Conservatives are actually MORE in favor of wealth redistribution!

So I'm just like you, then?

I love playing rope a dope with lefties.

DOPE!!


study confirms conservatives give more to charity - Bing

Well I'm not a leftist so I'll define your argument on that poor choice of labeling.

Here's something for you lad.

http://cdn.financialsamurai.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/giving_averages.gif

The poorest among us give more of what they earn than the richest.


You aren't going to convince people by making a claim and telling them to fuck off.

It so happens that I already knew about this study and its implications. But there is another study that is far more fundamental than this one.

The religious give more of their time and money to charity, something that has been known for a long time. Just so happens that republicans tend to be less secular than democrats.

How does the fact that the poor (whoever they are) give more as a percentage than the rich any refutation of the original point?
This is where we see the intelligence of a poster come through, or lack thereof. When they present "evidence" but cannot tell why it supports or refutes an argument.
 
I love playing rope a dope with lefties.

DOPE!!


study confirms conservatives give more to charity - Bing

Well I'm not a leftist so I'll define your argument on that poor choice of labeling.

Here's something for you lad.

http://cdn.financialsamurai.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/giving_averages.gif

The poorest among us give more of what they earn than the richest.


You aren't going to convince people by making a claim and telling them to fuck off.

It so happens that I already knew about this study and its implications. But there is another study that is far more fundamental than this one.

The religious give more of their time and money to charity, something that has been known for a long time. Just so happens that republicans tend to be less secular than democrats.

How does the fact that the poor (whoever they are) give more as a percentage than the rich any refutation of the original point?
This is where we see the intelligence of a poster come through, or lack thereof. When they present "evidence" but cannot tell why it supports or refutes an argument.

When exactly did I claim it was false? I know the OP is stating a fact, I wasn't arguing that. But convincing people doesn't involve giving them your view and telling them to fuck off.

Just a quick note, my problem with the OP is he refused to present evidence.
 
Last edited:
Well I'm not a leftist so I'll define your argument on that poor choice of labeling.

Here's something for you lad.

http://cdn.financialsamurai.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/giving_averages.gif

The poorest among us give more of what they earn than the richest.


You aren't going to convince people by making a claim and telling them to fuck off.

It so happens that I already knew about this study and its implications. But there is another study that is far more fundamental than this one.

The religious give more of their time and money to charity, something that has been known for a long time. Just so happens that republicans tend to be less secular than democrats.

How does the fact that the poor (whoever they are) give more as a percentage than the rich any refutation of the original point?
This is where we see the intelligence of a poster come through, or lack thereof. When they present "evidence" but cannot tell why it supports or refutes an argument.

When exactly did I claim it was false? I know the OP is stating a fact, I wasn't arguing that. But convincing people doesn't involve giving them your view and telling them to fuck off.

Just a quick note, my problem with the OP is he refused to present evidence.

So in other words you are posting irrelevant nonsense. Got it.
 
It's class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldn't be.
- Warren Buffett, CNN Interview, May 25 2005, in arguing the need to raise taxes on the rich.

There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning.
- Warrenn Buffett, New York Times, November 26, 2006.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett
Just when do these wealthy conservatives plan on redistributing the wealth in America - after they've won the "class war?"
 
It's class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldn't be.
- Warren Buffett, CNN Interview, May 25 2005, in arguing the need to raise taxes on the rich.

There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning.
- Warrenn Buffett, New York Times, November 26, 2006.

Warren Buffett - Wikiquote
Just when do these wealthy conservatives plan on redistributing the wealth in America - after they've won the "class war?"

Buffett plans on doing it after he dies.
 
How does the fact that the poor (whoever they are) give more as a percentage than the rich any refutation of the original point?
This is where we see the intelligence of a poster come through, or lack thereof. When they present "evidence" but cannot tell why it supports or refutes an argument.

When exactly did I claim it was false? I know the OP is stating a fact, I wasn't arguing that. But convincing people doesn't involve giving them your view and telling them to fuck off.

Just a quick note, my problem with the OP is he refused to present evidence.

So in other words you are posting irrelevant nonsense. Got it.

So asking for someone to back up a claim is nonsense?

Everything on this board makes so much more sense now!
 
Wealth Distribution is a Communist/Totalitarian agenda. No one should support it.
 
When exactly did I claim it was false? I know the OP is stating a fact, I wasn't arguing that. But convincing people doesn't involve giving them your view and telling them to fuck off.

Just a quick note, my problem with the OP is he refused to present evidence.

So in other words you are posting irrelevant nonsense. Got it.

So asking for someone to back up a claim is nonsense?

Everything on this board makes so much more sense now!

No, posting irrelevant nonsense is nonsense. Get with the picture.
 
Because right wingers are actually far more charitable than lefties. Yep. I'm not doing the research for you libtards, just take 20 seconds and google it, its proven true. We on the give far more to charity than you all. We not only believe in wealth redistribution, but we actually practice it and do it.

Our difference is in WHO should be doing the redistribution. We should. Through personal acts and charity. NOT through government using the barrel of a gun to TAKE money from people and distribute it how THEY see fit.

So, when the studies show that lefties are more charitable, then you all can bitch about wealth distribution. Until then, stfu and get a job you greedy punks.

Ahh yes, the conservative mantra. Throw money at problems, but don't actually get invested in the problems. See, that kind of mentality is what makes conservatives feel good, and that's all it's about. Real charitable people on the other hand, offer their time and services(and money if they can afford it). They strive to make a better community actively... they don't only throw money at other people and demand those people do it on behalf of them.

I know. Liberals don't mind hearing about money being thrown towards those [ideological] issues THEY believe all Americans should be concerned with, so long as they are left alone and not having to part with any of their OWN money. Let someone else take the burden of footing the bill, so long as I get what I feel I'm entitled to have. Why bother approaching me with your money woes and concerns, seeking "charity"? Yes I'm quite familiar with this "mindset" reasoning. Oh and God? Allowing nativity scenes to be displayed at public venues, and during the Christmas season (oh I'm sorry . . . pardon me . . . 'Winter Solstice')? "Baaah Humbug!" I'm sure is among the many resonating attitudes you'll find coming from the left.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top