. It's just my firm belief that conservative policies are the best way to handle this nations problems and make the country better for EVERYONE, not just the "have nots".



    Wow. I've never read an opinion here (including my own) put so decently and succinctly. While I do disagree with you, you still deserve a "Thanks" and a thumbs up.

    Edit: Me like grammar and spelling. They is good.

    (edited by Fletch on 8.11.02 1103)







Ok, if we are going to go into dealing with the Nazi's, does that disqualify members of the Kennedy family from offce, since Joseph Kennedy was willing to appease the Nazi's when he was ambassador to Britain? I say its a fair trade off, Republicans get rid of all references to the Presidencies of both Bush's, Democrats get rid of the references to Jack, Robert, and Glug Glug ( I mean Ted) Kennedy. Also, take Ted's retarded son Patches away as well.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Pages: Prev 1 2 3Thread ahead: Al Qaeda and Everyone else
Next thread: Here we go again. Again.
Previous thread: Tactics like these....
(1982 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Jim Jeffords Worst Nightmare and General Election ThoughtsRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.247 seconds.