RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us.

RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

graceadieu -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 12:33:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: graceadieu quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 The tin foil hatters see evil lurking everywhere...... "Oh no, some professor had a weird idea! It must be an evil liberal conspiracy!" What? I don't think there's any organized conspiracy. Just too many whackos (of all persuasions) in the wrong places. A professor at the University of Southern California (USC) appears to have used a fall semester 2012 political science class to deliver sustained and angered attacks on Republicans, who he characterized as old, white, racist, and “losers.” In a 15 min. video secretly captured by USC student Tyler Talgo, political science Professor Darry Sragow also appears to endorse the illegal suppression of Republican votes. “You lose their information on the election in the mail,” he suggested when a student asked him how to keep Republicans from voting. “I mean there is lots of ways to do it [SIC].” ~Campus Reform A professor at a public university in Texas is under investigation... According to the complaint, obtained by Campus Reform, the professor compelled students in her graphic design class to create artwork opposing firearms on campus and opposing pro-gun legislation currently pending before the Texas state legislature. The professor then used the artwork students created online to publicize an anti-gun petition entitled “MSU is anti-Concealed Carry on Campus”... The complaint adds that Yucus “did require all works to include the URL to the petition” she had created and adds that students were photographed while crafting the posters to give the illusion of youth support. ~Campus Reform Tin foil hats should be reserved for people who always think that only those on the "other" side are wearing them. K. Agreed. There are definitely some teachers and professors and colleges that try to inflict their beliefs - both liberal and conservative, religious and non-religious - on their students. I know somebody going to Liberty University that's been taught that the Earth is 6000 years old. My high school civics teacher got somebody from the Cato Institute to come preach to us about the virtues of libertarianism. Everybody's got their beliefs and biases, but I think teachers should try to be balanced in the classroom as much as possible.

graceadieu -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 12:35:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Absolutely not. It means heftily raising taxes and outlawing welfare for corporations and their minions. Taking into account that we're talking about LARGE corporations, of course. Any two people can go to the state office and register a corporation with themselves as the officers. There are lots of corporations that are small mom-and-pop businesses, and they don't get any kind of goddamn corporate welfare. Only the big guys get that stuff, because they can pay lobbyists.

mnottertail -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 12:43:01 PM)
Yeah, I am a corporation. I am taxed at an individual level on my earnings. I am not receiving corporate welfare, I dont write big checks to lobbyists or congressmens campaigns.

DomKen -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 1:22:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Living in a commune was not charity. They are literally the basis of Marx's thinking. Living in a commune was a choice. Living in a commune, you chose to share everything. Communism forced it, while the communes of the 60's were freely entered into. That is the difference. I doubt the children born into the communes of the 19th century had any choice in the matter. I'm absolutely positive that they did redistribute the wealth acting as a government.

DomKen -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 1:25:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: And, therein lies the difference between charity and government redistribution. And since the government has redistibuted our wealth to the corporations, it is time to swing the pendulum back and redistribute back to its owners. Completely agree, Ron. But, you do realize, that means cutting taxes, right? Wrong. The only way to get the money out of the hands of those who gained wealth from the supply side practices of certain Presidents of the past 30+ years is to greatly increase the highest marginal rate and to end treating capital gains as anything other than income. Ron called for the end to corporate welfare and for the money to be returned to those that owned the money. The ones that owned the money are the ones that paid them in taxes. How do you get a tax dollar back to the taxpayer? Cut taxes. No. Most of the money that was given to corps by the government ended up in the hands of the very wealthy. To get that money back in the hands of the middle class, where it belongs, the tax structure has to become more progressive and stuff like capital gains has to be ended and the estate tax has to be raised.

JeffBC -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 1:40:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri What does removing money from the money stream do to the value of the dollars still in the stream? That is, what happens to prices when the amount of money usable to buy stuff is reduced? Removing money from the money stream makes everyone's dollars more valuable. Let me clue you in on something. If you make dollars more valuable then those who already have all the dollars just got even richer. So actually, while I support dealing with the runaway fed I don't really see how your answer relates to my question other than to make the problem worse.

DesideriScuri -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 1:41:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Living in a commune was not charity. They are literally the basis of Marx's thinking. Living in a commune was a choice. Living in a commune, you chose to share everything. Communism forced it, while the communes of the 60's were freely entered into. That is the difference. I doubt the children born into the communes of the 19th century had any choice in the matter. I'm absolutely positive that they did redistribute the wealth acting as a government. The kids born into a commune weren't at the age of self-determination, were they? The parents made that choice. Regardless of whether or not the commune acted as its own government, it was still a choice to live there or not. Choosing to live in a commune is choosing to abide by those rules. People didn't go into communes not knowing the rules, did they?

mnottertail -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 1:41:25 PM)
It is called deflation. At least by economists.

DesideriScuri -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 1:43:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Ron called for the end to corporate welfare and for the money to be returned to those that owned the money. The ones that owned the money are the ones that paid them in taxes. How do you get a tax dollar back to the taxpayer? Cut taxes. No. Most of the money that was given to corps by the government ended up in the hands of the very wealthy. To get that money back in the hands of the middle class, where it belongs, the tax structure has to become more progressive and stuff like capital gains has to be ended and the estate tax has to be raised. End "Corporate Welfare." Now, it's giving money to the rich?!? Make up your mind, dude. By what metric does it "belong" to the Middle Class?

DesideriScuri -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 1:46:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri What does removing money from the money stream do to the value of the dollars still in the stream? That is, what happens to prices when the amount of money usable to buy stuff is reduced? Removing money from the money stream makes everyone's dollars more valuable. Let me clue you in on something. If you make dollars more valuable then those who already have all the dollars just got even richer. So actually, while I support dealing with the runaway fed I don't really see how your answer relates to my question other than to make the problem worse. If a dollar is more valuable, it can buy more. Yes, that guy/gal with a bajillion dollars in the bank just got richer, but he wasn't spending it anyway, was s/he? The guy that spends his paycheck every week getting the essentials can now get more essentials, or spend less to get the same amount of essentials (allocating the "extra" to some other worthy cause of his choosing).

mnottertail -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 2:14:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Ron called for the end to corporate welfare and for the money to be returned to those that owned the money. The ones that owned the money are the ones that paid them in taxes. How do you get a tax dollar back to the taxpayer? Cut taxes. No. Most of the money that was given to corps by the government ended up in the hands of the very wealthy. To get that money back in the hands of the middle class, where it belongs, the tax structure has to become more progressive and stuff like capital gains has to be ended and the estate tax has to be raised. End "Corporate Welfare." Now, it's giving money to the rich?!? Make up your mind, dude. By what metric does it "belong" to the Middle Class? He didn't say that, not even close, not even near, not even something like that. You are either dishonest, but more likely a run of the mill simpleton. That is why our encounters so very rarely come out affable.

mnottertail -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 2:18:34 PM)
Since the railroads for instance, were (thru lincoln the lawyer, primarily, but many others) given land that was supposed to go to to the people, and they picked and chose what they wanted, and then sold it to american citizens at inflated prices (which was not the program that was designed by the government) the bailout money that went into wall streets pocket as bonusus and so on.....Jesus fucking christ, if you dont know any of this what the fuck are you doing spewing ignorant shit all over and playing the fuckin professor?

DomKen -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 2:43:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Living in a commune was not charity. They are literally the basis of Marx's thinking. Living in a commune was a choice. Living in a commune, you chose to share everything. Communism forced it, while the communes of the 60's were freely entered into. That is the difference. I doubt the children born into the communes of the 19th century had any choice in the matter. I'm absolutely positive that they did redistribute the wealth acting as a government. The kids born into a commune weren't at the age of self-determination, were they? The parents made that choice. Regardless of whether or not the commune acted as its own government, it was still a choice to live there or not. Choosing to live in a commune is choosing to abide by those rules. People didn't go into communes not knowing the rules, did they? But this discussion was over whether communes practices redistribution or charity. Clearly it was redistribution.

DomKen -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 2:45:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Ron called for the end to corporate welfare and for the money to be returned to those that owned the money. The ones that owned the money are the ones that paid them in taxes. How do you get a tax dollar back to the taxpayer? Cut taxes. No. Most of the money that was given to corps by the government ended up in the hands of the very wealthy. To get that money back in the hands of the middle class, where it belongs, the tax structure has to become more progressive and stuff like capital gains has to be ended and the estate tax has to be raised. End "Corporate Welfare." Now, it's giving money to the rich?!? Make up your mind, dude. By what metric does it "belong" to the Middle Class? By the metric of it was their tax money that went to the ultra rich.

Edwynn -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 3:18:20 PM)
It takes some folks longer than others to figure out by what metric 4.5 million homes were stolen out from under people, by what metric Enron, Worldcom, etc. employees had their retirement looted out from under them, by what metric that ExxonMobil, Koch Bros., etc. skim billions off the top, by what metric the banks extort over a trillion $ from the US Treasury, by what metric that CEOs of Halliburton, etc. come into positions of foreign policy and exercise that privilege to its fullest extent, by what metric that a dentist came to be head of the FTC under Reagan, and any other number of a host of 'metrics.' I'm still trying to figure out how the winning sides ever got through two world wars, how IBM ever invented computers, etc., before we ever came up with the notion of having a 'metric' for any of it. I will also say that I am well tired of all this 'redistribution' crap. Leave it to well entrenched ideological liberals to miss the obvious: Don't give it away to begin with, then there will be no need for 're-distribution.'

farglebargle -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 5:14:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: And, therein lies the difference between charity and government redistribution. And since the government has redistibuted our wealth to the corporations, it is time to swing the pendulum back and redistribute back to its owners. Completely agree, Ron. But, you do realize, that means cutting taxes, right? Well, we'll be able to drop property taxes once we charge SALES TAX on the sales of stocks and bonds.

JeffBC -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 5:37:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri If a dollar is more valuable, it can buy more. Yes, that guy/gal with a bajillion dollars in the bank just got richer, but he wasn't spending it anyway, was s/he? The guy that spends his paycheck every week getting the essentials can now get more essentials, or spend less to get the same amount of essentials (allocating the "extra" to some other worthy cause of his choosing). No... I think I'll just step out of this one again. These sorts of ridiculous faux debates don't interest me. Here though, as a take-away, yeah I believe inflationary currency (I mean currency not monetary policy) is a bad thing because inflationary currency allows inflationary monetary policy and if it is allowed, then whoever controls the monetary supply will do it. If you could print money wouldn't you? So I'm with you on the whole wanting to "take money out of the money stream" although I doubt it can be done and I acknowledge it makes the current imbalances even worse.

Edwynn -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 5:46:44 PM)
I remember getting a ~ $115 tax rebate check from the IRS (actually the Treasury) in the early Reagan days. If we were to cut the cord from Exxon, Koch Bros, Monsanto, Cargill , Archer Daniels Midland, Halliburton, Citigroup, etc., then any administration could send us a $1,000 rebate check and the Treasury would hardly notice the effect. That tells me all I need to know about the priorities of the current and recent previous congresses and administrations.

Edwynn -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 5:56:14 PM)
Just for the adventure; Has the press ever mentioned anything about ExxonMobil or Monsanto, the regular and timely truckloads of US Treasury cash to those and other corporations, in any of their reporting on this "financial cliff" thing? Has the Congress mentioned them at all? What, no? Hard to imagine the absence of something so obvious in such discussion, wouldn't you think?

DesideriScuri -> RE: All Your Kids Belong To Us. (4/11/2013 6:39:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Ron called for the end to corporate welfare and for the money to be returned to those that owned the money. The ones that owned the money are the ones that paid them in taxes. How do you get a tax dollar back to the taxpayer? Cut taxes. No. Most of the money that was given to corps by the government ended up in the hands of the very wealthy. To get that money back in the hands of the middle class, where it belongs, the tax structure has to become more progressive and stuff like capital gains has to be ended and the estate tax has to be raised. End "Corporate Welfare." Now, it's giving money to the rich?!? Make up your mind, dude. By what metric does it "belong" to the Middle Class? He didn't say that, not even close, not even near, not even something like that. You are either dishonest, but more likely a run of the mill simpleton. That is why our encounters so very rarely come out affable. Perhaps not affable, but usually, from my end at least, laughable. Your assertion that "he didn't say that" refers to what? You called for the end of Corporate Welfare. Ken said most of the money given to corps (the Corporate Welfare) ended up in the hands of the very wealthy. Ergo, the "Corporate Welfare" was, essentially, giving money to the rich. Then, he said, "To get that money back in the hands of the middle class, where it belongs..." Now, tell me what your assertion referred to.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625