Total Posts:40|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Liberals, could you help me to understand?

MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 7:22:49 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hello everyone:

First of all, I've been awake for over 3 days straight at the time of writing this. So if there is a piece or two in my writing below that doesn't read correctly or makes no sense at all, just ignore it LOL.

I don't ask for help very often at all in my life, so I request that any person replying to this forum Topic; take it in a more serious fashion and respond the same if you provide comments.

I hope all of my friends here in the community are having an amazing day so far. Anyway, onto the topic at hand: All you Liberals out there, I need some help.

Help me to understand Liberal Ideology including the ideal future if Liberals were 100% in charge; how would the nation progress from its current state, following liberal trend lines for the past 20 years or so, how would it work, is it sustainable indefinitely, what is the logic behind it, what's the goal...the end game? Finally, using good logic and reasoning, modeling your path forward based off the liberal ideology, where does liberal ideology go, and end? What is the goal? What is the dream liberal America for liberals? Remember to stay grounded with your answers. Please don't respond with some stupidity.

Throughout my studies of American politics, parties, ideologies, etc.; I have come to understand Conservative ideology and can even define the reasoning and logic behind about 95% of their ideas and thought processes. Additionally, not only can I define it, but when I sit and REALLY think hard about the values, views, opinions, and paths moving forward; I may not particularly LIKE parts of it as they hurt me more than they help me. Yet even if it destroys me as an individual, I can properly calculate and understand what's going on. and how it fits in with the big picture, et.c et.c etc., getting quickly in line with the idea and generally agreeing with it.

On the other hand, as hard as I try to understand Liberal views, I just don't get it most of the time. I can't apply the numbers and progression over time and see ANY point where society would thrive indefinitely; no sweet spot. When running mental simulations of the future with Liberals I only see varying paths to complete destruction from the inside out; every path taken, merging at the same point in time where political leaders and other wealthy and powerful members of the American society are the only ones that walk away, and they walk away set for life after driving the nation into the ground, destroying everything we love about this great nation. Meanwhile, the rest of the nation, the common every day person like us gets shafted worse than we could ever imagine, left to the wolves.

I don't understand how the pieces fit together or how it would work moving forward. For example: As far back as I can remember, I've watched how Liberals just keep throwing more and more money into government expansion, quickly snatching up every small piece of power around them every chance they get, raising taxes and creating hidden ways of taking more and more of your money. As debt and deficits skyrocket, they refuse to shrink spending, instead just continually increasing the financial drain on everyone, swearing everything is fine as they plot how to squeeze even more out of you. These paths always lead to destruction of the nation in my simulations.

What am I missing about the Liberal ideology that makes it all work in a Liberals mind? Where is the glue that binds it all together? I would really love to learn and understand Liberals so when I talk with them I can have a better understanding of where they come from and how their minds work.

Thank you all for your responses, I look forward to reviewing them. :)

Please help me to larn
Akhenaten
Posts: 854
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 9:12:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I thought America was divided into Democrats, Republicans and Independents.

Where does Liberals come into it?
YaHey
Posts: 43
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 10:40:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 9:12:42 AM, Akhenaten wrote:
I thought America was divided into Democrats, Republicans and Independents.

Where does Liberals come into it?

Most often Democrats are Liberal and Republicans are conservative. I guess you could say Dem or Rep is the party where Lib or Con is the actual ideology.
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 11:14:01 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 10:40:59 AM, YaHey wrote:
At 10/12/2015 9:12:42 AM, Akhenaten wrote:
I thought America was divided into Democrats, Republicans and Independents.

Where does Liberals come into it?

Most often Democrats are Liberal and Republicans are conservative. I guess you could say Dem or Rep is the party where Lib or Con is the actual ideology.

You got it buddy :) Right on the nose!
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 11:22:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 9:04:31 AM, Wylted wrote:
Getting involved with a lot of debates on those subjects, with good debaters may help.

I have attempted to debate with Liberals for years, I just don't get it at all, I don't understand the mindset or the goals, where the finish line is, or really anything.

The ONLY and SINGULAR reason I can come up with in my mind that makes logical sense is that performing as little work as possible while receiving as much compensation as possible; now double it, is the mindset....kind of a laziness over accomplishment feeling?

But then I get into the argument of "Where are all of these handouts coming from?" at which time I'm told that rich people should pay more taxes; and it's down the rabbit hole from there.

My thing is I can't get to the root with anyone. As a dedicated hard worker who enjoys self sufficiency and absolutely hates asking for help; I'm starting to think that I'm just such an opposite of a liberal that I can't see something that's right there and I have no idea what questions to ask to dig to the answers I'm looking for LOL.

That last paragraph is written extremely badly, sounds like I'm calling liberals lazy but that's not what I was going for there so please don't take it that way.
Fly
Posts: 2,045
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 2:30:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I can try to address your question somewhat, but I think you frame your question in too "black and white" a manner-- perhaps that is even a clue itself of the differences being discussed-- black and white thinking vs. more nuanced thinking.

See, a "100% liberal" leadership would essentially be a dictatorship, and US liberals aren't seeking that as a goal. I rather like the checks and balances, disagreements, and compromise that our current structure allows.

As for goals, I would like to think that liberals and conservatives have largely similar goals with just different approaches to achieve them. That is unless conservatives actually seek a "winner take all" goal toward personal prosperity, and the "losers can go pound sand." I would say that liberals want equal access to prosperity as their goal. That is not to be confused with "equal prosperity for all, regardless of one's individual efforts and abilities."

To put it in more concrete terms, I think liberals desire to have the middle class be the largest class by far-- many conservatives do as well. The problem is that history shows this does not happen organically. Therefor, the "river of the economy" needs to be guided in various degrees, and THIS is where the most disagreement arises on the economy.

As for foreign policy, I am really not sure how the ideologies agree and differ from the purist standpoint. I do know how they differ in their current manifestation (present day Dem and Repub) of course.

Hopefully, this is along the lines of what you are looking for here...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 2:45:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 9:12:42 AM, Akhenaten wrote:
I thought America was divided into Democrats, Republicans and Independents.

Where does Liberals come into it?

It's used as a synonym for democrat, but most republicans are liberal as well
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 2:57:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 7:22:49 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
Hello everyone:

First of all, I've been awake for over 3 days straight at the time of writing this. So if there is a piece or two in my writing below that doesn't read correctly or makes no sense at all, just ignore it LOL.

Sorry about that. Whats up? Stress?

Help me to understand Liberal Ideology including the ideal future if Liberals were 100% in charge; how would the nation progress from its current state, following liberal trend lines for the past 20 years or so, how would it work, is it sustainable indefinitely, what is the logic behind it, what's the goal...the end game? Finally, using good logic and reasoning, modeling your path forward based off the liberal ideology, where does liberal ideology go, and end? What is the goal? What is the dream liberal America for liberals? Remember to stay grounded with your answers. Please don't respond with some stupidity.

No sane person wants complete control by a single ideology (except some conservatives). But, what would I see? A more egalitarian society. Where education at the primary levels was not tied to the wealth of the neighborhood you come from. Where higher education is open based on abilities not tied to finance. Where wealth is obtainable but not the obsession of the society. A society not he11 bent on bombing indiscriminately. A society that looks towards a future rather than a lust for a past.

Is it sustainable? Sure. Much more than the race to acquire.


Throughout my studies of American politics, parties, ideologies, etc.; I have come to understand Conservative ideology and can even define the reasoning and logic behind about 95% of their ideas and thought processes. Additionally, not only can I define it, but when I sit and REALLY think hard about the values, views, opinions, and paths moving forward; I may not particularly LIKE parts of it as they hurt me more than they help me. Yet even if it destroys me as an individual, I can properly calculate and understand what's going on. and how it fits in with the big picture, et.c et.c etc., getting quickly in line with the idea and generally agreeing with it.

On the other hand, as hard as I try to understand Liberal views, I just don't get it most of the time. I can't apply the numbers and progression over time and see ANY point where society would thrive indefinitely; no sweet spot. When running mental simulations of the future with Liberals I only see varying paths to complete destruction from the inside out; every path taken, merging at the same point in time where political leaders and other wealthy and powerful members of the American society are the only ones that walk away, and they walk away set for life after driving the nation into the ground, destroying everything we love about this great nation. Meanwhile, the rest of the nation, the common every day person like us gets shafted worse than we could ever imagine, left to the wolves.

I don't understand how the pieces fit together or how it would work moving forward. For example: As far back as I can remember, I've watched how Liberals just keep throwing more and more money into government expansion, quickly snatching up every small piece of power around them every chance they get, raising taxes and creating hidden ways of taking more and more of your money. As debt and deficits skyrocket, they refuse to shrink spending, instead just continually increasing the financial drain on everyone, swearing everything is fine as they plot how to squeeze even more out of you. These paths always lead to destruction of the nation in my simulations.

What am I missing about the Liberal ideology that makes it all work in a Liberals mind? Where is the glue that binds it all together? I would really love to learn and understand Liberals so when I talk with them I can have a better understanding of where they come from and how their minds work.

Thank you all for your responses, I look forward to reviewing them. :)

Please help me to larn
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 3:17:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 2:57:59 PM, TBR wrote:

Sorry about that. Whats up? Stress?

Yeah lots of stress.

No sane person wants complete control by a single ideology (except some conservatives). But, what would I see? A more egalitarian society. Where education at the primary levels was not tied to the wealth of the neighborhood you come from. Where higher education is open based on abilities not tied to finance. Where wealth is obtainable but not the obsession of the society. A society not he11 bent on bombing indiscriminately. A society that looks towards a future rather than a lust for a past.

OK, I get that...holding my tongue so I don't rebut LOL, but I get it. However, my question would be more along the lines of "What is the societal end-game within the liberal ideology? That tape line where liberals would stand there, wipe their sweat away and say "whew.....we finally did it guys"

Is it sustainable? Sure. Much more than the race to acquire.

Holding tongue again LOL.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 3:21:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
OK, I get that...holding my tongue so I don't rebut LOL, but I get it. However, my question would be more along the lines of "What is the societal end-game within the liberal ideology? That tape line where liberals would stand there, wipe their sweat away and say "whew.....we finally did it guys"

You don't need to "lol", those are legit goals.

Societal end-game? None. Society progresses and grows. I have no end-game in mind, just the evolution of society. I do think this is a common point of misunderstanding. The conservative is looking for a point where things become static. Traditional. That holds little interest to me, and many like me.


Is it sustainable? Sure. Much more than the race to acquire.

Holding tongue again LOL.

You come close to actually engaging then do this childish crap. Decide how you would like to talk, and let me know. Adult or child?
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 9:51:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 3:21:38 PM, TBR wrote:

Societal end-game? None. Society progresses and grows. I have no end-game in mind, just the evolution of society. I do think this is a common point of misunderstanding. The conservative is looking for a point where things become static. Traditional. That holds little interest to me, and many like me.

I am not not looking for something static as the world keeps turning, things change daily...we would get really bored if everything was static for the rest of our live right? LOL. When I ask what the end game is for Liberals, I mean something on the lines of: As a Conservative, my perfect world and end game would be as follows (I will keep this list as basic as possible for ease of reading as the full breakdown is too detailed to provide in a small post like this):

THE FOLLOWING ARE PAID CIVIL SERVICE POSITIONS

1) Military - Maintaining a national military as we currently have for national defense as well as security of all foreign interests and allies, keeping a presence on the four corners of globe; focus should remain on ensuring U.S. fields a military superpower without equal

2) Government - Efficient and successful upkeep of the three base branches of the federal government; Legislative, Executive and Judicial

3) Educational Advancement Team -- Not used for standardizing dumb math like common core lol. This is for upgrading and maintaining all public school infrastructure as well as materials, allowing the individual states to pump additional capital into the payroll and development systems for educators. Public School infrastructure top to bottom in America will match our status in the world; #1 -- Finally would be a proposed constitutional amendment sent for ratification, giving constitutional protection to every student; ensuring each student in the public system regardless of family income has the best infrastructure and materials America can provide.

THE FOLLOWING ARE NON-PAID CIVIL SERVICE POSITIONS
These positions are filled by vetted volunteers, internship opportunities, and a call-in system like jury selection. Checks and balances system manned by average citizens in a revolving manner.

1) National Budget Committee

2) Infrastructure Committee

3) Inter-State Ambassador Committee

4) Educational Advancement Committee (Ensures all facilities and materials are in the best possible condition. Liaisons between schools, state education boards and National Educational Advancement Team; completes daily audits to ensure every child in every school, no matter the income level of the area has the best the nation can provide and even the smallest of needs is met in a timely and above satisfactory level -- Ensures that education is treated as the top domestic priority behind only our national defense and preservation of freedoms)

[Additional items withheld for space considerations]

With VERY few exceptions, all of the federal government departments, entities, establishments, corporations, etc. currently linked to the Executive Branch should be disbanded. All responsibilities for these groups should be turned over to the state and local governments, allowing individual states and their residents to decide what is important to them.

[I hope you have a general idea of what I am going for here, extremely small federal footprint, power truly returned to the individual states and more importantly, the residents of that state. The largest focus of the nation domestically will be and remain on educating our children, paving the way for continual growth, making sure that each subsequent generation of Americans WILL be smarter and greater, utilizing the knowledge increase to further enhance this great nation.]

Is it sustainable?

Absolutely. I have worked out a pretty in depth system in my free time that does some pretty amazing things...wish I could show it here. Just looking at it here, I've emptied out 85% of the federal government, freeing up over 50% of our federal expenditures as it is. I've also, just in this small piece of my structure, increased available jobs nation wide by 2.8% -- 4.2% depending on how the states implement their new control. I'm sure there are a good number of bugs I don't see in the full model needing to be reworked as well as a few serious problems, but everything can be fixed when the weakness is found.

You come close to actually engaging then do this childish crap. Decide how you would like to talk, and let me know. Adult or child?

I did not mean anything childish about biting my tongue; it was simply to make it known that I was listening. instead of my usual jaw flapping. This forum is meant to be for me to shut my mouth and learn about liberalism straight from the horses mouth in order to better myself here at DDO so I can then help other become even better.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 10:24:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I have no concern over the size of the federal government with the exception of the military. Further I have no concern over federal spending, with the exception of the military.

Kicking everything to the states is only bumper sticker politics. That changes little, but sound nice to the majority on the right of the spectrum.
stealspell
Posts: 980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 1:49:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 7:22:49 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
Hello everyone:

First of all, I've been awake for over 3 days straight at the time of writing this. So if there is a piece or two in my writing below that doesn't read correctly or makes no sense at all, just ignore it LOL.

I don't ask for help very often at all in my life, so I request that any person replying to this forum Topic; take it in a more serious fashion and respond the same if you provide comments.

I hope all of my friends here in the community are having an amazing day so far. Anyway, onto the topic at hand: All you Liberals out there, I need some help.

Help me to understand Liberal Ideology including the ideal future if Liberals were 100% in charge; how would the nation progress from its current state, following liberal trend lines for the past 20 years or so, how would it work, is it sustainable indefinitely, what is the logic behind it, what's the goal...the end game? Finally, using good logic and reasoning, modeling your path forward based off the liberal ideology, where does liberal ideology go, and end? What is the goal? What is the dream liberal America for liberals? Remember to stay grounded with your answers. Please don't respond with some stupidity.

Throughout my studies of American politics, parties, ideologies, etc.; I have come to understand Conservative ideology and can even define the reasoning and logic behind about 95% of their ideas and thought processes. Additionally, not only can I define it, but when I sit and REALLY think hard about the values, views, opinions, and paths moving forward; I may not particularly LIKE parts of it as they hurt me more than they help me. Yet even if it destroys me as an individual, I can properly calculate and understand what's going on. and how it fits in with the big picture, et.c et.c etc., getting quickly in line with the idea and generally agreeing with it.

On the other hand, as hard as I try to understand Liberal views, I just don't get it most of the time. I can't apply the numbers and progression over time and see ANY point where society would thrive indefinitely; no sweet spot. When running mental simulations of the future with Liberals I only see varying paths to complete destruction from the inside out; every path taken, merging at the same point in time where political leaders and other wealthy and powerful members of the American society are the only ones that walk away, and they walk away set for life after driving the nation into the ground, destroying everything we love about this great nation. Meanwhile, the rest of the nation, the common every day person like us gets shafted worse than we could ever imagine, left to the wolves.

I don't understand how the pieces fit together or how it would work moving forward. For example: As far back as I can remember, I've watched how Liberals just keep throwing more and more money into government expansion, quickly snatching up every small piece of power around them every chance they get, raising taxes and creating hidden ways of taking more and more of your money. As debt and deficits skyrocket, they refuse to shrink spending, instead just continually increasing the financial drain on everyone, swearing everything is fine as they plot how to squeeze even more out of you. These paths always lead to destruction of the nation in my simulations.

What am I missing about the Liberal ideology that makes it all work in a Liberals mind? Where is the glue that binds it all together? I would really love to learn and understand Liberals so when I talk with them I can have a better understanding of where they come from and how their minds work.

Thank you all for your responses, I look forward to reviewing them. :)

Please help me to larn

I'll help you understand the Liberal ideology if you help me understand why billionaires are so greedy. What is the point of having that much money just laying around? Sometimes I wonder if greedy people have feelings of guilt, you know, because they just let their money sit in a vault and did nothing with it. If Superman just sat at home instead of used his powers to stop crime, what would you call that? What do you call people who have the power to do something good but don't do it?
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 6:41:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 1:49:34 AM, stealspell wrote:

Well, I am FAR from a billionaire but I"ll do my best here.
1)First, you are setting yourself up for failure right off the bat in ASSUMING an individual is inherently greedy simply for the fact that at some point in his life he became a billionaire.
2)Please allow me 1 single opportunity to sway your mind just a bit on the "Greedy" comment to get the pendulum moving in the right direction for us.
3) Warren Buffett teamed with Bill & Melinda Gates, launching the Giving Pledge in 2010. This pledge is aimed at convincing America"s billionaires to give away their fortunes to charities and philanthropic causes before or after death or even in their wills.
4)As of 2015, over 130 couples and individuals from 14 countries have signed on.
5)The current pledge list can be seen here: http://givingpledge.org...

What is the point of having that much money just laying around?
1)From the billionaires I have researched, they seem to be very generous with their income and excess
2)Bill Gates for example, without accounting for the promise previous listed, has also donated over $26 Billion
3)Bill has a charity with his wife Melinda called the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in which he has donated billions.
4)Bill has stated he intends to give away his entire fortune throughout his life

Sometimes I wonder if greedy people have feelings of guilt, you know, because they just let their money sit in a vault and did nothing with it.
1)Do you still think this after reading through to this point?

If Superman just sat at home instead of used his powers to stop crime, what would you call that?
1)An indefinite vacation?
2)Retirement?
3)An alien superhero"s version of a mid-life crisis?
4)Step 1 in Adrenaline junkies Anonymous
5)Avoidance of criminal prosecution for vigilantism

What do you call people who have the power to do something good but don't do it?
1)Politicians?
stealspell
Posts: 980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 10:59:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 6:41:51 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
At 10/13/2015 1:49:34 AM, stealspell wrote:



Well, I am FAR from a billionaire but I"ll do my best here.
1)First, you are setting yourself up for failure right off the bat in ASSUMING an individual is inherently greedy simply for the fact that at some point in his life he became a billionaire.

Most of them are greedy. Not all, but most.

2)Please allow me 1 single opportunity to sway your mind just a bit on the "Greedy" comment to get the pendulum moving in the right direction for us.
3) Warren Buffett teamed with Bill & Melinda Gates, launching the Giving Pledge in 2010. This pledge is aimed at convincing America"s billionaires to give away their fortunes to charities and philanthropic causes before or after death or even in their wills.
4)As of 2015, over 130 couples and individuals from 14 countries have signed on.
5)The current pledge list can be seen here: http://givingpledge.org...

What is the point of having that much money just laying around?
1)From the billionaires I have researched, they seem to be very generous with their income and excess
2)Bill Gates for example, without accounting for the promise previous listed, has also donated over $26 Billion
3)Bill has a charity with his wife Melinda called the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in which he has donated billions.
4)Bill has stated he intends to give away his entire fortune throughout his life

Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are both Liberals and have even said they want the government to raise their taxes.

I'm talking about the billionaires that aren't Liberals, which I assumed given the context, you'd understand. As far as I can tell the Republican party is the party of big corporations and billionaires. It's sad to me that people who aren't billionaires or big corporations can be so easily duped into thinking a Republican politician actually cares about the middle class.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 3:32:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
As for giving, it is a mater of how much effect it has on the giver. If I am Bill Gates, giving that amount changes nothing in my life. I personally have given where it DOES make a difference in my standard of living - if only I don't get to buy a cup of coffee that day. Bill Gates has no pain of any sort.
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 7:21:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 3:32:49 PM, TBR wrote:
As for giving, it is a mater of how much effect it has on the giver. If I am Bill Gates, giving :that amount changes nothing in my life. I personally have given where it DOES make a :difference in my standard of living - if only I don't get to buy a cup of coffee that day. Bill :Gates has no pain of any sort.

Did you miss the part where I said Bill Gates is setting everything up so he gives away every penny of his fortune by the time he dies? He's not even setting his kid up: He's giving his kid enough for college and a little safety net for his transition from school to the job market, but he want's his kid to start from the bottom and work hard just as he did.

You're probably thinking about how it's not going to effect him cuz he will be dead and all: But think about it further...He's risking something much more valuable than his $76 Billion bank account; he's donating his kid to the world AND after Bill dies. That means there is no safety net for his kid...no saving him.
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 8:03:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 10:59:12 AM, stealspell wrote:

I'm talking about the billionaires that aren't Liberals, which I assumed given the context, :you'd understand. As far as I can tell the Republican party is the party of big corporations :and billionaires. It's sad to me that people who aren't billionaires or big corporations can :be so easily duped into thinking a Republican politician actually cares about the middle :class.

Eh processed your request at face value which had no stipulation about political affiliation. I'll have to check it out again when I can and get back to you.

Yes, the Republican Party IS in fact about big businesses, corporations, business growth, etc.

And Liberals are all about big government, expansion of federal powers, extreme control of American Citizens , and micro-managing ever aspect of our lives.

So, are the Republicans showing up the Democrats? Although everything doesn't always go as theorized and sometimes the bottom will just fall out of the cruiser. But for those rare hiccups, it gets made up for in leaps and bounds with true American Dream stories like that of Sam Walton and his beautiful girl named Walmart; who started with a single, small location in Arkansas with a loan of $20,000 in 1945. Today he has 4,100 outlets in the U.S. and an additional 3,100 in 13 countries around the world. From a $20,000 loan in '45 to today having a multinational super beast of a store that he built from the ground up. Now today, as of this very second, Forbe's Lists sets Wal-mart as #30 World's Most Valuable Brands, #16 Global 2000, #1 in sales, #18 in Profit, #35 in Assets, and #12 in Market value; Additionally,they employee over 2.2 million workers and sport off a $261.30 public stock price. ALL of this, ALL of this and more; and it's still the cheapest place on the planet void of corporate Killing greed, constantly finding new and ingenious ways to maintain profit while increasing their presence and workforce.

How about those liberals? Pumping up that Federal Government larger and larger. How's it stack up? ;)
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 8:17:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Did you miss the part where I said Bill Gates is setting everything up so he gives away every penny of his fortune by the time he dies? He's not even setting his kid up: He's giving his kid enough for college and a little safety net for his transition from school to the job market, but he want's his kid to start from the bottom and work hard just as he did.

No, no no. You are quite wrong on that score. He already has setup 10m trusts for the each of them. Not to mention that they are inline for scads of money elsewhere. The Gates children will not be hurting.


You're probably thinking about how it's not going to effect him cuz he will be dead and all: But think about it further...He's risking something much more valuable than his $76 Billion bank account; he's donating his kid to the world AND after Bill dies. That means there is no safety net for his kid...no saving him.

Preposterous. His children have every advantage ever, plus wealth past most peoples dreams.
stealspell
Posts: 980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 8:26:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 8:03:29 PM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
And Liberals are all about big government, expansion of federal powers, extreme control of American Citizens , and micro-managing ever aspect of our lives.

This is what I'm talking about when I say that those on the right are duped to believe the Republicans are on the common people's side. Big government? Extreme control? Micro-managing? You have it backwards. Telling a woman she can't have an abortion. Is that a supposed to be freedom? Gays can't get married. Is that a freedom? This rhetoric about "extreme control" and "micromanaging people's lives" doesn't apply to common people. What the Republican politician really means to say is, it's control of the big corporations. But they'll never tell you that because you'd never vote them into office. Like I said. It's sad people actually believe this stuff. They don't really care about the common people. They're only in office for corporate America.
Todd0611
Posts: 99
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 9:00:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 8:17:51 PM, TBR wrote:
Did you miss the part where I said Bill Gates is setting everything up so he gives away every penny of his fortune by the time he dies? He's not even setting his kid up: He's giving his kid enough for college and a little safety net for his transition from school to the job market, but he want's his kid to start from the bottom and work hard just as he did.

No, no no. You are quite wrong on that score. He already has setup 10m trusts for the each of them. Not to mention that they are inline for scads of money elsewhere. The Gates children will not be hurting.


You're probably thinking about how it's not going to effect him cuz he will be dead and all: But think about it further...He's risking something much more valuable than his $76 Billion bank account; he's donating his kid to the world AND after Bill dies. That means there is no safety net for his kid...no saving him.

Preposterous. His children have every advantage ever, plus wealth past most peoples dreams.

While this is true, about Gates kids, probably not having money problems in the future, what would you do for your kids? I fall in the middle class, and have 4 kids, and I've truly wondered what I would do if I actually became extremely well off. I'd want my kids to go to college, and work for a living, but yes, I'd definitely set them up with some kind of trust. I can't be mad at someone who works hard, or invents something, and then gets rich off of it, especially if they are giving to charity.

I get what the poster said about having billions of dollars, but who decides how much is "fair" to gain in life. If I invented something that made me wealthy, I'd spoil my kids, to a point, and we even do so now on occasion. I see comments on the web about people wanting the rich to pay their fair share, but no one ever says what they think is fair. But if you actually became a multi-millionaire, and worked for it, what is considered a fair percentage to be taxed. I guess sometimes from reading posts on the web, it seems like some people just don't want anyone to be rich. I just believe some people work harder than others, and deserve to have what they earned. I'm all for charity, and helping others, but if you truly, honestly deserve what you worked for, then whose has the right to put a limit on that. I'm not talking about the cheaters and scammers who steal. Isn't it possible, that if certain people were over-taxed, that out of spite, they stop giving to charities? If I became really rich one day, I'd be willing to pay my fair share, but I don't even know what that would be.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 9:05:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 9:00:30 PM, Todd0611 wrote:
At 10/13/2015 8:17:51 PM, TBR wrote:
Did you miss the part where I said Bill Gates is setting everything up so he gives away every penny of his fortune by the time he dies? He's not even setting his kid up: He's giving his kid enough for college and a little safety net for his transition from school to the job market, but he want's his kid to start from the bottom and work hard just as he did.

No, no no. You are quite wrong on that score. He already has setup 10m trusts for the each of them. Not to mention that they are inline for scads of money elsewhere. The Gates children will not be hurting.


You're probably thinking about how it's not going to effect him cuz he will be dead and all: But think about it further...He's risking something much more valuable than his $76 Billion bank account; he's donating his kid to the world AND after Bill dies. That means there is no safety net for his kid...no saving him.

Preposterous. His children have every advantage ever, plus wealth past most peoples dreams.

While this is true, about Gates kids, probably not having money problems in the future, what would you do for your kids? I fall in the middle class, and have 4 kids, and I've truly wondered what I would do if I actually became extremely well off. I'd want my kids to go to college, and work for a living, but yes, I'd definitely set them up with some kind of trust. I can't be mad at someone who works hard, or invents something, and then gets rich off of it, especially if they are giving to charity.

I get what the poster said about having billions of dollars, but who decides how much is "fair" to gain in life. If I invented something that made me wealthy, I'd spoil my kids, to a point, and we even do so now on occasion. I see comments on the web about people wanting the rich to pay their fair share, but no one ever says what they think is fair. But if you actually became a multi-millionaire, and worked for it, what is considered a fair percentage to be taxed. I guess sometimes from reading posts on the web, it seems like some people just don't want anyone to be rich. I just believe some people work harder than others, and deserve to have what they earned. I'm all for charity, and helping others, but if you truly, honestly deserve what you worked for, then whose has the right to put a limit on that. I'm not talking about the cheaters and scammers who steal. Isn't it possible, that if certain people were over-taxed, that out of spite, they stop giving to charities? If I became really rich one day, I'd be willing to pay my fair share, but I don't even know what that would be.

I'm not angry that a wealthy person wants to leave their entire fortune to his children, it is not a great idea, but that is their choice. I just don't like the "he is soooo giving" line that is put out without thinking about it. At 10m each of his children have a ticket punched for the 1%. Yup, they are in it.
Todd0611
Posts: 99
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 9:11:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 9:05:28 PM, TBR wrote:
At 10/13/2015 9:00:30 PM, Todd0611 wrote:
At 10/13/2015 8:17:51 PM, TBR wrote:
Did you miss the part where I said Bill Gates is setting everything up so he gives away every penny of his fortune by the time he dies? He's not even setting his kid up: He's giving his kid enough for college and a little safety net for his transition from school to the job market, but he want's his kid to start from the bottom and work hard just as he did.

No, no no. You are quite wrong on that score. He already has setup 10m trusts for the each of them. Not to mention that they are inline for scads of money elsewhere. The Gates children will not be hurting.


You're probably thinking about how it's not going to effect him cuz he will be dead and all: But think about it further...He's risking something much more valuable than his $76 Billion bank account; he's donating his kid to the world AND after Bill dies. That means there is no safety net for his kid...no saving him.

Preposterous. His children have every advantage ever, plus wealth past most peoples dreams.

While this is true, about Gates kids, probably not having money problems in the future, what would you do for your kids? I fall in the middle class, and have 4 kids, and I've truly wondered what I would do if I actually became extremely well off. I'd want my kids to go to college, and work for a living, but yes, I'd definitely set them up with some kind of trust. I can't be mad at someone who works hard, or invents something, and then gets rich off of it, especially if they are giving to charity.

I get what the poster said about having billions of dollars, but who decides how much is "fair" to gain in life. If I invented something that made me wealthy, I'd spoil my kids, to a point, and we even do so now on occasion. I see comments on the web about people wanting the rich to pay their fair share, but no one ever says what they think is fair. But if you actually became a multi-millionaire, and worked for it, what is considered a fair percentage to be taxed. I guess sometimes from reading posts on the web, it seems like some people just don't want anyone to be rich. I just believe some people work harder than others, and deserve to have what they earned. I'm all for charity, and helping others, but if you truly, honestly deserve what you worked for, then whose has the right to put a limit on that. I'm not talking about the cheaters and scammers who steal. Isn't it possible, that if certain people were over-taxed, that out of spite, they stop giving to charities? If I became really rich one day, I'd be willing to pay my fair share, but I don't even know what that would be.

I'm not angry that a wealthy person wants to leave their entire fortune to his children, it is not a great idea, but that is their choice. I just don't like the "he is soooo giving" line that is put out without thinking about it. At 10m each of his children have a ticket punched for the 1%. Yup, they are in it.

I agree, but what do you think is a fair %, or amount that the 1%'s or even top 10% earners should be taxed. People rail on about the rich, and I agree with some of their complaints, I'm just trying to see if anyone has stated, or wants to offer a "fair" percentage.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 9:17:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I agree, but what do you think is a fair %, or amount that the 1%'s or even top 10% earners should be taxed. People rail on about the rich, and I agree with some of their complaints, I'm just trying to see if anyone has stated, or wants to offer a "fair" percentage.

Right, well, it should be much more progressive, topping out in the %80s'
BrittanyR1911.45
Posts: 12
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 9:35:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 10:59:12 AM, stealspell wrote:
At 10/13/2015 6:41:51 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
At 10/13/2015 1:49:34 AM, stealspell wrote:



Well, I am FAR from a billionaire but I"ll do my best here.
1)First, you are setting yourself up for failure right off the bat in ASSUMING an individual is inherently greedy simply for the fact that at some point in his life he became a billionaire.

Most of them are greedy. Not all, but most.

2)Please allow me 1 single opportunity to sway your mind just a bit on the "Greedy" comment to get the pendulum moving in the right direction for us.
3) Warren Buffett teamed with Bill & Melinda Gates, launching the Giving Pledge in 2010. This pledge is aimed at convincing America"s billionaires to give away their fortunes to charities and philanthropic causes before or after death or even in their wills.
4)As of 2015, over 130 couples and individuals from 14 countries have signed on.
5)The current pledge list can be seen here: http://givingpledge.org...

What is the point of having that much money just laying around?
1)From the billionaires I have researched, they seem to be very generous with their income and excess
2)Bill Gates for example, without accounting for the promise previous listed, has also donated over $26 Billion
3)Bill has a charity with his wife Melinda called the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in which he has donated billions.
4)Bill has stated he intends to give away his entire fortune throughout his life

Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are both Liberals and have even said they want the government to raise their taxes.

I'm talking about the billionaires that aren't Liberals, which I assumed given the context, you'd understand. As far as I can tell the Republican party is the party of big corporations and billionaires. It's sad to me that people who aren't billionaires or big corporations can be so easily duped into thinking a Republican politician actually cares about the middle class.

Warren Buffett"s Nifty Tax Loophole

Warren Buffett is fond of saying his tax rate is lower than his secretary"s. He does not publicize his tax returns, but for the tax year 2010, he paid $6.9 million on taxable income of $39.8 million, according to partial disclosures he made in 2011.

What is astounding about those numbers is not the 17.3% tax rate, but that Buffett"s $39.8 million of taxable income is only about 0.05% of his reported net worth ($71 billion according to Forbes, which put him third on its list of the 400 wealthiest people in the world for 2015).

Proportionately, that"s like someone with an ever-expanding net worth, currently $10 million, reporting taxable income of only $5,000 and paying a federal tax bill of only $900.

So, how does he do it? Buffett"s principal holding is an economic interest of about 20% of Berkshire Hathaway, the huge conglomerate he has been building since the 1960s. It has a market value of about $350 billion. Berkshire hasn"t paid any cash dividends since 1967. Rather, the company accumulates its prodigious after-tax income ($19.9 billion in 2014) and cash flow ($32 billion in 2014) to get bigger by buying companies, lots of companies. Among its large recent acquisitions were Lubrizol, Burlington Northern Santa Fe, and a shared acquisition of H.J. Heinz.

The Berkshire Model is to buy companies rich in cash flow with histories of paying dividends, then cancel those dividends and retain the cash flow going forward for future acquisitions.

HOW MUCH TAX is Warren Buffett able to avoid by fixing Berkshire"s dividend at zero? The dividend yield of the Standard & Poor"s 500 is about 2%. The price/earnings ratio of the S&P 500 is about 18. Thus, for the S&P 500, approximately 30% of earnings are paid out to shareholders. These dividends are taxable at a current maximum rate of 23.8%.

If Berkshire followed the average of the S&P 500, it would have paid out about $6 billion in dividends in 2014, and Buffett"s share would have been about $1.2 billion.

At a 23.8% tax rate, that would have given Buffett a tax bill of $280 million, or about 40 times the taxes he said he actually paid in 2010.

Thus the Treasury has been getting exiguous tax revenue from one of its wealthiest citizens. Buffett is virtually immune to higher individual income-tax rates, while he promotes higher rates for other rich people, who may have a net worth a hundredth of 1% (0.01%) of his own.

Since, according to his publicly stated plans, Buffett intends to leave the bulk of his estate to charity, his estate won"t be paying much tax, either.

The Buffett Loophole and the Berkshire Model are allowing one individual to build one of the great American fortunes while avoiding individual taxes. Talk about someone not paying his share!
Todd0611
Posts: 99
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 9:46:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 9:17:47 PM, TBR wrote:
I agree, but what do you think is a fair %, or amount that the 1%'s or even top 10% earners should be taxed. People rail on about the rich, and I agree with some of their complaints, I'm just trying to see if anyone has stated, or wants to offer a "fair" percentage.

Right, well, it should be much more progressive, topping out in the %80s'

Without considering it much, isn't that pretty high? I mean is that fair? If people are screaming about equality, then paying that high of a %, doesn't seem fair. I honestly, would be pissed if I had to pay over half of what I made for taxes. I'd have to think about it more. I just don't think you can get to equality, coming from my statement of working hard and getting rich, why should I pay that much more, than someone who only makes $20K-$30K. Couldn't a consumption tax be a fairer way? Thanks for giving me a number, I just wanted somewhere to start, and come up with some ideas.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 9:52:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 9:46:02 PM, Todd0611 wrote:
At 10/13/2015 9:17:47 PM, TBR wrote:
I agree, but what do you think is a fair %, or amount that the 1%'s or even top 10% earners should be taxed. People rail on about the rich, and I agree with some of their complaints, I'm just trying to see if anyone has stated, or wants to offer a "fair" percentage.

Right, well, it should be much more progressive, topping out in the %80s'

Without considering it much, isn't that pretty high? I mean is that fair? If people are screaming about equality, then paying that high of a %, doesn't seem fair. I honestly, would be pissed if I had to pay over half of what I made for taxes. I'd have to think about it more. I just don't think you can get to equality, coming from my statement of working hard and getting rich, why should I pay that much more, than someone who only makes $20K-$30K. Couldn't a consumption tax be a fairer way? Thanks for giving me a number, I just wanted somewhere to start, and come up with some ideas.

Well we are talking about inheritance, not income taxes. No, I don't think its too high, not in a progressive tax plan. Breaks at 1m, 10m, 100m, 1b etc. So, until you reach 1b the money is taxed at a lower rate etc.

When someone is at, say, several hundred million, the difference in quality of life is non-existence with the person at 1 billion.
stealspell
Posts: 980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 11:37:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 9:46:02 PM, Todd0611 wrote:
At 10/13/2015 9:17:47 PM, TBR wrote:
I agree, but what do you think is a fair %, or amount that the 1%'s or even top 10% earners should be taxed. People rail on about the rich, and I agree with some of their complaints, I'm just trying to see if anyone has stated, or wants to offer a "fair" percentage.

Right, well, it should be much more progressive, topping out in the %80s'

Without considering it much, isn't that pretty high? I mean is that fair? If people are screaming about equality, then paying that high of a %, doesn't seem fair. I honestly, would be pissed if I had to pay over half of what I made for taxes. I'd have to think about it more. I just don't think you can get to equality, coming from my statement of working hard and getting rich, why should I pay that much more, than someone who only makes $20K-$30K. Couldn't a consumption tax be a fairer way? Thanks for giving me a number, I just wanted somewhere to start, and come up with some ideas.

I think the grander question is, why do you need that money? You're going to die in a few decades, so, honestly, why the hell keep it? No offence, but in my eyes that's the greed talking. I recall reading the first page of Trump's Art of the Deal because the book was laying around somewhere and he says right there on the first page that he's made more money than he'll ever need for the rest of his life but he keeps working hard everyday because for him making deals is an art form. It's what he's good at and that's what motives him and gives his life purpose.

So keeping that in mind, let's get real about the "working hard, I earned it" spiel. The truth is, you can't get anywhere in this world without the help of other people. Whether that be someone who has helped you with connections, or has lent you their money or time, to the very consumers that you sell your product. Without people, your hard work means diddly squat. It kind of ticks me off to hear people say "I worked hard for it" because it's pretty arrogant to say you work hard as if everyone else is a bunch of lazy slobs. Everyone works hard at their job. Someone out their has to pick up your trash at 5 in the morning. And someone has to make your coffee. Someone has to fill your medication. To quote Pope Francis during his address to Congress: "Today I would like not only to address you, but through you the entire people of the United States. Here, together with their representatives, I would like to take this opportunity to dialogue with the many thousands of men and women who strive each day to do an honest day"s work, to bring home their daily bread, to save money and "one step at a time " to build a better life for their families. These are men and women who are not concerned simply with paying their taxes, but in their own quiet way sustain the life of society. They generate solidarity by their actions, and they create organizations which offer a helping hand to those most in need."

So let us get back to the question of, "Is it fair?" You're damn right it's fair. Because the only real reason anyone would have to hoard billions of dollars instead of helping people that desperately need food because they were born in a life of poverty that they did not choose is greed. And nothing else but.
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2015 12:44:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
@stealspell --

At 10/13/2015 8:26:41 PM, stealspell wrote:

This is what I'm talking about when I say that those on the right are duped to believe the Republicans are on the common people's side. Big government? Extreme control? Micro-managing? You have it backwards. Telling a woman she can't have an abortion. Is that a supposed to be freedom? Gays can't get married. Is that a freedom?

Not very many Republican politicians have THAT extreme of views on same sex marriage and abortion. OK, maybe marriage they've been going a bit overboard on; I can give you that one LOL. ||

The one major change I wish they would make to that is to enact protections for the civil servants approving marriage licenses. First of all, I don't understand the necessity to pay the state for a license to get married; just comes off to me as a shameful means of generating further revenue from the citizens so I guess I'll have to bore myself with that research LOL. But I mean throwing lady in jail for DAYS over that nonsense? Really? 1,000 ways that could have been handled better, but the judge threw her in jail longer than a drunk man running naked down the street dancing in the intersection? Simple solution here: Open a part-time position for a person to handle marriage licenses for same sex couples. Get one of our 33,000,000 unemployed brothers or sisters back to work at least part time. This simple solution will allow same sex couples a much more enjoyable experience as they are trying to celebrate their upcoming union, AND will protect people like Kim Davis from getting railroaded again. ||

Now for that small handful of people instigating that situation further just to get their 15 seconds of fame on the next news cycle, specifically that guy they kept showing on the news asking Kim "Under whose authority..."; SHAME ON YOU SON, SHAME ON YOU. You see the lady is clearly upset by the situation she's been thrown into and she's asking for approval of alternate processes to appeal to both sides, and instead of offering your assistance to A LADY who is in trouble, which is what a man should do; you instead turn the country courthouse into the middle school cafe, flat out attacking her. Way to diffuse the situation. The worst part about that for though, was the fact that you and your fiancee could have hoped into your car with a smile on your faces, and enjoyed each other's company on an 18 minute drive to the next county courthouse and been served there. Instead, you decided to stay and harass a lady who's probably old enough to be your mother, completely embarrassing her and yourself on national news. The fact that you chose to stand there and do that, gaining pleasure and joy from harassing Kim like that; consciously choosing to attack an older lady like over spending time with your hubby on an bit more of a drive to the next courthouse shows me that not only are you not ready to get married, but you don't care for your partner even close to as much as you make people think. Sorry about that rant Stealspell, I had to get that one out, that guy just makes me wanna OOOOOOOO kick a puppy!!! Anyway, next item. || Abortions -- quick and dirty for you here: I recently pulled stats from Orlando Women's Center (or something like that; I can get it for you if you want. After crunching the numbers they provide regarding anonymous data collected from abortion patients, I checked them again, 3 more times, calculating in a different order each time to ensure I wasn't missing something; to my surprise, I was perfect on all calculation. I couldn't believe my eyes.....The data collected from patients having abortions stated that 93% of all abortions performed, the patient admitted to intentionally misusing or completely NOT using contraceptive measures while "spending time" with their partner; with a chunk saying the do it all the time. [INSERT FURY RAGE HERE !!!!!!!] || Why are my tax dollars going to save a high school couple from responsibility that are too gosh darn stupid to properly use the FREE contraceptive measures that even MORE of my tax dollars are obviously being wasted on? || Quickly one line addition here: How about Obama unilaterally telling me health insurance coverage types I am supposed to have, which happen to include things like coverage for birth control pills for myself and even coverage for when I get pregnant....as a 28 year old man. ||

Well, that section was a bit fun, but I'll see your stupidity, and raise you.....micro managing my what now son!?! :) || OHHHHHH NY....NY NY NY. The heck do you mean I can't have a large soda with that? I'm 136 lbs and cut, WHILE being physically disabled...and you think I'm too stupid with my health to choose to get a large soda? And where on Earth is the salt at? I can't choose to have salt either? And why is every storefront for miles closed? It's nice outside, let some air in and show people you're open....you gotta be kidding me, you can't open your own door when you want now? Man.....NY.....you used to be tough. When I was growing up and you heard anything about NY, the first thing everyone thought about was a PR with lightning fast fists throwing down for cash in an ally, I thought of the Ninja Turtles beating down on some foot clan soldiers....now....now I just....I picture everyone running around in diapers now. You stole the allure of NY from me guys. You better get back on your game before you adopt the trash policies starting over in CA, the trash man poking through you and your wife's personals, waking up to a fine taped to your trash can from the guy dumpster diving every day.

I hope you got a kick out of this reply while appreciating the truth it directly mirrors.