Jump to content
datastrain

working class republicans

Recommended Posts

 

Hey fucktardstrain, you were given a question. Answer it, or get the fuck outta here. Explain why the more the government redistributes, the worse poverty becomes?

 

 

 

 

 

First tell me what you are saying gov. redistributes that makes poverty worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

First tell me what you are saying gov. redistributes that makes poverty worse.

ALL resources!

Those of us who trust the science demonstrating with overwheming evidence - and 97% peer agreement - that human activity is playing no small roll in global warming and climate change are right, too.

You sound a lot like a brown noser. The shirt and jack boots won't be too far behind if you're not careful. If you aren't, make sure you know your neck size. I'm guessing about 4-and -a-quarter.

And just why do the deepest red states have the highest poverty rates, and take far more money from the taxpayers then they themselves pay in taxes?

Probably because they have the deepest minority levels.

Mississippi 1,074,200 37.30% 2 Louisiana 1,452,396 31.98% 3 Georgia 3,150,435 31.4% 4 Maryland 1,700,298 29.44% 5 South Carolina 1,290,684 28.48% 6 Alabama 1,251,311 26.38% 7 North Carolina 2,048,628 21.60% 8 Delaware 191,814 20.95% 9 Virginia 1,551,399 19.91% 10 Tennessee 1,055,689

There is 97% peer agreement on this too I might add.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ALL resources!

Probably because they have the deepest minority levels.

Mississippi 1,074,200 37.30% 2 Louisiana 1,452,396 31.98% 3 Georgia 3,150,435 31.4% 4 Maryland 1,700,298 29.44% 5 South Carolina 1,290,684 28.48% 6 Alabama 1,251,311 26.38% 7 North Carolina 2,048,628 21.60% 8 Delaware 191,814 20.95% 9 Virginia 1,551,399 19.91% 10 Tennessee 1,055,689

There is 97% peer agreement on this too I might add.

right... because if we didn't give the homeless family $12'000 a year to live on, they would have gone out to find a job already, right??

 

too bad the facts state that people on assistance are more likely to find a job and get back on their feet, than people living on the street and from shelters.

 

too bad facts state that more than 80% of Americans have had to rely on social assistance at some point in their lives (and lo and behold! America doesn't have an 80% unemployment rate!).

 

too bad facts state (let alone common sense) that it is much harder to be poor and look for food and shelter from the street, than it is to work 8 hours a day and be able to buy fodd from grocery store, that hasn't been spit on or half eaten by rats.

 

too bad you insist your not racist, and then declare the reason why red states are poor is because of minorities. you should go read my post on systemic racism again, and then retract those facts from that conversation. man up! i did!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there... board.

There it is. You are banned from the "Conservative only" thread.

 

Been lying the whole time, liberal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There it is. You are banned from the "Conservative only" thread.

 

Been lying the whole time, liberal.

Good riddance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

there was always that kid in school that sucked up to authority. the teachers pet. nobody like him.
but he survived school, and ended up sitting beside us in the workplace. the brown-noser that, despite his best efforts, wasn't even liked by the boss that he covertly worked to impress.
this type of person has always been around, but especially in the worst tragedies.
the Nazi's would look for them, and hire them: Jews that could be recruited and relied upon to help the Nazi cause of first controlling the population, and then killing them. they would help Nazi's control crowds, find notorious Jews, or Jews that were hiding, or just point out the Jews that could cause trouble. they would spy on their neighbours and friends, and then sell them out in order to prove their worth to authority. it didn't turn out that way - many of these 'traitors', after doing their job, were just thrown onto the last train leaving. because, despite their allegiance, they would always be filthy Jews.
these traitors couldn't have helped the Nazi cause more. they might as well have voted in favour of the Nazi's anti-Jewish campaigns themselves.
i'm beginning to see working class republicans the same way. they are so dedicated, and fight so hard, and debate so ruthlessly for the republican cause.
but more and more research is showing the wealth gap only getting worse. more and more of the working class are boarding that train to poverty, assisted by lax regulations and deregulation and policies that openly support keeping the poor poor, and the rich rich. and NONE of these polices and laws would ever even come into existence, if it weren't for the support of the the working class republicans.
for some reason, they just don't see that the system in place is slowly putting everyone on a train. and they don't see that the people on the train have just ONE thing in common. and they just don't believe that they will be the last ones to board.

 

 

You constantly attack Republicans and conservatism, but claim you are a Libertarian. Never have I witnessed-granted, I am relatively new here-you start a thread attacking Liberalism in any way. You do not see that Liberalism is doing worse than Republicans as far as costing us free exercise of rights. Your general thrust seems to be that we are owed money other people have earned. We are not.

 

The economy is a zero sum game in that regardless of who spends my money-me, or the government-it gets spent, and that creates jobs. The difference is that I have earned it, the government has not, and the government is wasteful in how they spend it. But-as kfools said-the creation of wealth is not. Wealth is not fixed. Granted, money is not wealth, but is more the representation of debt, but it acts as wealth, and increases as productivity and innovation do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

right... because if we didn't give the homeless family $12'000 a year to live on, they would have gone out to find a job already, right??

Who the fuck said that?

 

too bad the facts state that people on assistance are more likely to find a job and get back on their feet, than people living on the street and from shelters.

What kind of assistance and what facts?

 

too bad facts state that more than 80% of Americans have had to rely on social assistance at some point in their lives (and lo and behold! America doesn't have an 80% unemployment rate!).

No the facts don't really support that the way you presenting it. The facts say that most of that money goes to the elderly and disabled...[people who aren't in the work force] the facts also show that blacks are 12% of the population and take a whopping 14% of all entitlement money. The stats show that whites take the most but that should statistically be the case as there are a LOT more whites.

 

too bad facts state (let alone common sense) that it is much harder to be poor and look for food and shelter from the street, than it is to work 8 hours a day and be able to buy fodd from grocery store, that hasn't been spit on or half eaten by rats.

 

Who is arguing that?

 

too bad you insist your not racist,

 

Facts are always racist to people who don't like facts about their race. I am sorry that these things are true but that doesn't make me a racist no matter how much you want me to be. At least not anymore racist than you are.

 

and then declare the reason why red states are poor is because of minorities.

 

Total lie. The question was about the highest POVERTY levels. It is an inarguable fact that black communities are by and large extremely poor. If you think that has nothing to do with high poverty levels in high concentrations of black communities within certain states then you are just blinded by your own bias.

 

you should go read my post on systemic racism again,

 

We have already been through your made up term.

 

and then retract those facts from that conversation. man up! i did!

 

Huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There it is. You are banned from the "Conservative only" thread.

 

Been lying the whole time, liberal.

understood - thanks for the chance.

 

but i'm no Liberal. i'm not partisan. just an asshole. but i vote for people and positions (not parties).

 

i've even been removed from a Liberal Only thread by bludog (probably the most fair / tolerant guy on the sight) for pushing a conservative position : http://www.liberalforum.org/index.php?/topic/177549-why-you-should-vote-republican/?p=1059172961

 

i hold many conservative positions.

1. pro gun

2. anti-abortion

3. pro free trade

4. pro keystone pipeline

5. pro-small government

6. i disagree with Obama's position on ISIS. he's acting like he's a little bit pregnant - either get all in, or get all out.

7. i believe people are responsible for their own actions.

8. i think the welfare system needs major reform. there is a large number of people "addicted" to welfare, and they need to be dealt with.

9. i've voted for many republicans: Ronald Reagan, Ron Paul.

 

i ONLY discussed Conservative topics on that thread.

 

all my posts have been very cordial on that thread, on purpose, out of respect for the Conservatives on that thread. outside the thread, i can be an asshole - no doubt. but there, very cordial.

 

 

but i've already presented my case here: http://www.liberalforum.org/index.php?/topic/175692-conservatives-only-thread/?p=1059133709

 

thanks for giving me the chance. totally understand the decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

right... because if we didn't give the homeless family $12'000 a year to live on, they would have gone out to find a job already, right??

Who the fuck said that?

 

too bad the facts state that people on assistance are more likely to find a job and get back on their feet, than people living on the street and from shelters.

What kind of assistance and what facts?

 

too bad facts state that more than 80% of Americans have had to rely on social assistance at some point in their lives (and lo and behold! America doesn't have an 80% unemployment rate!).

No the facts don't really support that the way you presenting it. The facts say that most of that money goes to the elderly and disabled...[people who aren't in the work force] the facts also show that blacks are 12% of the population and take a whopping 14% of all entitlement money. The stats show that whites take the most but that should statistically be the case as there are a LOT more whites.

 

too bad facts state (let alone common sense) that it is much harder to be poor and look for food and shelter from the street, than it is to work 8 hours a day and be able to buy fodd from grocery store, that hasn't been spit on or half eaten by rats.

 

Who is arguing that?

 

too bad you insist your not racist,

 

Facts are always racist to people who don't like facts about their race. I am sorry that these things are true but that doesn't make me a racist no matter how much you want me to be. At least not anymore racist than you are.

 

and then declare the reason why red states are poor is because of minorities.

 

Total lie. The question was about the highest POVERTY levels. It is an inarguable fact that black communities are by and large extremely poor. If you think that has nothing to do with high poverty levels in high concentrations of black communities within certain states then you are just blinded by your own bias.

 

you should go read my post on systemic racism again,

 

We have already been through your made up term.

 

and then retract those facts from that conversation. man up! i did!

 

Huh?

 

 

http://www.liberalforum.org/index.php?/topic/175263-working-class-republicans/?p=1059170108

 

you were saying the red states have hi poverty levels because of the minorities that live in red states, but don't address WHY minorities are so poor. leaving it there does no good. you're not address the root cause of why minorities are so poor.

 

 

 

 

 

You constantly attack Republicans and conservatism, but claim you are a Libertarian. Never have I witnessed-granted, I am relatively new here-you start a thread attacking Liberalism in any way. You do not see that Liberalism is doing worse than Republicans as far as costing us free exercise of rights. Your general thrust seems to be that we are owed money other people have earned. We are not.

 

The economy is a zero sum game in that regardless of who spends my money-me, or the government-it gets spent, and that creates jobs. The difference is that I have earned it, the government has not, and the government is wasteful in how they spend it. But-as kfools said-the creation of wealth is not. Wealth is not fixed. Granted, money is not wealth, but is more the representation of debt, but it acts as wealth, and increases as productivity and innovation do.

 

read my reply to techer just above. i criticize everybody that i think deserves criticism. (and i back up my criticism.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

First tell me what you are saying gov. redistributes that makes poverty worse.

 

Because there's more of it going on now than ever before. And the problem is only getting worse.

 

If you kept pouring kerosene on a fire and if wasn't going out, would you order another ten tankers full of kerosene to try again?

 

Your thinking is stale. You honestly believe we just haven't taken the social experiment far enough.

 

You're all for expanding the welfare state as it's collapsing.

 

Utterly ridiculous in the face of where it's been tried and failed over the last couple of hundred years.

 

 

 

Obama just nationalized student loans two years ago and now everyone is complaining they can't pay their loans!

Hello? We never had these problems until govt encroached further and further on every aspect of our lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.liberalfo...s/?p=1059170108

you were saying the red states have hi poverty levels because of the minorities that live in red states, but don't address WHY minorities are so poor. leaving it there does no good. you're not address the root cause of why minorities are so poor.

That's because it had nothing to do with what we were originally talking about.

The question was And just why do the deepest red states have the highest poverty rates, and take far more money from the taxpayers then they themselves pay in taxes?

I said :Probably because they have the deepest minority levels.

Mississippi 1,074,200 37.30% 2 Louisiana 1,452,396 31.98% 3 Georgia 3,150,435 31.4% 4 Maryland 1,700,298 29.44% 5 South Carolina1,290,684 28.48% 6 Alabama 1,251,311 26.38% 7 North Carolina 2,048,628 21.60% 8 Delaware 191,814 20.95% 9 Virginia 1,551,399 19.91% 10 Tennessee 1,055,689

Then you yelled out "Systemic racism" and changed the subject to why minorities are poor.

 

Ok I am happy to talk about that, but don't pretend like that had anything to do with the question that was asked.

 

Also, you need to tell me how telling the truth is racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://www.liberalfo...s/?p=1059170108

you were saying the red states have hi poverty levels because of the minorities that live in red states, but don't address WHY minorities are so poor. leaving it there does no good. you're not address the root cause of why minorities are so poor.

That's because it had nothing to do with what we were originally talking about.

The question was And just why do the deepest red states have the highest poverty rates, and take far more money from the taxpayers then they themselves pay in taxes?

I said :Probably because they have the deepest minority levels.

Mississippi 1,074,200 37.30% 2 Louisiana 1,452,396 31.98% 3 Georgia 3,150,435 31.4% 4 Maryland 1,700,298 29.44% 5 South Carolina1,290,684 28.48% 6 Alabama 1,251,311 26.38% 7 North Carolina 2,048,628 21.60% 8 Delaware 191,814 20.95% 9 Virginia 1,551,399 19.91% 10 Tennessee 1,055,689

Then you yelled out "Systemic racism" and changed the subject to why minorities are poor.

 

Ok I am happy to talk about that, but don't pretend like that had anything to do with the question that was asked.

 

Also, you need to tell me how telling the truth is racist.

 

that's fine. but you brought up minorities as if the fact that they are minorities is the cause of them being poor. and they are not poor because they are minorities.

 

that was the only point.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice article. so if you're parents make it big (and rich) THEN you can get a good education. if your parents don't, you're out of luck. how can working class republicans support this? don't they want the best for their kids?

 

In 2013, Americans in the highest-income bracket, defined as those households that made over $108,650 in 2012, were more than eight times more likely to have graduated from a bachelor’s-degree program than the lowest-income Americans, defined as households that made less than $34,160 in 2012.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/02/the-rich-get-richer-and-more-educated/385166/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Define a "good education" for us.

 

Then define "out of luck" for us.

good education means 4 years of university.

 

out of luck means can't afford 4 years of university.

 

(or college)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, soooo that could be in journalism or psychology. Or it could be in STEM or physics or some hard science.

 

We didn't seem to have a problem with this twenty years ago? People went to college, they worked part time and summer jobs and the government wasn't backing 100% of whatever any school while building elaborate campuses. Families helped or scholarships were awarded here and there based on performance and applying yourself and the family "made it happen". Now, college is skyrocketing quickly, like medical and it's just expected.

 

Do you see what I'm getting at? Anytime the feds get involved and promise to pay everything or loan for everything without batting an eye, an institution is gonna raise fees higher and higher because...THEY CAN. There's no feedback mechanism to the provider saying enough is enough. No, the "everyone deserves_________" tact is taken and prices rise more quickly than other things. Same with mortgages. It's cheap money and it breeds stupidity.

 

It's self defeating. That's what's destroying systems; no feedback mechanism from the end consumer and the mentality of do it and worry about how to pay for it later.

 

Do you remember that valuable lesson when buying a car: don't worry about the monthly payments, worry about the total cost? Well, that mentality is out the window and everyone expects to work their whole f'n life for an iPhone and a cell plan. The short-sightedness is very destructive and govt promotes it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice article. so if you're parents make it big (and rich) THEN you can get a good education. if your parents don't, you're out of luck. how can working class republicans support this? don't they want the best for their kids?

 

 

 

In 2013, Americans in the highest-income bracket, defined as those households that made over $108,650 in 2012, were more than eight times more likely to have graduated from a bachelors-degree program than the lowest-income Americans, defined as households that made less than $34,160 in 2012.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/02/the-rich-get-richer-and-more-educated/385166/
Or you can be financially smart, save your money, get scholarships, or take out loans and pay them back.

You don't need a rich family to be smart and efficient with your money.

 

Most young people don't invest in stocks at all, don't have a good concept of saving, and don't know how to handle debt well.

 

That's the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, soooo that could be in journalism or psychology. Or it could be in STEM or physics or some hard science.

 

We didn't seem to have a problem with this twenty years ago? People went to college, they worked part time and summer jobs and the government wasn't backing 100% of whatever any school while building elaborate campuses. Families helped or scholarships were awarded here and there based on performance and applying yourself and the family "made it happen". Now, college is skyrocketing quickly, like medical and it's just expected.

 

Do you see what I'm getting at? Anytime the feds get involved and promise to pay everything or loan for everything without batting an eye, an institution is gonna raise fees higher and higher because...THEY CAN. There's no feedback mechanism to the provider saying enough is enough. No, the "everyone deserves_________" tact is taken and prices rise more quickly than other things. Same with mortgages. It's cheap money and it breeds stupidity.

 

It's self defeating. That's what's destroying systems; no feedback mechanism from the end consumer and the mentality of do it and worry about how to pay for it later.

 

Do you remember that valuable lesson when buying a car: don't worry about the monthly payments, worry about the total cost? Well, that mentality is out the window and everyone expects to work their whole f'n life for an iPhone and a cell plan. The short-sightedness is very destructive and govt promotes it.

fine - but then what solution do you have to counter what our system is resulting in? what's your solution for this:

 

In 2013, Americans in the highest-income bracket, defined as those households that made over $108,650 in 2012, were more than eight times more likely to have graduated from a bachelor’s-degree program than the lowest-income Americans, defined as households that made less than $34,160 in 2012.

Or you can be financially smart, save your money, get scholarships, or take out loans and pay them back.

You don't need a rich family to be smart and efficient with your money.

 

Most young people don't invest in stocks at all, don't have a good concept of saving, and don't know how to handle debt well.

i totally agree with everything you say. and if you aren't smart with your money, there are natural consequences. i strongly believe in natural consequences, and not "rescuing" people.

 

but the fact is, we are here. and here is this (below). and this is not good for our country. we're being left behind...

 

In 2013, Americans in the highest-income bracket, defined as those households that made over $108,650 in 2012, were more than eight times more likely to have graduated from a bachelor’s-degree program than the lowest-income Americans, defined as households that made less than $34,160 in 2012.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that's exactly how it works.

No it isn't how it works.

 

If you make spears for your tribe and everybody wants one because spear technology is new, does that mean the percentage of all the bead necklaces gets smaller?

 

Of course not! Why you ask, well because ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER! Yet they are both still part of the same economy. Somebody just baked a new economical cake.

 

This is purely inarguable logic sir.

 

If I make a billion dollars selling whiskey, and you make a billion dollars selling computers. Yet the economy only started with a billion dollars how did the other billion get there I wonder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it isn't how it works.

 

If you make spears for your tribe and everybody wants one because spear technology is new, does that mean the percentage of all the bead necklaces gets smaller?

 

Of course not! Why you ask, well because ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER! Yet they are both still part of the same economy. Somebody just baked a new economical cake.

 

This is purely inarguable logic sir.

 

If I make a billion dollars selling whiskey, and you make a billion dollars selling computers. Yet the economy only started with a billion dollars how did the other billion get there I wonder?

80% of new income goes to the top 1%. income of the 99% has reduced.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/28/upshot/gains-from-economic-recovery-still-limited-to-top-one-percent.html?abt=0002&abg=1&utm_content=buffera2fbe&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer&_r=2

 

the rich get richer, and poor have gotten poorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fine - but then what solution do you have to counter what our system is resulting in? what's your solution for this:

 

In 2013, Americans in the highest-income bracket, defined as those households that made over $108,650 in 2012, were more than eight times more likely to have graduated from a bachelor’s-degree program than the lowest-income Americans, defined as households that made less than $34,160 in 2012.

i totally agree with everything you say. and if you aren't smart with your money, there are natural consequences. i strongly believe in natural consequences, and not "rescuing" people.

 

but the fact is, we are here. and here is this (below). and this is not good for our country. we're being left behind...

 

In 2013, Americans in the highest-income bracket, defined as those households that made over $108,650 in 2012, were more than eight times more likely to have graduated from a bachelor’s-degree program than the lowest-income Americans, defined as households that made less than $34,160 in 2012.

 

What about the highest income bracket? You can't just put those numbers out there and hang a hat on them. Of course if you live in a metro area like San Francisco, Austin or Northern Virginia or Miami, you're going to have numbers like that. $110K doesn't go as far as you would think it would. If you live in a rural place like Adamsville, Rhode Island or Nokomis, Illinois or Herriman, Utah, it's going to go much farther, but you're probably going to earn closer to the $34K. WTF is your point? Everyone should earn the same pay check?

 

Everyone should go to college? Fuck no. If you aren't meant for it and don't have the brain power, then I don't care if the earnings are 4 times as much or not. YOU AREN'T SUITED TO GO TO COLLEGE. PERIOD.

 

My solution are a return to trade schools, but the realization that you will most likely never make as much as a college grad and that's just the way it is.

 

The fact is we're being left behind because A) we're importing stupidity from our southern border, Be) affirmative action with people in schools, work positions, and leadership positions that can't perform, C) the absolutely idiotic belief that every probleme can be solved by throwing more of someone else's money at it, and D)) the lack of teaching civics and good government in the last 30 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What about the highest income bracket? You can't just put those numbers out there and hang a hat on them. Of course if you live in a metro area like San Francisco, Austin or Northern Virginia or Miami, you're going to have numbers like that. $110K doesn't go as far as you would think it would. If you live in a rural place like Adamsville, Rhode Island or Nokomis, Illinois or Herriman, Utah, it's going to go much farther, but you're probably going to earn closer to the $34K. WTF is your point? Everyone should earn the same pay check?

 

Everyone should go to college? Fuck no. If you aren't meant for it and don't have the brain power, then I don't care if the earnings are 4 times as much or not. YOU AREN'T SUITED TO GO TO COLLEGE. PERIOD.

 

My solution are a return to trade schools, but the realization that you will most likely never make as much as a college grad and that's just the way it is.

i literally don't understand your points in this reply.

 

1. "What's my point???" really???

2. Colleges include Trade Schools

3. "Everyone should go to college?? ummm... no. who the hell said that???

 

can you read my post before replying? otherwise you're wasting peoples time (no offence).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

80% of new income goes to the top 1%. income of the 99% has reduced.

This is literally all a lie. All of it. The article you linked certainly said nothing of the sort.

 

It literally said nowhere that the income of 99% has reduced, do you know why? It's because it simply isn't true. In fact it isn't even possible at this point.

 

America's top earners tend to be highly paid executives or entrepreneurs, the "working rich," instead of elites who enjoy lives of leisure on inherited wealth, Saez wrote in a report that accompanied the new analysis.

 

How can this be? You mean this article actually states right in it that these people earned their wealth they did not inherit it? WOW I mean....it's like anybody could do that with enough hard work!

 

Increasingly, technology is replacing workers in performing routine tasks

The changes have reduced costs for many employers. That is one reason corporate profits hit a record this year

 

I see.....sounds like the evil corporations have gone out of their way to make sure they keep costs down so they pocket the most possible money....which is what is called in the business world smart.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/28/upshot/gains-from-economic-recovery-still-limited-to-top-one-percent.html?abt=0002&abg=1&utm_content=buffera2fbe&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer&_r=2

 

the rich get richer,

Actually according to this article

The richest Americans were hit hard by the financial crisis. Their incomes fell more than 36 percent in the Great Recession of 2007-09 as stock prices plummeted. Incomes for the bottom 99 percent fell just 11.6 percent, according to the analysis.

Sounds like they actually got poorer while the middle class and poor kept more money. Huh....go figure.

 

But since the recession officially ended in June 2009, the top 1 percent have enjoyed the benefits of rising corporate profits and stock prices: 95 percent of the income gains reported since 2009 have gone to the top 1 percent.

 

You mean to say they still have not totally recovered? Fancy that.

 

 

 

and poor have gotten poorer.

 

Absolute lie. There is zero proof of that in this article at all. You couldn't find proof of that if you wanted to it is totally bogus. You are still in the "There is only one pizza and of they get 80% of the pizza we all only get 20%

 

I keep trying to explain to you that isn't how economics works. That isn't even how it works in your own home. You just bake two pizzas right? Common sense. Money is only as finite as we make it depending on service and product demand which is greater than ever. If you can't make a buck in this country you literally aren't trying very hard. This article even points that out by telling you hard workers are the top earners.

 

You don't have to very smart to get rich man...you just have to take risk. Nobody ever wants to do that and that is why very few people are rich...im sorry but thems the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


No holds barred chat

  • Hey kfools.. does this help? 


  • By Vegas

    Liberals are going to hell.


  • grgle



  • Where’s at @slideman?


  • Hola


  • I know this one, this new chat thing. I've seen it called the "shoutbox" among other things in my past. Very hard to hide from the chat box. The question is asked, there's no time to go search what other folks think, this is real time. Only seconds should be between chat box replies. This one is made for me. In the chat box one has to be quick on their feet with stuff at the ready. This chat box is the worst nightmare of anyone trying to deal with ol' teach. 


  • By pmurT

    hey @teacher that sounds like too much work for me LOL I need that useless thing called *time* in order to authenticate facts and truths which get posted by deceitful Dems


  • What does the red number refer to? currently, on my screen it says 2

     


  • Where does it say 2?


  • So. In the chat....if you tag a member the text afterwards should be a private message. 


  • By teacher

    How do? I'm teacher. If I'm online and the powers that be can figure out how to make it immediately apparent to me that whatever I've said here has been replied to I'm gonna show up right quick and kick some teeth in. It's the chat box, all this is new and scary. I know this gig. This starts now. 



  • By Duck615

    Hey kfools, did you lose your securtiy cert? On my browser it is saying your site is not secure?


  • By kfools

    Mine too. I'm looking into it.


  • By Imgreatagain

    Mine too. 


  • By Imgreatagain

    I thought it was my location.. 


  • By kfools

    Just gave to renew the security cert. No big deal I'll do it tonight


  • By Duck615

    OK thanks

     


  • By king of the county

    Test


  • By Blue Devil

    Happy Anniversary, America... on your Civil Union.


You don't have permission to chat in this chatroom
×
×
  • Create New...