Total Posts:41|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Supermodel needs 1/4 Billion to Live Rant

TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?
Chang29
Posts: 732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.
A free market anti-capitalist

If it can be de-centralized, it will be de-centralized.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 4:15:55 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

Divorce laws are idiotic and anti-male. I don't agree with his anti-capitalist view.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Chang29
Posts: 732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 9:17:15 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 4:15:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

Divorce laws are idiotic and anti-male. I don't agree with his anti-capitalist view.

I was only talking about one law. A law takes a sizable portion of many retired service members income every month, and applies until death.

You'll come around on the views. They are simple, don't hurt people and don't take their stuff, and recognize that it applies to governments as well as people. Helping the needy is a personal choice and should never be due to the threat of violence.
A free market anti-capitalist

If it can be de-centralized, it will be de-centralized.
Chang29
Posts: 732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.
A free market anti-capitalist

If it can be de-centralized, it will be de-centralized.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 12:46:51 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 4:15:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

Divorce laws are idiotic and anti-male. I don't agree with his anti-capitalist view.

I agree with the former and not the latter
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth
Chang29
Posts: 732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 1:18:17 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Capitalism when defined as mutually beneficial voluntary exchange is not the problem, government is. Government is the system rigger, through its monopoly of force, with input from the wealthy and well connected to screw the rest of us. The main weapon used is the dollar. In today's economic environment the crony capitalist fear a free market more than government. These capitalists can control governments, but can not control all of us. No company can use violence to force the purchase of a product, yet government can. Free markets are the great equalizer.

Here is a video from Jeffrey A. Tucker about how capitalism is about love:

https://www.youtube.com...

Please watch it with an open mind, Jeffrey uses many religious references, which I thought were unneeded.
A free market anti-capitalist

If it can be de-centralized, it will be de-centralized.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 1:38:33 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 1:18:17 PM, Chang29 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Capitalism when defined as mutually beneficial voluntary exchange is not the problem, government is. Government is the system rigger, through its monopoly of force, with input from the wealthy and well connected to screw the rest of us. The main weapon used is the dollar. In today's economic environment the crony capitalist fear a free market more than government. These capitalists can control governments, but can not control all of us. No company can use violence to force the purchase of a product, yet government can. Free markets are the great equalizer.

Here is a video from Jeffrey A. Tucker about how capitalism is about love:

https://www.youtube.com...

Please watch it with an open mind, Jeffrey uses many religious references, which I thought were unneeded.

Will do, but right now, I have to finish my show. I've missed an episode of Wayward Pines so I will watch this in roughly 20 minutes
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 2:56:40 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 1:18:17 PM, Chang29 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Capitalism when defined as mutually beneficial voluntary exchange is not the problem, government is. Government is the system rigger, through its monopoly of force, with input from the wealthy and well connected to screw the rest of us. The main weapon used is the dollar. In today's economic environment the crony capitalist fear a free market more than government. These capitalists can control governments, but can not control all of us. No company can use violence to force the purchase of a product, yet government can. Free markets are the great equalizer.

Here is a video from Jeffrey A. Tucker about how capitalism is about love:

https://www.youtube.com...

Please watch it with an open mind, Jeffrey uses many religious references, which I thought were unneeded.

Open mind, and I personally think he is full of sh!t so far.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 3:53:45 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 9:17:15 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 4:15:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

Divorce laws are idiotic and anti-male. I don't agree with his anti-capitalist view.

I was only talking about one law. A law takes a sizable portion of many retired service members income every month, and applies until death.

You'll come around on the views. They are simple, don't hurt people and don't take their stuff, and recognize that it applies to governments as well as people. Helping the needy is a personal choice and should never be due to the threat of violence.

I already agree 100% with what you just said, so there's no need for me to come around.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Chang29
Posts: 732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2016 11:55:10 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 2:56:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 1:18:17 PM, Chang29 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Capitalism when defined as mutually beneficial voluntary exchange is not the problem, government is. Government is the system rigger, through its monopoly of force, with input from the wealthy and well connected to screw the rest of us. The main weapon used is the dollar. In today's economic environment the crony capitalist fear a free market more than government. These capitalists can control governments, but can not control all of us. No company can use violence to force the purchase of a product, yet government can. Free markets are the great equalizer.

Here is a video from Jeffrey A. Tucker about how capitalism is about love:

https://www.youtube.com...

Please watch it with an open mind, Jeffrey uses many religious references, which I thought were unneeded.

Open mind, and I personally think he is full of sh!t so far.

Since you disagree with his explanation. I'd like to know what method you support for individuals to peacefully exchange goods and services.

Most people that say they object to capitalism, their real issue is how companies influence government to gain advantage in markets. Then assign blame to the market for failures not government. Companies can not use force in a free market, only government can. If you do not want systems to be rigged, removed violent government from systems.
A free market anti-capitalist

If it can be de-centralized, it will be de-centralized.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 12:10:35 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/1/2016 11:55:10 PM, Chang29 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 2:56:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 1:18:17 PM, Chang29 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Capitalism when defined as mutually beneficial voluntary exchange is not the problem, government is. Government is the system rigger, through its monopoly of force, with input from the wealthy and well connected to screw the rest of us. The main weapon used is the dollar. In today's economic environment the crony capitalist fear a free market more than government. These capitalists can control governments, but can not control all of us. No company can use violence to force the purchase of a product, yet government can. Free markets are the great equalizer.

Here is a video from Jeffrey A. Tucker about how capitalism is about love:

https://www.youtube.com...

Please watch it with an open mind, Jeffrey uses many religious references, which I thought were unneeded.

Open mind, and I personally think he is full of sh!t so far.

Since you disagree with his explanation. I'd like to know what method you support for individuals to peacefully exchange goods and services.

Communism, everyone is 100% equal.
Most people that say they object to capitalism, their real issue is how companies influence government to gain advantage in markets. Then assign blame to the market for failures not government. Companies can not use force in a free market, only government can. If you do not want systems to be rigged, removed violent government from systems.
Government shouldn't be involved in business ever. Corporations have more rights than I do!
Chang29
Posts: 732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 12:44:15 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 12:10:35 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 11:55:10 PM, Chang29 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 2:56:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 1:18:17 PM, Chang29 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Capitalism when defined as mutually beneficial voluntary exchange is not the problem, government is. Government is the system rigger, through its monopoly of force, with input from the wealthy and well connected to screw the rest of us. The main weapon used is the dollar. In today's economic environment the crony capitalist fear a free market more than government. These capitalists can control governments, but can not control all of us. No company can use violence to force the purchase of a product, yet government can. Free markets are the great equalizer.

Here is a video from Jeffrey A. Tucker about how capitalism is about love:

https://www.youtube.com...

Please watch it with an open mind, Jeffrey uses many religious references, which I thought were unneeded.

Open mind, and I personally think he is full of sh!t so far.

Since you disagree with his explanation. I'd like to know what method you support for individuals to peacefully exchange goods and services.

Communism, everyone is 100% equal.

Wow, you never understood a word I wrote, I need to get better.

Most people that say they object to capitalism, their real issue is how companies influence government to gain advantage in markets. Then assign blame to the market for failures not government. Companies can not use force in a free market, only government can. If you do not want systems to be rigged, removed violent government from systems.
Government shouldn't be involved in business ever. Corporations have more rights than I do!

Then, argue to end government's ability to control markets. If government can not control markets then corporations will not need to influence it.
A free market anti-capitalist

If it can be de-centralized, it will be de-centralized.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.
She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"
The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.
She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.
MrVindication
Posts: 86
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 2:51:10 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.
She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.

This is incorrect. With the proper education, work ethic, and a fair amount of bootstrapping, those willing to do anything to rise to the top will. You cannot be a high school drop out, work ten jobs at McDonalds, and complain about how your hard work is not paying off.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 2:55:51 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.

You must not be paying attention to the news or to any financial writing if you think that Trump went from a few million dollars into a few billion out of sheer luck. You do realize that making quite a lot of money in the property business is the exact opposite of pure luck? You could make that argument in the stock market, but I'm sure that an MBA from an Ivy League university that has written multiple best-sellers made his money with a little bit more than just pure luck.

She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.

What about Bill Gates, who built the foundations for being the richest man in the world in his garage? What about the various entrepreneurs with skill and intelligence that were able to make a fortune without having a lot of money to back them up? Are you going to discount all of those start ups just because your mom lacks the basic skill to get somewhere in life? What a moron you must me.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 2:57:50 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 2:51:10 AM, MrVindication wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.
She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.

This is incorrect. With the proper education, work ethic, and a fair amount of bootstrapping, those willing to do anything to rise to the top will. You cannot be a high school drop out, work ten jobs at McDonalds, and complain about how your hard work is not paying off.

So, luck has nothing to do with richness?

A person can be the most educated person on Earth, have the best work ethic, work a lot of jobs and work in their basement on a prototype for the next big thing, and still get nowhere in life. That person could die poor, all because of bad luck.

http://inventors.about.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 3:03:10 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 2:57:50 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:51:10 AM, MrVindication wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.
She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.

This is incorrect. With the proper education, work ethic, and a fair amount of bootstrapping, those willing to do anything to rise to the top will. You cannot be a high school drop out, work ten jobs at McDonalds, and complain about how your hard work is not paying off.

So, luck has nothing to do with richness?

A person can be the most educated person on Earth, have the best work ethic, work a lot of jobs and work in their basement on a prototype for the next big thing, and still get nowhere in life. That person could die poor, all because of bad luck.

http://inventors.about.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Two pieces of "evidence" =/= enough evidence to constitute what your argument as being truth.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 3:03:17 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 2:55:51 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.

You must not be paying attention to the news or to any financial writing if you think that Trump went from a few million dollars into a few billion out of sheer luck. You do realize that making quite a lot of money in the property business is the exact opposite of pure luck? You could make that argument in the stock market, but I'm sure that an MBA from an Ivy League university that has written multiple best-sellers made his money with a little bit more than just pure luck.

Went into the right business at the right time. The education and other factors are important, but if you didn't get the right amount of luck in the first place, MBA from Ivy league would be the hobo down the street.
She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.

What about Bill Gates, who built the foundations for being the richest man in the world in his garage? What about the various entrepreneurs with skill and intelligence that were able to make a fortune without having a lot of money to back them up? Are you going to discount all of those start ups just because your mom lacks the basic skill to get somewhere in life? What a moron you must me.

No amount of work accounts for the misfortune suffered by some inventers who had the misfortune of bad luck on the wrong day

http://www.foxnews.com...

http://inventors.about.com...
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 3:04:52 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 3:03:10 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:57:50 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:51:10 AM, MrVindication wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.
She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.

This is incorrect. With the proper education, work ethic, and a fair amount of bootstrapping, those willing to do anything to rise to the top will. You cannot be a high school drop out, work ten jobs at McDonalds, and complain about how your hard work is not paying off.

So, luck has nothing to do with richness?

A person can be the most educated person on Earth, have the best work ethic, work a lot of jobs and work in their basement on a prototype for the next big thing, and still get nowhere in life. That person could die poor, all because of bad luck.

http://inventors.about.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Two pieces of "evidence" =/= enough evidence to constitute what your argument as being truth.

Those two would have fame untold. Bad luck. Grey? Would be in history books worldwide. Other guy? i'd remember his name.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 3:06:57 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 3:03:17 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:55:51 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.

You must not be paying attention to the news or to any financial writing if you think that Trump went from a few million dollars into a few billion out of sheer luck. You do realize that making quite a lot of money in the property business is the exact opposite of pure luck? You could make that argument in the stock market, but I'm sure that an MBA from an Ivy League university that has written multiple best-sellers made his money with a little bit more than just pure luck.

Went into the right business at the right time. The education and other factors are important, but if you didn't get the right amount of luck in the first place, MBA from Ivy league would be the hobo down the street.

Not exactly. An MBA from Ivy League enables you to work for someone else, which is what he did with his father. He got enough experience to learn to menage a property business at the right time, especially when the property business in the 1970s wasn't that profitable.

She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.

What about Bill Gates, who built the foundations for being the richest man in the world in his garage? What about the various entrepreneurs with skill and intelligence that were able to make a fortune without having a lot of money to back them up? Are you going to discount all of those start ups just because your mom lacks the basic skill to get somewhere in life? What a moron you must me.

No amount of work accounts for the misfortune suffered by some inventers who had the misfortune of bad luck on the wrong day

http://www.foxnews.com...

http://inventors.about.com...
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 3:08:14 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 3:04:52 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 3:03:10 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:57:50 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:51:10 AM, MrVindication wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.
She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.

This is incorrect. With the proper education, work ethic, and a fair amount of bootstrapping, those willing to do anything to rise to the top will. You cannot be a high school drop out, work ten jobs at McDonalds, and complain about how your hard work is not paying off.

So, luck has nothing to do with richness?

A person can be the most educated person on Earth, have the best work ethic, work a lot of jobs and work in their basement on a prototype for the next big thing, and still get nowhere in life. That person could die poor, all because of bad luck.

http://inventors.about.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Two pieces of "evidence" =/= enough evidence to constitute what your argument as being truth.

Those two would have fame untold. Bad luck. Grey? Would be in history books worldwide. Other guy? i'd remember his name.

Patent laws are different from entrepreneurship, especially when someone "claiming" they invented the iPhone bears absolutely no weight as there is little evidence for it.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
TheChristian
Posts: 1,031
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2016 3:10:05 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/2/2016 3:06:57 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 3:03:17 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:55:51 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:49:05 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 2:33:58 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:29:02 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 1:13:12 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:08:55 AM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/2/2016 12:01:21 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/1/2016 12:49:40 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 7/1/2016 9:24:52 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/30/2016 1:46:02 PM, TheChristian wrote:
At 6/30/2016 3:27:44 AM, Chang29 wrote:
At 6/29/2016 10:14:04 PM, TheChristian wrote:
http://www.msn.com...

Am I the only one who sees the issue with this? It's ridiculous. It's more than most people ever make. How dare this woman claim she needs this much? I mean, my family isn't poor, but that's still more money than my mother will make!More than most Americans ever make. By a LOT. How DARE she? She is insulting the middle class. And there's the breakdown.

Thoughts?

Current divorce law in America uses this same justification. The UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES" PROTECTION ACT is in line with this supermodel's reasoning. Those offend by her justification should also be offend by the injustice the American government imposes on military retiree's so that a former spouses can "maintain a lifestyle".

Plus, this is another reason for the state not to be involved in marriage. Government authorized bed partners should not receive special treatment.

I hate divorce law. By thevway, I agree with your anticapitalist view

I prefer to consider my views pro-free market, which is not how most capitalists want to operate today.

I hate capitalism, it is rigged for the top 1%. People who work hard can't make something for themselves while the rich mostly inherit wealth

Economics disagrees with you.

Take my mother for instance. Worked 2 jobs for 6 years of my life, single parent. Didn't have the money to develop her ideas. Real life disagrees. In the cave man times of early industry, it was great. Everyone could be wealthy. Now, it's the rich who do nothing.

You really think that anecdotal evidence of a mother who works two jobs, meaning she doesn't have an education to support a family on one job, as well as being a single parent, which is an idiotic decision - you think this qualifies as hatred for "losing" when not being able to compete is not a matter of the system's failure but your mother's failure?

Okay, listen up, nobody insults my mother, she did the most she could with what she had. And the wealthy were born into enough that they had enough money to experiment and innovate. I doubt people like Trump would be as successful if his family wasn't ultra-rich.

You think a few million dollars being turned to a few billion dollars is somehow indicative of him being born into wealth? His father was intelligent, but nowhere as wealthy as he is now. Stop denouncing the success of others because you lack some of your own.

Luck. Pure luck.

You must not be paying attention to the news or to any financial writing if you think that Trump went from a few million dollars into a few billion out of sheer luck. You do realize that making quite a lot of money in the property business is the exact opposite of pure luck? You could make that argument in the stock market, but I'm sure that an MBA from an Ivy League university that has written multiple best-sellers made his money with a little bit more than just pure luck.

Went into the right business at the right time. The education and other factors are important, but if you didn't get the right amount of luck in the first place, MBA from Ivy league would be the hobo down the street.

Not exactly. An MBA from Ivy League enables you to work for someone else, which is what he did with his father. He got enough experience to learn to menage a property business at the right time, especially when the property business in the 1970s wasn't that profitable.

Either way, had he picked a different business, or as lucky to have connections in the beginning, he wouldn't have had a prayer of success
She had college, and not to mention, she didn't have much of a choice. My dad? Missed my birth. Dumped her a week later, after looking at me and saying "God what an ugly baby"

And this means what? Should I pity you and thus state that a system of capital that has given you and your family far more opportunity and leisure than any other system known to man is somehow bad because someone with stupid life decisions didn't benefit from it?

The wealthy create jobs, goods, capital, industry, and innovation, while on the other hand, your mother, who you claimed was wrong by capitalism and unable to "develop her ideas" creates very little.
She created little because she wasn't given opportunity to advance. Most rich people are just pretentious rich kids who let daddy's money carry them to success.

86% of millionaires are self made. No one is simply born into billions and does nothing with it.
Once again, no amount of hard work will do anything today without money backing you and luck.

What about Bill Gates, who built the foundations for being the richest man in the world in his garage? What about the various entrepreneurs with skill and intelligence that were able to make a fortune without having a lot of money to back them up? Are you going to discount all of those start ups just because your mom lacks the basic skill to get somewhere in life? What a moron you must me.

No amount of work accounts for the misfortune suffered by some inventers who had the misfortune of bad luck on the wrong day

http://www.foxnews.com...

http://inventors.about.com...