Truthmatters
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2007
- 80,182
- 2,272
- 1,283
- Banned
- #21
wealth inequity is unsustainable.
It kills every country that ignores it.
Read history
why do you love theives?
Why do you want this country to die?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
wealth inequity is unsustainable.
It kills every country that ignores it.
Read history
why do you love theives?
wealth inequity is unsustainable.
It kills every country that ignores it.
Read history
why do you love theives?
Why do you want this country to die?
Well you and Hubby give your money and holdings away.
Don't worry. The freeloaders and deadbeats will give your holdings and money a real good home.
Think how proud you'll be to be one of those who are curing the wealth inequality problem.
We'll wait and see how you and hubby sustain life when all your money is gone to help out the poor and downtrodden.
Ain't gonna hold my breath because you won't walk the walk. You just talk. Moron.
Look at history.
when any country (no matter if kings or democracy) has too much wealth inequity they are distroyed by revolution.
Please go read some history
grunt, how many people on this message board you think are receiving welfare as given to poorer people?
What are the regs that are keeping companies from hiring? When I talk to people that run small business's, they say the only thing keeping them from hiring is lack of business. But then I live in Ohio.
I guess around the rest of the country, demand is termendous but no one is hiring because of those regs. What regs?
And what is the correct tax rate for people in your opinion? Is it 0, 2% 5% how much?
Charity would be providing a place for the needy to stay. Redistribution of wealth provides government housing. Charity provides a food line for the poor. Redistribution of wealth provides hundreds of dollars in food stamps. Charity is usually unpleasant yet effective in taking care of the poor. The poor still wish to get out of poverty. Redistribution tries to provide a poor person what everyone else has and makes it as comfortable as possible for those that participate. Most become complacent and no longer try to better themselves. Persons receiving charity are usually grateful for the shelter and food they receive. Those receiving redistribution feel entitled and usually are unhappy and complain it is not enough.
Charity is to help those that are needy and help them get on their own two feet. Redistribution of wealth is taking from someone to give to someone else. Redistribution will never be a good thing as it creates spoiled individuals that feel just being an American entitles them to what they believe is theirs.
Charity can never come from the use of force. Charity requires VOLUNTARY giving. Therefore, government can never do charity.Charity would be providing a place for the needy to stay. Redistribution of wealth provides government housing. Charity provides a food line for the poor. Redistribution of wealth provides hundreds of dollars in food stamps. Charity is usually unpleasant yet effective in taking care of the poor. The poor still wish to get out of poverty. Redistribution tries to provide a poor person what everyone else has and makes it as comfortable as possible for those that participate. Most become complacent and no longer try to better themselves. Persons receiving charity are usually grateful for the shelter and food they receive. Those receiving redistribution feel entitled and usually are unhappy and complain it is not enough.
Charity is to help those that are needy and help them get on their own two feet. Redistribution of wealth is taking from someone to give to someone else. Redistribution will never be a good thing as it creates spoiled individuals that feel just being an American entitles them to what they believe is theirs.
Charity would be providing a place for the needy to stay. Redistribution of wealth provides government housing. Charity provides a food line for the poor. Redistribution of wealth provides hundreds of dollars in food stamps. Charity is usually unpleasant yet effective in taking care of the poor. The poor still wish to get out of poverty. Redistribution tries to provide a poor person what everyone else has and makes it as comfortable as possible for those that participate. Most become complacent and no longer try to better themselves. Persons receiving charity are usually grateful for the shelter and food they receive. Those receiving redistribution feel entitled and usually are unhappy and complain it is not enough.
Charity is to help those that are needy and help them get on their own two feet. Redistribution of wealth is taking from someone to give to someone else. Redistribution will never be a good thing as it creates spoiled individuals that feel just being an American entitles them to what they believe is theirs.
I love your post
It highlights the callous view that conservatives have towards the poor. They are not happy unless the poor suffer for their handouts. Having a place to call your own is too good for them.......Let em beg for a charity room
Being able to buy your food with dignity is too easy.......humiliate them and make them stand in a food line
The poor are meant to suffer.....that is why we need Conservatives to remind us what their proper place is
Charity would be providing a place for the needy to stay. Redistribution of wealth provides government housing. Charity provides a food line for the poor. Redistribution of wealth provides hundreds of dollars in food stamps. Charity is usually unpleasant yet effective in taking care of the poor. The poor still wish to get out of poverty. Redistribution tries to provide a poor person what everyone else has and makes it as comfortable as possible for those that participate. Most become complacent and no longer try to better themselves. Persons receiving charity are usually grateful for the shelter and food they receive. Those receiving redistribution feel entitled and usually are unhappy and complain it is not enough.
Charity is to help those that are needy and help them get on their own two feet. Redistribution of wealth is taking from someone to give to someone else. Redistribution will never be a good thing as it creates spoiled individuals that feel just being an American entitles them to what they believe is theirs.
Well you and Hubby give your money and holdings away.
Don't worry. The freeloaders and deadbeats will give your holdings and money a real good home.
Think how proud you'll be to be one of those who are curing the wealth inequality problem.
We'll wait and see how you and hubby sustain life when all your money is gone to help out the poor and downtrodden.
Ain't gonna hold my breath because you won't walk the walk. You just talk. Moron.
When the tax rates on the ultra wealth go up (and they will) will you be sending your favorite billioniare a personal check to ease their pain? Just curious. How much will you send them?
Charity would be providing a place for the needy to stay. Redistribution of wealth provides government housing. Charity provides a food line for the poor. Redistribution of wealth provides hundreds of dollars in food stamps. Charity is usually unpleasant yet effective in taking care of the poor. The poor still wish to get out of poverty. Redistribution tries to provide a poor person what everyone else has and makes it as comfortable as possible for those that participate. Most become complacent and no longer try to better themselves. Persons receiving charity are usually grateful for the shelter and food they receive. Those receiving redistribution feel entitled and usually are unhappy and complain it is not enough.
Charity is to help those that are needy and help them get on their own two feet. Redistribution of wealth is taking from someone to give to someone else. Redistribution will never be a good thing as it creates spoiled individuals that feel just being an American entitles them to what they believe is theirs.
I love your post
It highlights the callous view that conservatives have towards the poor. They are not happy unless the poor suffer for their handouts. Having a place to call your own is too good for them.......Let em beg for a charity room
Being able to buy your food with dignity is too easy.......humiliate them and make them stand in a food line
The poor are meant to suffer.....that is why we need Conservatives to remind us what their proper place is
So, just for the record......you think that liberals are more charitable because they want to tax people and have the government redistribute that money to people who have less? Is that what you consider charity? Because you seem to believe that conservatives who choose to give freely of their bounty to people in need hate the poor and are not charitable. Do I understand your warped view of the definition of charity?
wealth inequity is unsustainable.
It kills every country that ignores it.
Read history
grunt, how many people on this message board you think are receiving welfare as given to poorer people?
What are the regs that are keeping companies from hiring? When I talk to people that run small business's, they say the only thing keeping them from hiring is lack of business. But then I live in Ohio.
I guess around the rest of the country, demand is termendous but no one is hiring because of those regs. What regs?
And what is the correct tax rate for people in your opinion? Is it 0, 2% 5% how much?
Charity would be providing a place for the needy to stay. Redistribution of wealth provides government housing. Charity provides a food line for the poor. Redistribution of wealth provides hundreds of dollars in food stamps. Charity is usually unpleasant yet effective in taking care of the poor. The poor still wish to get out of poverty. Redistribution tries to provide a poor person what everyone else has and makes it as comfortable as possible for those that participate. Most become complacent and no longer try to better themselves. Persons receiving charity are usually grateful for the shelter and food they receive. Those receiving redistribution feel entitled and usually are unhappy and complain it is not enough.
Charity is to help those that are needy and help them get on their own two feet. Redistribution of wealth is taking from someone to give to someone else. Redistribution will never be a good thing as it creates spoiled individuals that feel just being an American entitles them to what they believe is theirs.
We already have a redistribution of wealth. It has been going on for thirty years and has redistributed wealth from the middle class to the wealthy
Was that charity?
I am ultra rich (pretend with me) and I spend tens of millions of dollars getting the right person elected to office. When I get them elected, I call in my cards and let them know just what legislation I would like to see passed that would benefit both me, my friends and the Senator or Congressman that I just helped get elected. Now with the help of my Congresperson I can get legislation passed so I can legally avoid paying my taxes or obtain tax treatment that is unavailable to people with far less money.
That sceniaro happens every day in Congress, very rich people using their wealth to obtain decisions favorable to a small few of very rich people.
Tell me again how that is "fair" to the rest of us.
YUP...things have REALLY gotten tough for the upper crust.
Yeah, the rich have had it REALLY REALLY tough since their top tax rate has dropped over 65% since that Pinko Commie EISENHOWER was President.
Gee, MY federal taxes haven't decreased by 65% in the last 50 years like they have for the likes of Paris Hilton.
One has to wonder if you're getting paid enough by your rich leash-holders to post this tripe to offset how shitty your world becomes as a result of them getting their way.
Charity would be providing a place for the needy to stay. Redistribution of wealth provides government housing. Charity provides a food line for the poor. Redistribution of wealth provides hundreds of dollars in food stamps. Charity is usually unpleasant yet effective in taking care of the poor. The poor still wish to get out of poverty. Redistribution tries to provide a poor person what everyone else has and makes it as comfortable as possible for those that participate. Most become complacent and no longer try to better themselves. Persons receiving charity are usually grateful for the shelter and food they receive. Those receiving redistribution feel entitled and usually are unhappy and complain it is not enough.
Charity is to help those that are needy and help them get on their own two feet. Redistribution of wealth is taking from someone to give to someone else. Redistribution will never be a good thing as it creates spoiled individuals that feel just being an American entitles them to what they believe is theirs.
We already have a redistribution of wealth. It has been going on for thirty years and has redistributed wealth from the middle class to the wealthy
Was that charity?
Can you please provide some examples of the middle class supporting the rich? Considering that the top 10% pay 70% of the taxes I don't think your argument has much merit. Without the rich this country would be in a world of hurt.
Well you and Hubby give your money and holdings away.
Don't worry. The freeloaders and deadbeats will give your holdings and money a real good home.
Think how proud you'll be to be one of those who are curing the wealth inequality problem.
We'll wait and see how you and hubby sustain life when all your money is gone to help out the poor and downtrodden.
Ain't gonna hold my breath because you won't walk the walk. You just talk. Moron.
When the tax rates on the ultra wealth go up (and they will) will you be sending your favorite billioniare a personal check to ease their pain? Just curious. How much will you send them?
Charity would be providing a place for the needy to stay. Redistribution of wealth provides government housing. Charity provides a food line for the poor. Redistribution of wealth provides hundreds of dollars in food stamps. Charity is usually unpleasant yet effective in taking care of the poor. The poor still wish to get out of poverty. Redistribution tries to provide a poor person what everyone else has and makes it as comfortable as possible for those that participate. Most become complacent and no longer try to better themselves. Persons receiving charity are usually grateful for the shelter and food they receive. Those receiving redistribution feel entitled and usually are unhappy and complain it is not enough.
Charity is to help those that are needy and help them get on their own two feet. Redistribution of wealth is taking from someone to give to someone else. Redistribution will never be a good thing as it creates spoiled individuals that feel just being an American entitles them to what they believe is theirs.
We already have a redistribution of wealth. It has been going on for thirty years and has redistributed wealth from the middle class to the wealthy
Was that charity?