Class War Illustrated

[mnbasketball]

yes there is, you just choose to think that your smarter than others.

The fact that they choose to do this(provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States) is their right. They have a wide area of determining what that means, and so far this country has determined that what they do to help different segments of our community is in the country best interest)

 

[Chris]

A trillion dollars for Iraq, Wall Street, and tax cuts for the wealthy, but no money for teachers or schools.

Is this a great country or what?

Just imagine how much greater it will be thirty years from now...

I think it will be.

But first we have to raise taxes on the wealthy and cut the defense budget.

 

[georgephillip]

It is an interesting exercise though don't you think? Again I've never found a conservative who couldn't answer that question.

I've never found a liberal who could or would.

But I'll keep searching.

What answers do conservatives supply?

 

[Foxfyre]

It is an interesting exercise though don't you think? Again I've never found a conservative who couldn't answer that question.

I've never found a liberal who could or would.

But I'll keep searching.

What answers do conservatives supply?

Answer the question and I'll tell you.

 

[JBeukema]

Fox, you ask why a man has a moral or ethical obligation to care for his fellow Man, then you claim you're don't want to deal with the morality of the matter. That is intellectually dishonest, to put it kindly. It seems you simply do not want to answer to the question. Again, if you can't grasp that some feel/believe such a moral obligation exists, then you will never understand. It is not something one can understand on a purely intellectual level- even to explain how it is better for society as a whole assumes that it is 'good' to do what is best for society. Fortunately, most people grasp this and feel this obligation to their fellow Man- evolution took care of that.

I wonder this: if you were to fall from a ladder, would you believe I had any obligation to help you- either by carrying you or calling 9-1-1? Do I have any obligation to call the police or an ambulance if you are shot and robbed?

Of course, you presented a loaded question in the first place, choosing your words to purposely misrepresent what most people actually advocate in terms of the social safety net. This all goes to show that you are not interested in an honest discussion of the matter. That is why you won't get the answer you want- you're trolling and everyone can see it.

 

[mnbasketball]

A trillion dollars for Iraq, Wall Street, and tax cuts for the wealthy, but no money for teachers or schools.

Is this a great country or what?

Just imagine how much greater it will be thirty years from now...

I think it will be.

But first we have to raise taxes on the wealthy and cut the defense budget.

don't you think it's a little funny how we can cut the wage and benefits of 150,000 people in Wisc at the very same time the two richest people in Wisc just improved their net worth from 36 billion to 44 billion in one year.
Maybe these guys being such great citizens of the state might just give the state the amount they need to balance the budget, since it was the people of the state and country they made their money off of.

Did you know they (koch bros and their rich friends*18 of the top 25 wealthiest families) have spent close to 500 million dollars trying to get rid of the inheritance tax, that would save them 78 billion it is est.

 

[georgephillip]

A trillion dollars for Iraq, Wall Street, and tax cuts for the wealthy, but no money for teachers or schools.

Is this a great country or what?

Just imagine how much greater it will be thirty years from now...

I think it will be.

But first we have to raise taxes on the wealthy and cut the defense budget.

War and private bond markets seem to be government's favorite tools for socializing cost and privatizing profit.

The state of North Dakota began doing business as the State Bank of North Dakota in 1919 and currently enjoys a budget surplus and more jobs than people looking for them.

Public banking could solve the private (Wall Street) credit problem, but I'm not too sure what to do about millions of middle class jobs dependent on Defense spending?

High speed rail and universal internet, maybe?

 

[mnbasketball]

If those people lose their jobs it will just be because they are LAZY and worthless, right Conservatives.

 

[Chris]

Just imagine how much greater it will be thirty years from now...

I think it will be.

But first we have to raise taxes on the wealthy and cut the defense budget.

War and private bond markets seem to be government's favorite tools for socializing cost and privatizing profit.

The state of North Dakota began doing business as the State Bank of North Dakota in 1919 and currently enjoys a budget surplus and more jobs than people looking for them.

Public banking could solve the private (Wall Street) credit problem, but I'm not too sure what to do about millions of middle class jobs dependent on Defense spending?

High speed rail and universal internet, maybe?

Imagine if we spent the money we wasted on Iraq on American energy independence.

Or carbon nanotubes.

 

[Foxfyre]

Fox, you ask why a man has a moral or ethical obligation to care for his fellow Man, then you claim you're don't want to deal with the morality of the matter. That is intellectually dishonest, to put it kindly. It seems you simply do not want to answer to the question. Again, if you can't grasp that some feel/believe such a moral obligation exists, then you will never understand. It is not something one can understand on a purely intellectual level- even to explain how it is better for society as a whole assumes that it is 'good' to do what is best for society. Fortunately, most people grasp this and feel this obligation to their fellow Man- evolution took care of that.

I wonder this: if you were to fall from a ladder, would you believe I had any obligation to help you- either by carrying you or calling 9-1-1? Do I have any obligation to call the police or an ambulance if you are shot and robbed?

Of course, you presented a loaded question in the first place, choosing your words to purposely misrepresent what most people actually advocate in terms of the social safety net. This all goes to show that you are not interested in an honest discussion of the matter. That is why you won't get the answer you want- you're trolling and everyone can see it.

I'm perfectly willing to discuss the morality of anything. But morality has nothing to do with the question I posed. And it is not at all a loaded question. It is straight forward, to the point, realistic, and quite answerable if you are an American who has read and at least reasonably understands and agrees with the Constitution. If you are a Communist or Marxist or Socialist you will answer much differently than will a modern American conservative but you'll answer it quite easily.

And so far, no modern American liberal can or will even attempt it.

I find that a fascinating phenomenon.

 

[Chris]

Fox, you ask why a man has a moral or ethical obligation to care for his fellow Man, then you claim you're don't want to deal with the morality of the matter. That is intellectually dishonest, to put it kindly. It seems you simply do not want to answer to the question. Again, if you can't grasp that some feel/believe such a moral obligation exists, then you will never understand. It is not something one can understand on a purely intellectual level- even to explain how it is better for society as a whole assumes that it is 'good' to do what is best for society. Fortunately, most people grasp this and feel this obligation to their fellow Man- evolution took care of that.

I wonder this: if you were to fall from a ladder, would you believe I had any obligation to help you- either by carrying you or calling 9-1-1? Do I have any obligation to call the police or an ambulance if you are shot and robbed?

Of course, you presented a loaded question in the first place, choosing your words to purposely misrepresent what most people actually advocate in terms of the social safety net. This all goes to show that you are not interested in an honest discussion of the matter. That is why you won't get the answer you want- you're trolling and everyone can see it.

I'm perfectly willing to discuss the morality of anything. But morality has nothing to do with the question I posed. And it is not at all a loaded question. It is straight forward, to the point, realistic, and quite answerable if you are an American who has read and at least reasonably understands and agrees with the Constitution. If you are a Communist or Marxist or Socialist you will answer much differently than will a modern American conservative but you'll answer it quite easily.

And so far, no modern American liberal can or will even attempt it.

I find that a fascinating phenomenon.

What's the question?

 

[mnbasketball]

they have to do it because they don't have a choice. but the truth is they don't do this. Once the money is paid to the govt they no longer have a say as to what the govt does with the money unless they are a member of congress.

 

[Foxfyre]

Fox, you ask why a man has a moral or ethical obligation to care for his fellow Man, then you claim you're don't want to deal with the morality of the matter. That is intellectually dishonest, to put it kindly. It seems you simply do not want to answer to the question. Again, if you can't grasp that some feel/believe such a moral obligation exists, then you will never understand. It is not something one can understand on a purely intellectual level- even to explain how it is better for society as a whole assumes that it is 'good' to do what is best for society. Fortunately, most people grasp this and feel this obligation to their fellow Man- evolution took care of that.

I wonder this: if you were to fall from a ladder, would you believe I had any obligation to help you- either by carrying you or calling 9-1-1? Do I have any obligation to call the police or an ambulance if you are shot and robbed?

Of course, you presented a loaded question in the first place, choosing your words to purposely misrepresent what most people actually advocate in terms of the social safety net. This all goes to show that you are not interested in an honest discussion of the matter. That is why you won't get the answer you want- you're trolling and everyone can see it.

I'm perfectly willing to discuss the morality of anything. But morality has nothing to do with the question I posed. And it is not at all a loaded question. It is straight forward, to the point, realistic, and quite answerable if you are an American who has read and at least reasonably understands and agrees with the Constitution. If you are a Communist or Marxist or Socialist you will answer much differently than will a modern American conservative but you'll answer it quite easily.

And so far, no modern American liberal can or will even attempt it.

I find that a fascinating phenomenon.

What's the question?

It goes to the heart of the class war thing among other things.

The question is:

All things being equal, what makes Citizen A who made choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous responsible to support Citizen B who did not make choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous?

It implies they started off even.
It implies they both had choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous.

 

[Chris]

I'm perfectly willing to discuss the morality of anything. But morality has nothing to do with the question I posed. And it is not at all a loaded question. It is straight forward, to the point, realistic, and quite answerable if you are an American who has read and at least reasonably understands and agrees with the Constitution. If you are a Communist or Marxist or Socialist you will answer much differently than will a modern American conservative but you'll answer it quite easily.

And so far, no modern American liberal can or will even attempt it.

I find that a fascinating phenomenon.

What's the question?

It goes to the heart of the class war thing among other things.

The question is:

All things being equal, what makes Citizen A who made choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous responsible to support Citizen B who did not make choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous?

It implies they started off even.
It implies they both had choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous.

Peter said to him, "Lord, are you telling this parable to us, or to everybody?"

The Lord said, "Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his lord will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the right times? Blessed is that servant whom his lord will find doing so when he comes. Truly I tell you, that he will set him over all that he has. But if that servant says in his heart, 'My lord delays his coming,' and begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken, then the lord of that servant will come in a day when he isn't expecting him, and in an hour that he doesn't know, and will cut him in two, and place his portion with the unfaithful. That servant, who knew his lord's will, and didn't prepare, nor do what he wanted, will be beaten with many stripes, but he who didn't know, and did things worthy of stripes, will be beaten with few stripes. To whomever much is given, of him will much be required; and to whom much was entrusted, of him more will be asked.

– Luke 12:35-48, World English Bible

 

[Foxfyre]

What's the question?

It goes to the heart of the class war thing among other things.

The question is:

All things being equal, what makes Citizen A who made choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous responsible to support Citizen B who did not make choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous?

It implies they started off even.
It implies they both had choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous.

Peter said to him, "Lord, are you telling this parable to us, or to everybody?"

The Lord said, "Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his lord will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the right times? Blessed is that servant whom his lord will find doing so when he comes. Truly I tell you, that he will set him over all that he has. But if that servant says in his heart, 'My lord delays his coming,' and begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken, then the lord of that servant will come in a day when he isn't expecting him, and in an hour that he doesn't know, and will cut him in two, and place his portion with the unfaithful. That servant, who knew his lord's will, and didn't prepare, nor do what he wanted, will be beaten with many stripes, but he who didn't know, and did things worthy of stripes, will be beaten with few stripes. To whomever much is given, of him will much be required; and to whom much was entrusted, of him more will be asked.

– Luke 12:35-48, World English Bible

Yes, and the Bible also says that he who will not work should not eat.

So can we get past the Bible lesson and address the question please?

 

[Chris]

You teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"
But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"

"Caesar's," they replied.

Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

The Bible and Taxes - What Does the Bible Say About Paying Taxes?

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay yet another liberal who cannot or will not answer the question but distracts and diverts with all manner of non sequitur.

This is getting really interesting.

 

[Chris]

It goes to the heart of the class war thing among other things.

The question is:

All things being equal, what makes Citizen A who made choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous responsible to support Citizen B who did not make choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous?

It implies they started off even.
It implies they both had choices to do what was necessary to become honorably prosperous.

Peter said to him, "Lord, are you telling this parable to us, or to everybody?"

The Lord said, "Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his lord will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the right times? Blessed is that servant whom his lord will find doing so when he comes. Truly I tell you, that he will set him over all that he has. But if that servant says in his heart, 'My lord delays his coming,' and begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken, then the lord of that servant will come in a day when he isn't expecting him, and in an hour that he doesn't know, and will cut him in two, and place his portion with the unfaithful. That servant, who knew his lord's will, and didn't prepare, nor do what he wanted, will be beaten with many stripes, but he who didn't know, and did things worthy of stripes, will be beaten with few stripes. To whomever much is given, of him will much be required; and to whom much was entrusted, of him more will be asked.

– Luke 12:35-48, World English Bible

Yes, and the Bible also says that he who will not work should not eat.

So can we get past the Bible lesson and address the question please?

But Jesus never said that. He did say this....

If anyone wants to go to law with you over your tunic, hand him your cloak as well.

Should anyone press you into service for one mile, go with him for two miles.

Give to the one who asks of you, and do not turn your back on one who wants to borrow.

USCCB - NAB - Matthew 5

 

[Chris]

Okay yet another liberal who cannot or will not answer the question but distracts and diverts with all manner of non sequitur.

This is getting really interesting.

I answered your question.

People who are sick or old should be helped by those more fortunate.

But modern day conservatism is the political codification of selfishness.

 

[mnbasketball]

you know what guys, god don't give a shit what anyone chooses to do, as he allows everything that man does to each other and all natural events.

Now if you believe in God then you better lead your life like you read the bible, because that is what you may be judged on if it happens.

but the truth is you pay to the govt what they deem is theres and they and only they make the choice of where that money goes, and there is no way you can tell if it was your money or mine that went to help out old B.