Total Posts:101|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Libs Giving Conservatives Handouts

PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
http://voices.washingtonpost.com...

I dunno how accurate this is, but it's interesting to say the least. Oh, also...

http://www.businessinsider.com...

The rich-poor gap is getting bigger and bigger. Right-wingers, how do you explain this? Are the poor just getting multifold lazier, and the rich multifold industrious? Please explain.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Tamikajones
Posts: 371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:20:58 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
The rich-poor gap is getting bigger and bigger. Right-wingers, how do you explain this? Are the poor just getting multifold lazier, and the rich multifold industrious? Please explain.

1. Economy gets better

2. Anyone who's intelligent (invests in the stock market) The only people with balls were me and the richies. Thus companies get better and the rich get richer. Doesn't have anything to do with multifold laziness, just a repercussion of the lack of an education on basic investing for the working class.
: At 4/21/2010 5:49:24 PM, banker wrote:
: Mirza at least no one is misunderstanding santa...!!
:
:Hitler had sexual issues just like muhammud..!!
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:22:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
The rich-poor gap is getting bigger and bigger. Right-wingers, how do you explain this?

Statism.

Are the poor just getting multifold lazier, and the rich multifold industrious?

HAHAHA. No.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:24:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I don't really see the concern with the rich-poor gap as long as the living conditions of all parties are improving. I'd much rather be in a world where everybody is unequally rich than where everybody is equally poor.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:25:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:22:21 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
The rich-poor gap is getting bigger and bigger. Right-wingers, how do you explain this?

Statism.
Statism certainly makes the poor poorer, but it does not make the rich richer (most of them anyway), after all, it taxes from them. A few rich that are politically favored benefit, but most of the money for that is taken from other rich people, and the classes of politically favored poor people are more numerous.

Granted, inflation and debt tend to be factors that run in the opposite direction, taking from the poor and giving to the rich-- but as far as I know they aren't currently as major factors as taxes.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:27:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:25:44 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:22:21 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
The rich-poor gap is getting bigger and bigger. Right-wingers, how do you explain this?

Statism.
Statism certainly makes the poor poorer, but it does not make the rich richer (most of them anyway),

Wrong. The roots of almost all of the great fortunes today lie in the bloody hands of the state.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:29:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:27:33 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:25:44 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:22:21 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
The rich-poor gap is getting bigger and bigger. Right-wingers, how do you explain this?

Statism.
Statism certainly makes the poor poorer, but it does not make the rich richer (most of them anyway),

Wrong. The roots of almost all of the great fortunes today lie in the bloody hands of the state.

Reasoning, I'm sure you have some quote for that from Rothbard or whoever, but that doesn't make it true.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:30:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:27:33 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:25:44 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:22:21 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
The rich-poor gap is getting bigger and bigger. Right-wingers, how do you explain this?

Statism.
Statism certainly makes the poor poorer, but it does not make the rich richer (most of them anyway),

Wrong. The roots of almost all of the great fortunes today lie in the bloody hands of the state.

Well, I'll take two great fortunes that I can think of off the top of my head: Bill Gates and Alex Rodriguez. Where's the state?
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:32:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:27:33 PM, Reasoning wrote:
Wrong. The roots of almost all of the great fortunes today lie in the bloody hands of the state.

http://www.forbes.com...

Find me all the fortunes that the state created.
Tamikajones
Posts: 371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:33:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:20:58 PM, Tamikajones wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
The rich-poor gap is getting bigger and bigger. Right-wingers, how do you explain this? Are the poor just getting multifold lazier, and the rich multifold industrious? Please explain.

1. Economy gets better

2. Anyone who's intelligent (invests in the stock market) The only people with balls were me and the richies. Thus companies get better and the rich get richer. Doesn't have anything to do with multifold laziness, just a repercussion of the lack of an education on basic investing for the working class.
: At 4/21/2010 5:49:24 PM, banker wrote:
: Mirza at least no one is misunderstanding santa...!!
:
:Hitler had sexual issues just like muhammud..!!
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:34:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com...

I dunno how accurate this is, but it's interesting to say the least. Oh, also...

Anyone care to comment on the first link?
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:38:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:30:14 PM, mongeese wrote:
Well, I'll take two great fortunes that I can think of off the top of my head: Bill Gates and Alex Rodriguez. Where's the state?

Bill Gates: Intellectual Property, etc.

Alex Rodriguez: Government subsidization of the baseball industry, etc.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:41:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:34:33 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com...

I dunno how accurate this is, but it's interesting to say the least. Oh, also...

Anyone care to comment on the first link?

The author is most likely half-retarded. The study is from 2005 (GOP Congress since 1994 and Prez since 2000). What does he expect? He gives the 2008 Presidential election chart like it somehow contributed to the 2005 study.

Government subsidies suck no matter what.
Tamikajones
Posts: 371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:41:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:34:33 PM, PoeJoe wrote
A bogus statistic that shows dollar per tax dollar but fails to show to whom that dollar goes to. If it did it would show the poor (liberal) minority receiving 99% of those tax dollars regardless of state majority in all 50 states while the taxpayer (conservative except for the very high incomes) paying 99% of those taxes.
: At 4/21/2010 5:49:24 PM, banker wrote:
: Mirza at least no one is misunderstanding santa...!!
:
:Hitler had sexual issues just like muhammud..!!
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:44:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:38:50 PM, Reasoning wrote:
Bill Gates: Intellectual Property, etc.

Alex Rodriguez: Government subsidization of the baseball industry, etc.

What a warped world you live in. Poor boy. First off, you can't put "etc" if you only give one example. Bill Gates didn't get rich because of intellectual property, so I don't know what you're talking about there. If you seriously believe that the MLB gets more than an extremely minimal subsidy from the federal government, then you're delusional. The MLB would be the MLB with or without government.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:55:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:38:50 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:30:14 PM, mongeese wrote:
Well, I'll take two great fortunes that I can think of off the top of my head: Bill Gates and Alex Rodriguez. Where's the state?

Bill Gates: Intellectual Property, etc.
If Intellectual Property didn't exist, we'd have no Microsoft. We'd probably have no computer programming languages, either, because those take time and effort, which should rightfully be rewarded. I say, if intellectual property didn't exist, the steam engine would have been delayed for so much longer, airplane designs would be static, and Debate.org would never come into existence. How about that?

Alex Rodriguez: Government subsidization of the baseball industry, etc.

Link? Seriously?
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:57:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:44:16 PM, Nags wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:38:50 PM, Reasoning wrote:
Bill Gates didn't get rich because of intellectual property, so I don't know what you're talking about there.

What universe do you live in?

If you seriously believe that the MLB gets more than an extremely minimal subsidy from the federal government, then you're delusional. The MLB would be the MLB with or without government.

"A stadium subsidy is a type of government subsidy given to professional sports franchises to help finance the construction or renovation of sports stadiums. Stadium subsidies can come in the form of cash payments, tax abatements, infrastructure improvements, and operating cost subsidies. The government funding to provide stadium subsidies comes from state or local (often municipal) tax revenues." - Wikipedia[1]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 7:59:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:57:24 PM, Reasoning wrote:
What universe do you live in?

Nice logic and nice sources. Right on, bro.

"A stadium subsidy is a type of government subsidy given to professional sports franchises to help finance the construction or renovation of sports stadiums. Stadium subsidies can come in the form of cash payments, tax abatements, infrastructure improvements, and operating cost subsidies. The government funding to provide stadium subsidies comes from state or local (often municipal) tax revenues." - Wikipedia[1]

What's your point?
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:00:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:59:24 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Is it sad that the title made me think this was a banker thread?

No, I thought the same this first.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:00:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 8:00:22 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:59:24 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Is it sad that the title made me think this was a banker thread?

No, I thought the same thing at first.

Jon Stewart came on. Got rushed. Made typo.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:02:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:57:24 PM, Reasoning wrote:
"A stadium subsidy is a type of government subsidy given to professional sports franchises to help finance the construction or renovation of sports stadiums. Stadium subsidies can come in the form of cash payments, tax abatements, infrastructure improvements, and operating cost subsidies. The government funding to provide stadium subsidies comes from state or local (often municipal) tax revenues." - Wikipedia[1]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...

And you seriously believe that stadium subsidies are the only reason why A-Rod has a multi-million dollar salary?
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:06:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 8:00:59 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 4/12/2010 8:00:22 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:59:24 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Is it sad that the title made me think this was a banker thread?

No, I thought the same thing at first.

Jon Stewart came on. Got rushed. Made typo.

It's fine. I've just found that, generally, any title of the form "libs do X" is usually banker.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:08:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 8:02:42 PM, mongeese wrote:
And you seriously believe that stadium subsidies are the only reason why A-Rod has a multi-million dollar salary?

The only reason, no. But the rest of the reasons have to do with government intervention in some way as well.

But the stadium subsidies are massive. Tens and sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:11:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 8:08:20 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/12/2010 8:02:42 PM, mongeese wrote:
And you seriously believe that stadium subsidies are the only reason why A-Rod has a multi-million dollar salary?

The only reason, no. But the rest of the reasons have to do with government intervention in some way as well.

Let me guess, people enjoy watching baseball games becasue the government set up a huge mind-control device that compelled many people with baseball addiction.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:12:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:38:50 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/12/2010 7:30:14 PM, mongeese wrote:
Well, I'll take two great fortunes that I can think of off the top of my head: Bill Gates and Alex Rodriguez. Where's the state?

Bill Gates: Intellectual Property

That isn't "Statist" any more than ordinary property, are you a thief?. Both can be enforced by a state of course, but the state did not create the IP, Gates did.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:12:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 8:08:20 PM, Reasoning wrote:
The only reason, no. But the rest of the reasons have to do with government intervention in some way as well.

Let's hear 'em.

But the stadium subsidies are massive. Tens and sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars.

The stadium subsidies do little to nothing for players' salaries.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:15:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 8:12:38 PM, Nags wrote:
At 4/12/2010 8:08:20 PM, Reasoning wrote:
The only reason, no. But the rest of the reasons have to do with government intervention in some way as well.

Let's hear 'em.

But the stadium subsidies are massive. Tens and sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars.

The stadium subsidies do little to nothing for players' salaries.

I wouldn't say little to nothing, but-- 100 million is about an entire roster worth of salary-- for one year. Obviously pro sports teams don't get new stadium every year, they get it once every ten to twenty years or so.
That amounts to 5 to 10 percent.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2010 8:22:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 8:15:00 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
I wouldn't say little to nothing, but-- 100 million is about an entire roster worth of salary-- for one year. Obviously pro sports teams don't get new stadium every year, they get it once every ten to twenty years or so.
That amounts to 5 to 10 percent.

The subsidies go to the stadium, not the players' salaries. ...
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2010 5:15:09 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/12/2010 7:18:20 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
The rich-poor gap is getting bigger and bigger. Right-wingers, how do you explain this?

They don't need to explain it, it makes them happy inside.