Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 76

Thread: The Wealth Machine

  1. #61 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    People who set out to be fabulously rich, and then find a way to do it?

    -Probably have compromised ethics.

    People who set out to provide something ingenious, new and and innovative for humanity? And thus become fabulously rich in the process?

    -I have respect for them. Very cool people.
    Oh, the if they got rich doing something I don't like, they did it unethically but if they do with what they created how I think they should, it's great mindset. Thanks for invalidating any claim you made.

  2. #62 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakuda View Post
    How did you reach that first conclusion? You don't even bother to question yourself do you?
    He's jealous because he couldn't do either one.

  3. #63 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    29,740
    Thanks
    2,748
    Thanked 10,875 Times in 8,272 Posts
    Groans
    41
    Groaned 594 Times in 590 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    He's jealous because he couldn't do either one.
    LMFAO probably right. They just say whatever stupid shit comes into their heads and they can dont think anyone should challenge it.

  4. #64 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakuda View Post
    LMFAO probably right. They just say whatever stupid shit comes into their heads and they can dont think anyone should challenge it.
    Any wealthy person that doesn't fit their ideal is someone they believe cheated to get there.

    A wealthy person doing what a lefty thinks he/she should is considered of the highest moral standard.

    In other words, they base their opinion not on proof of actions but on ideology.

  5. #65 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    29,740
    Thanks
    2,748
    Thanked 10,875 Times in 8,272 Posts
    Groans
    41
    Groaned 594 Times in 590 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    Any wealthy person that doesn't fit their ideal is someone they believe cheated to get there.

    A wealthy person doing what a lefty thinks he/she should is considered of the highest moral standard.

    In other words, they base their opinion not on proof of actions but on ideology.
    Right. Ideology is their religion and consensus is the high sacrament of their religion.

  6. #66 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,454
    Thanks
    158
    Thanked 1,037 Times in 727 Posts
    Groans
    15
    Groaned 372 Times in 345 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    In other words, you want to help the poor just with someone else footing the bill. That's the very definition of a bleeding heart.

    Show your tax returns to support that claim.
    We all would foot the bill. And I don't need to show you my taxes.

    Consider this: About 155.76 million Americans are employed. If each were required to contribute $1/yr towards a public fund devoted to helping the poor, that would be $155.76 million per year. If you increase that to $10/yr, this fund would be worth $1.56 billion.

    That money could be used to fund programs that help homeless and poor people get on their feet. It wouldn't be "endless handouts," but it would be free money to help them find a place to live, buy new clothes, pay utilities, etc. The ultimate goal of such a program would be to help elevate the disenfranchised so that they can become productive members of society.

    Is $10/yr too much to ask? I don't think so.

  7. #67 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael_Panetta View Post
    We all would foot the bill. And I don't need to show you my taxes.

    Consider this: About 155.76 million Americans are employed. If each were required to contribute $1/yr towards a public fund devoted to helping the poor, that would be $155.76 million per year. If you increase that to $10/yr, this fund would be worth $1.56 billion.

    That money could be used to fund programs that help homeless and poor people get on their feet. It wouldn't be "endless handouts," but it would be free money to help them find a place to live, buy new clothes, pay utilities, etc. The ultimate goal of such a program would be to help elevate the disenfranchised so that they can become productive members of society.

    Is $10/yr too much to ask? I don't think so.
    If you make that kind of claim you do. Just another left winger using the BISSO defense.

    We, as a country, have done that to the tune of over $22 trillion dollars since 1965. The percentage in poverty in 1965 prior to wasting that money was 14%. 50 years later in 2015, very little had changed.

    I see your mistake. It's not about the amount, it's about the principle. When someone like you claims to care then expects others to pay anything, you prove to me your caring is only words not deeds. You don't get to think on my behalf, son.

  8. #68 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    71,685
    Thanks
    6,597
    Thanked 12,131 Times in 9,660 Posts
    Groans
    14
    Groaned 504 Times in 477 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Let's look at some basic logic.

    Suppose an individual had the goal of becoming fabulously rich.

    How would this be done?

    Obviously, working for somebody else would not make that happen.

    The individual would have to set up a 'Wealth Machine.'

    That would usually mean building a system that collects some money from as many other individuals as possible.

    It could be a little bit from a lot of people (Jeff Bezos.)

    Or it could be a lot from selected individuals (The American Health Care System, where people have partial coverage and require expensive services.)

    It would be detrimental to the function of The Wealth Machine to care about the concerns of the individuals affected by The Wealth Machine.

    Individuals with partial coverage requiring expensive health care would then have to forfeit their life savings to The Wealth Machine.

    Great for getting super-rich, not great for those affected.
    so closing mom and pop shops and restaurants is obviously the right thing to do.

  9. #69 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,454
    Thanks
    158
    Thanked 1,037 Times in 727 Posts
    Groans
    15
    Groaned 372 Times in 345 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    If you make that kind of claim you do. Just another left winger using the BISSO defense.

    We, as a country, have done that to the tune of over $22 trillion dollars since 1965. The percentage in poverty in 1965 prior to wasting that money was 14%. 50 years later in 2015, very little had changed.

    I see your mistake. It's not about the amount, it's about the principle. When someone like you claims to care then expects others to pay anything, you prove to me your caring is only words not deeds. You don't get to think on my behalf, son.
    I don't know what BISSO is. I also don't care to check your claims because you just enjoy arguing.

  10. #70 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael_Panetta View Post
    I don't know what BISSO is. I also don't care to check your claims because you just enjoy arguing.
    Because I said so. That's the source you're using if you make a claim then refuse to back it up with verifiable proof.

    You don't have to check my claims. You can look at a source.

    pr.jpg

  11. #71 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,454
    Thanks
    158
    Thanked 1,037 Times in 727 Posts
    Groans
    15
    Groaned 372 Times in 345 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    Because I said so. That's the source you're using if you make a claim then refuse to back it up with verifiable proof.

    You don't have to check my claims. You can look at a source.

    pr.jpg
    That chart doesn't support your claim.

  12. #72 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    An individual could get fabulously rich by controlling lots of other people's money, perhaps buying lots of smaller businesses, put them all into one larger company, reduce the number of managers, stop giving raises, cut benefits, replace higher paid older workers with lower paid younger ones, that sort of thing.

    Or an individual could get fabulously rich by being really creative and entertaining, possibly coming up with a popular new style of singing and performing, not ripping off anybody, simply being entertaining enough to get a lot of people interested in the performance.

    If each of the described methods for getting rich earned the same amount of money, the cold-hearted company would pay far less tax than the individual who earned it as personal income.

    Doesn't seem right, does it?
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  13. #73 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    71,685
    Thanks
    6,597
    Thanked 12,131 Times in 9,660 Posts
    Groans
    14
    Groaned 504 Times in 477 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    An individual could get fabulously rich by controlling lots of other people's money, perhaps buying lots of smaller businesses, put them all into one larger company, reduce the number of managers, stop giving raises, cut benefits, replace higher paid older workers with lower paid younger ones, that sort of thing.

    Or an individual could get fabulously rich by being really creative and entertaining, possibly coming up with a popular new style of singing and performing, not ripping off anybody, simply being entertaining enough to get a lot of people interested in the performance.

    If each of the described methods for getting rich earned the same amount of money, the cold-hearted company would pay far less tax than the individual who earned it as personal income.

    Doesn't seem right, does it?
    and locking down mom and pop shops and restaurants helps how?

  14. #74 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael_Panetta View Post
    That chart doesn't support your claim.
    So approximately 14% doesn't equal approximately 14%? Is that your claim.

    Interesting how you say it doesn't but can't provide any explanation. Am I supposed to accept it because you said it. Sorry, boy, I don't take the word of bleeding heart liberals that claim to care for people then expect others to fund what he supports.

  15. #75 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,454
    Thanks
    158
    Thanked 1,037 Times in 727 Posts
    Groans
    15
    Groaned 372 Times in 345 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    So approximately 14% doesn't equal approximately 14%? Is that your claim.

    Interesting how you say it doesn't but can't provide any explanation. Am I supposed to accept it because you said it. Sorry, boy, I don't take the word of bleeding heart liberals that claim to care for people then expect others to fund what he supports.
    Get Trump's dick out of your mouth and breathe. You never explained how a chart showing poverty levels in the US suggests that poverty programs are not working.

Similar Threads

  1. What have you run through a copy machine?
    By Damocles in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-10-2014, 09:19 PM
  2. Should STY get a machine gun?
    By Canceled.LTroll.28 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 207
    Last Post: 08-11-2010, 01:11 PM
  3. First Machine President!
    By Damocles in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-08-2008, 12:36 PM
  4. Where does wealth come from?
    By Onceler in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 10-17-2008, 06:52 AM
  5. Right Wing Machine
    By Cancel7 in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 01-29-2008, 07:00 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •