Best appropriation of a Charlie Brown cartoon ever
-
Those that are not rich are getting tax breaks too, not just the rich. Read the bill.
Reading the bill isn't on the liberals' agenda. Remember to see what was in the health care bill, they had to pass it.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
Are all stockholders rich?
-
What a pile of crap. How does a 'rich person' 'scam poor people out of rent, funds, and insurance'? There are plenty of scammers out there, they are called criminals, some are in prison already, many will be soon. Some make a living, just, others are more successful, but you cant equate criminality with wealth, that is utterly wrong and very ignorant.
I start thinking you have a different definition of "rich" than me. Because I really don't understand what is so wrong in my statement.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Some make a living, just, others are more successful, but you cant equate criminality with wealth, that is utterly wrong and very ignorant.
Would you please really read carefully what I have written? I have nowhere said that, but I am against your "all rich are nice and good people" because this is as wrong as the other way around. I already said:
Quote:
The one that manages to make money without harming anyone and having respect for the rest of the people... I do say: Kudos ... Generalizing is wrong, in both directions.
and
Quote:
There are "good" and "bad" persons in every social / economic status. ... I have no problem with rich people who have worked hard or had luck in life or both.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Exactly. I personally, have nothing against the rich, and have never harbored ill will toward them just because they are rich.
Slacker007 wrote:
have nothing against the rich, and have never harbored ill will toward them
Surely that must be white privilege talking. :laugh: :laugh:
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data. There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Those that are not rich are getting tax breaks too, not just the rich. Read the bill.
Preface this with "I am an independent, not a lib or con." Government should help take care of those who need it and stay out of my business. My biggest problem is the degree that said tax breaks shift through the years for the low vs middle vs upper class. Yes it is a prediction, but it appears that I get a small break now that gets smaller for the next 10 years and might even turn into a tax increase during that time. Along with that they make the business cuts permanent but leave me with the hope that they were right with the "No one would ever let these tax breaks expire!" logic.
-
Those that are not rich are getting tax breaks too, not just the rich. Read the bill.
Slacker007 wrote:
Read the bill.
OK, here's 429 pages...you have 2 hours to read it before voting...better hurry! :laugh: tps://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/02/us/politics/document-Read-the-G-O-P-Tax-Bill.html[^]
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
-
Preface this with "I am an independent, not a lib or con." Government should help take care of those who need it and stay out of my business. My biggest problem is the degree that said tax breaks shift through the years for the low vs middle vs upper class. Yes it is a prediction, but it appears that I get a small break now that gets smaller for the next 10 years and might even turn into a tax increase during that time. Along with that they make the business cuts permanent but leave me with the hope that they were right with the "No one would ever let these tax breaks expire!" logic.
RJOberg wrote:
those who need it
Here is the rub. Who defines who "needs" it? Ask the far left and they'll say "everybody who asks". Ask the far right and they'll say "only the truly infirmed". In the US alone there are 10's of millions of people in between those 2 extremes.
-
I start thinking you have a different definition of "rich" than me. Because I really don't understand what is so wrong in my statement.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Some make a living, just, others are more successful, but you cant equate criminality with wealth, that is utterly wrong and very ignorant.
Would you please really read carefully what I have written? I have nowhere said that, but I am against your "all rich are nice and good people" because this is as wrong as the other way around. I already said:
Quote:
The one that manages to make money without harming anyone and having respect for the rest of the people... I do say: Kudos ... Generalizing is wrong, in both directions.
and
Quote:
There are "good" and "bad" persons in every social / economic status. ... I have no problem with rich people who have worked hard or had luck in life or both.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
Nelek wrote:
Would you please really read carefully what I have written? I have nowhere said that, but I am against your "all rich are nice and good people"
Oh the irony! :)
-
RJOberg wrote:
those who need it
Here is the rub. Who defines who "needs" it? Ask the far left and they'll say "everybody who asks". Ask the far right and they'll say "only the truly infirmed". In the US alone there are 10's of millions of people in between those 2 extremes.
Yeah, I know what you're saying and I don't have a good answer. My thought is a sliding scale, if you can do something, you should. Maybe that is the Scandinavian heritage, dunno. Those who are truly infirmed, of course. The problem is there are entire law practices set up to prove everyone who claims to be are in fact infirm. I believe the goal of these programs should be to get everyone off of said support and aid. Give them training and help them set realistic expectations. Unfortunately social media tends to reinforce the idea that everyone needs a new car, fancy phone, big tv, etc. So people see the options as "hard" legal work and modest comfort or "easy" criminal work and luxury?
-
Nelek wrote:
Would you please really read carefully what I have written? I have nowhere said that, but I am against your "all rich are nice and good people"
Oh the irony! :)
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Nelek wrote:
Would you please really read carefully what I have written? I have nowhere said that, but I am against your "all rich are nice and good people"
If you want to quote me... then quote the full sentence please
Nelek wrote:
Would you please really read carefully what I have written? I have nowhere said that, but I am against your "all rich are nice and good people" because this is as wrong as the other way around.
Because...
Munchies_Matt wrote:
but you cant equate criminality with wealth, that is utterly wrong and very ignorant.
You can't equate wealth with being a good person neither.
Slacker007 wrote:
don't be so lame in your thinking, and stop generalizing the rich.
Nelek wrote:
There are "good" and "bad" persons in every social / economic status. ... I have no problem with rich people who have worked hard or had luck in life or both.
So... No, I am not generalizing. No, I am not equating wealthy with criminality. No, I have nothing against rich people. But yes... telling that no rich person has done something censurable is as wrong as telling that every rich people have done it. And that's my point the full time, and that's what looks like you are not understanding.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Then where is the money going?
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data. There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Those that are not rich are getting tax breaks too, not just the rich. Read the bill.
Have you read it?
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
He apparently didn't like the simple question. Too hard?
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data. There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Not at all – but I’m not interested in having an argument about it. As I said to MM before – do your own friggin’ research. But really, the reason is that it’s a waste of time. I’m happy enough to come on here and spout my opinions for fun, but I’m not interested in trying to convince you – because I won’t. Your mind is already made up, and it won’t matter what I say. I have never – ever- seen anyone (including me!) change their mind about anything as a result of an online discussion anywhere (or argument!) So… you carry on believing what you want, and I’ll carry on as I do. Meanwhile I’m off for a couple of days for work reasons, so won’t be posting anything (you’ll be relieved to hear.) ving said all that. A lot goes to tax havens. Some of it goes to good causes (eg Gates Foundation). Some of it even goes to creating jobs - but jobs would be created anyway, one way or another. Mega-rich individuals are not a necessary condition for job creation. Some rich people are very nice people. That doesn’t alter the fact that they shouldn’t be that rich – no one should. And by “that rich” I mean billionaires. As I said, I have no problem with the odd million or two, but no-one has a morally legitimate claim to billions. Anyway – I have a train to catch.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Nelek wrote:
Would you please really read carefully what I have written? I have nowhere said that, but I am against your "all rich are nice and good people"
If you want to quote me... then quote the full sentence please
Nelek wrote:
Would you please really read carefully what I have written? I have nowhere said that, but I am against your "all rich are nice and good people" because this is as wrong as the other way around.
Because...
Munchies_Matt wrote:
but you cant equate criminality with wealth, that is utterly wrong and very ignorant.
You can't equate wealth with being a good person neither.
Slacker007 wrote:
don't be so lame in your thinking, and stop generalizing the rich.
Nelek wrote:
There are "good" and "bad" persons in every social / economic status. ... I have no problem with rich people who have worked hard or had luck in life or both.
So... No, I am not generalizing. No, I am not equating wealthy with criminality. No, I have nothing against rich people. But yes... telling that no rich person has done something censurable is as wrong as telling that every rich people have done it. And that's my point the full time, and that's what looks like you are not understanding.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
And he doesnt get the irony. :)
-
Have you read it?
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Yes, actually. I spent about an hour reading it. Obviously, not the entire bill but enough to know that most of the people posting on this thread are full of shit, like usual.
-
Not at all – but I’m not interested in having an argument about it. As I said to MM before – do your own friggin’ research. But really, the reason is that it’s a waste of time. I’m happy enough to come on here and spout my opinions for fun, but I’m not interested in trying to convince you – because I won’t. Your mind is already made up, and it won’t matter what I say. I have never – ever- seen anyone (including me!) change their mind about anything as a result of an online discussion anywhere (or argument!) So… you carry on believing what you want, and I’ll carry on as I do. Meanwhile I’m off for a couple of days for work reasons, so won’t be posting anything (you’ll be relieved to hear.) ving said all that. A lot goes to tax havens. Some of it goes to good causes (eg Gates Foundation). Some of it even goes to creating jobs - but jobs would be created anyway, one way or another. Mega-rich individuals are not a necessary condition for job creation. Some rich people are very nice people. That doesn’t alter the fact that they shouldn’t be that rich – no one should. And by “that rich” I mean billionaires. As I said, I have no problem with the odd million or two, but no-one has a morally legitimate claim to billions. Anyway – I have a train to catch.
A_Griffin wrote:
Not at all – but I’m not interested in having an argument about it. As I said to MM before – do your own friggin’ research. But really, the reason is that it’s a waste of time. I’m happy enough to come on here and spout my opinions for fun, but I’m not interested in trying to convince you – because I won’t. Your mind is already made up, and it won’t matter what I say. I have never – ever- seen anyone (including me!) change their mind about anything as a result of an online discussion anywhere (or argument!) So… you carry on believing what you want, and I’ll carry on as I do. Meanwhile I’m off for a couple of days for work reasons, so won’t be posting anything (you’ll be relieved to hear.)
Boy do you prejudge big time!! :wtf: I asked a simple question. Nothing implied or said. It was an honest question. The money has to be somewhere. The only way to keep their riches from affecting others is by hiding it under a mattress, which none of them do (I don't think.)
A_Griffin wrote:
but no-one has a morally legitimate claim to billions.
Why not? So what would you do to "fix" this? Would you somehow prevent people from earning a billion dollars? Would you change the economic model to make it impossible? These are not baiting questions. I genuinely am interested in why you believe what you believe. I know that puts in my rare company here, but it is true. And I agree, neither of us will likely change our opinions but I do like to learn about why people believe things differently than me. I find that interesting.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data. There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
And he doesnt get the irony. :)
No, I don't get it. I am not english native. Would you mind to explain it?
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
No, I don't get it. I am not english native. Would you mind to explain it?
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
You accused me of misrepresenting what you said, then accused me of saying "all rich are nice and good people" when I said no such thing. :)
-
You accused me of misrepresenting what you said, then accused me of saying "all rich are nice and good people" when I said no such thing. :)
Well... arguing against "some rich people are bad people" can be confused with defending the opinion "all rich people are good people" realtively easy. Don't you think? If that's not what you were saying, then the other possibility is "some rich people are nice and good people" which already was included in my arguments. If you meant the second option... then I don't really understand why you started arguing against what I said.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
