Romney: Income inequality is just "envy"

If you envy them so much, then why don't you develop your own ability to "buy US public policy and law"? What is wrong with people with resources trying to make their country better?

You equate people bribing - oh sorry donating - to political parties as making your country better? No wonder your political system is so fucked up...

So you think people shouldn't be able to donate to causes they beleive in?

Huge donations to political parties? Nope, I don't....The integrity of the political process in a truly free society is far more important than that. (to be fair, I consider the US one of the least free in the Western World mainly due to your political donations and lobbying groups).
 
Is the right envious of the poor when members of GOP talk about "broadening the taxbase" and making the 47% that are too poor to pay income taxes pay their fair share?
Or how about in places like Wisconsin where republicans tried to make private sector workers "envious" of public sector workers by talking about how those public sector workers have better benefits than private sector workers do so we need to take them away from them.

How is it that when the right engages in it they seem to have no problem with class warfare?
So if the top 53% do not fund all the government, they are not paying their fair share. But when the lower 47% do not pay anything and/or become a net drain on the economy they are innocents? NOT parasites?

Gov. Walker is making the private sector envious of unsustainable golden goose benefit packages public sector unions got by rigging the negotiation process by helping get their opposite member at the negotiation table elected and thereby should be recused due to conflict of influence??? Nope, sorry. They recognize that the public sector is pulling a fast one and trying to claim they're justified in being 'untouchable' by an economic downturn because they are too 'saintly and essential'. The rest of the state sees it and calls bullshit on WEAC and their out of state cronies attemting to influence WI policy because they're afraid the necessary steps will soon be at their very door.

The public sector should NEVER be superior in pay and benefit to the private sector employment. Ever. Lest it forget that they are public SERVANTS and the servant never makes more than it's master, the taxpayers... which in this case is only the upper 53% of wage earners in this nation.


If you would stick to judging my comments for what I ACTUALLY said instead of trying to put words into my mouth that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

BTW you do know that the number 47% refers to INCOME taxes only and not taxes as a whole don't you??

Oh and thanks for proving my point and engaging in class warfare which the right claims to be against. The mere fact that you consider public workers as less than private sector workers says it all. Master and servants?? Really?? WOW!

They have it, you don't and you believe that they shouldn't have it. Therefore you must be envious. LOL

Again I have to ask, How is it that when the right engages in it they seem to have no problem with class warfare?
BTW you do know that the number 47% refers to INCOME taxes only and not taxes as a whole don't you??
Of course I did. I just didn't want to fuck up your chi by mentioning that the rich pay more in consumption taxes than the poor and that all taxation is retroactive. Making them progressive based on ability to pay only makes them more unfair. After all, progressive taxation is only something created based on the ideas of envy (no one should have more than x amount of money) and some lawmaker's interpretation of what 'enough' is. You know, this reminds me of when the computer industry said that the public's 'need' for computing power should never exceed 33mhz and 8mbs of hard drive space let alone RAM. So tell me, do you require more than that, or are you still somehow online with an old 8088 or Intel 286? Why isn't that enough computing power for you? The computer industry of the late 1980's thought it was.

Oh and thanks for proving my point and engaging in class warfare which the right claims to be against. The mere fact that you consider public workers as less than private sector workers says it all. Master and servants?? Really?? WOW!
LOL... tell me, sahib, if you are born into the upper class, as you see it, in this nation... what guarantees you stay there? Why is it that over half of the millionaires in this nation became so when they were poor? How did Jobs, Gates, Wozniak, Ray Krok, Hilton, Harlan "Colonel" Sanders, Sam Walton and so many other innovators industry rise up and become millionaires? Were they all handed their millions? No. They earned them by finding a need in the public and filling it. In the Gilded Age this was never more apparent. Carnegie, Westinghouse, Hormel, Birdseye, Rockafeller, Hill and more started poor too. It is called "Social Class Mobility". We are not a caste system. We do not have a noble peerdom and then the peasants. You are not guaranteed to stay anywhere, but must merit your status in any 'class'. If you are poor, what have you done to keep yourself poor? Why haven't you overcome it? Many have. If you are rich, why haven't you remained there? You are responsible for not screwing up the blessings you have been given and maintain and or grow what you have. Just as you have been alloted the same amount of time in a day that was given Leonardo DaVinci, Thomas Edison, Charles Dickens, Jonas Salk, Mother Theresa, or Horatio Nelson, it is how you choose to use your time and what you desire to become that matters. You choose.

If all you do is whine about your circumstances, you become a whiner. If you work to overcome it all, you become victorious. EVEN IF YOU FAIL, you have still worked to achieve something and you will still have knowledge of how to succeed or not. When you choose to stay down, is when you never overcome.

As for our public 'servants' in this nation... AS ONE MYSELF... I see how my fellow workers who are only as enlightened as you think, act and talk. They believe someone OWES them a job and living. They don't have to provide a service or skill or product... that is an inconvenient byproduct of the unfair world they live in. It's disgusting. They seem to think that because they are a government employee and their performance is not linked to their pay... that they are somehow immune and above economic forces. Someone will and must always pay for their share, but never them. Politicians and bureaucrats are so much worse than that. You piss and moan about the upper class or plutocrats and captains of industry, but you never cast an askance glance at the middle class mendacity of the government bureaucrat just because they are not so conspicuous in their greed and rapacious desires for what they will not work to achieve. I DO have what they have and at least I am fucking grateful for it. On the other hand when the union was ready to strike because they weren't getting a better plan than they deserved right before WI destroyed WEAC, I told people (who had the nerve to look shocked) that I would gladly take a paycut and decrease in benefits if it meant I kept working and prevented my fellow taxpayer's lives from getting worse. Why? Because I can see big picture and long game. I can see that the taxpayer's fortune meant my fortune was secure as well and over time, life can get better, more taxes roll in with increased prosperity and my life can grow bigger then too. But my life, as the servant of the public is never greater than the public's. They don't owe me a living, I owe it to myself to provide a service or product to them for the best profit available to me, for the best price for them. I don't begrudge any man what they make unless they prove to me they earn it illicitly. You make a billion dollars a year? Fine. Be nice if some of your largess fell my way. Do I have a right to have a piece of your pie? No. Theft is still theft, whether you do it with a pistol in an alley or from the desk of your congressional representative.

I don't engage in 'class warfare' as the left defines it. I engage in 'merit warfare'. What have YOU done to deserve the life you want, versus the life you have? I engage in a war on entitlement. I battle with envy and small minded hatred against the successful doing better than lazy, indigent and slothful. I begrudge no man his poverty either... only his attitude on why they are poor and how to escape it, if it comes at the expense of others.

We aren't even talking about the same things, and I doubt you could understand my philosophical basis. Most liberals cant, because honor, merit and achievement are beyond them in their envious entitlement scarred hate.
 
Last edited:
So if the top 53% do not fund all the government, they are not paying their fair share. But when the lower 47% do not pay anything and/or become a net drain on the economy they are innocents? NOT parasites?

Gov. Walker is making the private sector envious of unsustainable golden goose benefit packages public sector unions got by rigging the negotiation process by helping get their opposite member at the negotiation table elected and thereby should be recused due to conflict of influence??? Nope, sorry. They recognize that the public sector is pulling a fast one and trying to claim they're justified in being 'untouchable' by an economic downturn because they are too 'saintly and essential'. The rest of the state sees it and calls bullshit on WEAC and their out of state cronies attemting to influence WI policy because they're afraid the necessary steps will soon be at their very door.

The public sector should NEVER be superior in pay and benefit to the private sector employment. Ever. Lest it forget that they are public SERVANTS and the servant never makes more than it's master, the taxpayers... which in this case is only the upper 53% of wage earners in this nation.


If you would stick to judging my comments for what I ACTUALLY said instead of trying to put words into my mouth that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

BTW you do know that the number 47% refers to INCOME taxes only and not taxes as a whole don't you??

Oh and thanks for proving my point and engaging in class warfare which the right claims to be against. The mere fact that you consider public workers as less than private sector workers says it all. Master and servants?? Really?? WOW!

They have it, you don't and you believe that they shouldn't have it. Therefore you must be envious. LOL

Again I have to ask, How is it that when the right engages in it they seem to have no problem with class warfare?
BTW you do know that the number 47% refers to INCOME taxes only and not taxes as a whole don't you??
Of course I did. I just didn't want to fuck up your chi by mentioning that the rich pay more in consumption taxes than the poor and that all taxation is retroactive. Making them progressive based on ability to pay only makes them more unfair. After all, progressive taxation is only something created based on the ideas of envy (no one should have more than x amount of money) and some lawmaker's interpretation of what 'enough' is. You know, this reminds me of when the computer industry said that the public's 'need' for computing power should never exceed 33mhz and 8mbs of hard drive space let alone RAM. So tell me, do you require more than that, or are you still somehow online with an old 8088 or Intel 286? Why isn't that enough computing power for you? The computer industry of the late 1980's thought it was.

Oh so you knew that the 47% was in reference to those who don't pay income taxes and yet you misrepresented it intentionally as you tried to claim that "lower 47% do not pay anything and/or become a net drain on the economy"

Don't even try to blame me for your dishonesty. Whatever happened to the personal responsibility that the right used to preach about?
 
If you would stick to judging my comments for what I ACTUALLY said instead of trying to put words into my mouth that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

BTW you do know that the number 47% refers to INCOME taxes only and not taxes as a whole don't you??

Oh and thanks for proving my point and engaging in class warfare which the right claims to be against. The mere fact that you consider public workers as less than private sector workers says it all. Master and servants?? Really?? WOW!

They have it, you don't and you believe that they shouldn't have it. Therefore you must be envious. LOL

Again I have to ask, How is it that when the right engages in it they seem to have no problem with class warfare?
BTW you do know that the number 47% refers to INCOME taxes only and not taxes as a whole don't you??
Of course I did. I just didn't want to fuck up your chi by mentioning that the rich pay more in consumption taxes than the poor and that all taxation is retroactive. Making them progressive based on ability to pay only makes them more unfair. After all, progressive taxation is only something created based on the ideas of envy (no one should have more than x amount of money) and some lawmaker's interpretation of what 'enough' is. You know, this reminds me of when the computer industry said that the public's 'need' for computing power should never exceed 33mhz and 8mbs of hard drive space let alone RAM. So tell me, do you require more than that, or are you still somehow online with an old 8088 or Intel 286? Why isn't that enough computing power for you? The computer industry of the late 1980's thought it was.

Oh so you knew that the 47% was in reference to those who don't pay income taxes and yet you misrepresented it intentionally as you tried to claim that "lower 47% do not pay anything and/or become a net drain on the economy"

Don't even try to blame me for your dishonesty. Whatever happened to the personal responsibility that the right used to preach about?
Sorry, I didn't realize the goal posts were mobile in this discussion. It is considered common knowledge that when discussing the 47% who don't pay taxes, it is referring to ONLY income tax. All other taxes are pretty much ignored as consumption or excise taxes included in the cost of doing business or commerce.

I can't help it that you are unable to accept your own failures when trying to score political points by changing definitions and get caught doing it. I'd like to see you take some personal responsibility in being a dishonest fraud too. Not that I expect it, but it would be particularly generous of you to have some.

Love how you were unable to digest the rest of what I said.

Are we now claiming that the lower 47% of wage earners don't pay 0% or make money off of 'paying their taxes' now? Have we moved into denial yet, or stuck on anger? I do get those two mixed up. Bargaining's fun and Depression's quiet as you just don't say anything more, too ashamed to voice your ignorance. I don't suppose you could be a good chap and just speed things up to acceptance of your philosophical failure and grow up, could you?
 
Last edited:
Oh and thanks for proving my point and engaging in class warfare which the right claims to be against. The mere fact that you consider public workers as less than private sector workers says it all. Master and servants?? Really?? WOW!
LOL... tell me, sahib, if you are born into the upper class, as you see it, in this nation... what guarantees you stay there? Why is it that over half of the millionaires in this nation became so when they were poor? How did Jobs, Gates, Wozniak, Ray Krok, Hilton, Harlan "Colonel" Sanders, Sam Walton and so many other innovators industry rise up and become millionaires? Were they all handed their millions? No. They earned them by finding a need in the public and filling it. In the Gilded Age this was never more apparent. Carnegie, Westinghouse, Hormel, Birdseye, Rockafeller, Hill and more started poor too. It is called "Social Class Mobility". We are not a caste system. We do not have a noble peerdom and then the peasants. You are not guaranteed to stay anywhere, but must merit your status in any 'class'. If you are poor, what have you done to keep yourself poor? Why haven't you overcome it? Many have. If you are rich, why haven't you remained there? You are responsible for not screwing up the blessings you have been given and maintain and or grow what you have. Just as you have been alloted the same amount of time in a day that was given Leonardo DaVinci, Thomas Edison, Charles Dickens, Jonas Salk, Mother Theresa, or Horatio Nelson, it is how you choose to use your time and what you desire to become that matters. You choose.

If all you do is whine about your circumstances, you become a whiner. If you work to overcome it all, you become victorious. EVEN IF YOU FAIL, you have still worked to achieve something and you will still have knowledge of how to succeed or not. When you choose to stay down, is when you never overcome.


Again why do you feel the need to try and define me personally when you know nothing about me? I merely pointed out two positions taken by the right where they engaged in the same type of class warfare that they claim to be against and you decided to try and come at me personally. Why is that?

As for our public 'servants' in this nation... AS ONE MYSELF... I see how my fellow workers who are only as enlightened as you think, act and talk. They believe someone OWES them a job and living. They don't have to provide a service or skill or product... that is an inconvenient byproduct of the unfair world they live in. It's disgusting. They seem to think that because they are a government employee and their performance is not linked to their pay... that they are somehow immune and above economic forces. Someone will and must always pay for their share, but never them. Politicians and bureaucrats are so much worse than that. You piss and moan about the upper class or plutocrats and captains of industry, but you never cast an askance glance at the middle class mendacity of the government bureaucrat just because they are not so conspicuous in their greed and rapacious desires for what they will not work to achieve. I DO have what they have and at least I am fucking grateful for it. On the other hand when the union was ready to strike because they weren't getting a better plan than they deserved right before WI destroyed WEAC, I told people (who had the nerve to look shocked) that I would gladly take a paycut and decrease in benefits if it meant I kept working and prevented my fellow taxpayer's lives from getting worse. Why? Because I can see big picture and long game. I can see that the taxpayer's fortune meant my fortune was secure as well and over time, life can get better, more taxes roll in with increased prosperity and my life can grow bigger then too. But my life, as the servant of the public is never greater than the public's. They don't owe me a living, I owe it to myself to provide a service or product to them for the best profit available to me, for the best price for them. I don't begrudge any man what they make unless they prove to me they earn it illicitly. You make a billion dollars a year? Fine. Be nice if some of your largess fell my way. Do I have a right to have a piece of your pie? No. Theft is still theft, whether you do it with a pistol in an alley or from the desk of your congressional representative.

I don't engage in 'class warfare' as the left defines it. I engage in 'merit warfare'. What have YOU done to deserve the life you want, versus the life you have? I engage in a war on entitlement. I battle with envy and small minded hatred against the successful doing better than lazy, indigent and slothful. I begrudge no man his poverty either... only his attitude on why they are poor and how to escape it, if it comes at the expense of others.

We aren't even talking about the same things, and I doubt you could understand my philosophical basis. Most liberals cant, because honor, merit and achievement are beyond them in their envious entitlement scarred hate.



It's funny how you have your own special definitions for everything to make if fit how you want it to. LOL Furthermore, I seriously doubt that you are what you claim to be because I sincerely doubt based on the arrogance in your last statement that you see yourself as a "servant" to any master. Thanks for the spin anyway

In the end your spin about "merit warfare" is nothing more than class warfare by a different name. They have something you BELIEVE that they didn't earn and it is your wish to take it away form them. How is your postion any different than the liberals you are trying to attack? It isn't.
 
Not envy but rather anger and resentment that they lie, steal and cheat to take money away from those who earn it and use it to line their own pockets.

I'm sick of the "job creator" lie. While the president busts his hump to actually create jobs, the lying scum like McConnell and Boehner tell us we can't expect the 1% to pay their fair share because they're creating jobs.

And, amazingly, there are actually voters who are stupidly falling for this lie.

Where are the fucking jobs then?

When Boehner was asked for the name of just ONE job creating millionaire, he could not name one. not even one.

But, he promised jobs in return for votes ad still has not come up with even one jobs bill while Congress filibusters every single jobs bill. Every one.

Who is so damn dumb they would vote again for these crooks?

Speaking of "stupid"? Do you realize that since the 2010 mid term elections, the House has passed approximately 30 bills that would positively affect jobs in this country and those bills are currently collecting dust on Harry Reid's desk over in the Senate? You have the gall to come HERE and demand to know why Boehner hasn't come up with any jobs bills? You not only won't admit that it is now the Democrats in the Senate that are obstructing legislation but accuse Republicans of filibustering every jobs bill?

I'd like you to recall the words of Barack Obama back in 2009..."elections have consequences". They do indeed. The midterm elections in 2010 sent a loud and clear message to Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, that the country was NOT behind their progressive agenda and did not like what the Progressives had been doing since taking complete control of the government in 2008. The truth is that the Obama Administration won't admit that they had their "mandate" taken away from them in 2010 by the voters. They still think they know best...even though their fiscal policy has been such a disaster that the architects of that policy, Larry Summers and Christina Romer both bolted back to the safety of academia rather than stick around to try and make it work.

You want to know why people don't want to invest in America? It's because they don't believe in the policies of this President.
 
Of course I did. I just didn't want to fuck up your chi by mentioning that the rich pay more in consumption taxes than the poor and that all taxation is retroactive. Making them progressive based on ability to pay only makes them more unfair. After all, progressive taxation is only something created based on the ideas of envy (no one should have more than x amount of money) and some lawmaker's interpretation of what 'enough' is. You know, this reminds me of when the computer industry said that the public's 'need' for computing power should never exceed 33mhz and 8mbs of hard drive space let alone RAM. So tell me, do you require more than that, or are you still somehow online with an old 8088 or Intel 286? Why isn't that enough computing power for you? The computer industry of the late 1980's thought it was.

Oh so you knew that the 47% was in reference to those who don't pay income taxes and yet you misrepresented it intentionally as you tried to claim that "lower 47% do not pay anything and/or become a net drain on the economy"

Don't even try to blame me for your dishonesty. Whatever happened to the personal responsibility that the right used to preach about?
Sorry, I didn't realize the goal posts were mobile in this discussion. It is considered common knowledge that when discussing the 47% who don't pay taxes, it is referring to ONLY income tax. All other taxes are pretty much ignored as consumption or excise taxes included in the cost of doing business or commerce.

I can't help it that you are unable to accept your own failures when trying to score political points by changing definitions and get caught doing it. I'd like to see you take some personal responsibility in being a dishonest fraud too. Not that I expect it, but it would be particularly generous of you to have some.

Love how you were unable to digest the rest of what I said.

Are we now claiming that the lower 47% of wage earners don't pay 0% or make money off of 'paying their taxes' now? Have we moved into denial yet, or stuck on anger? I do get those two mixed up. Bargaining's fun and Depression's quiet as you just don't say anything more, too ashamed to voice your ignorance. I don't suppose you could be a good chap and just speed things up to acceptance of your philosophical failure and grow up, could you?

Hey it's not my fault you began by being dishonest as you tried to argue they "do not pay anything." Those are your words not mine. So before you play ignorant and try to dump your mistep onto me perhapos you should choose your words more wisely in the future?

Furthermore care to explain what I failed at? After all I am not the one running away from my own words. I posted two postions held by rightwingers that contradict their usual rhetoric about class warfare and you chime in with your spin trying to put words into my mouth and assign postions to me that I have not taken so you can label me as something that I am not.

PS I responded to your drivel filled diatribe in another post. You were so longwinded as you tried to put words into my mouth I decided to respond in multiple posts. Sorry if that confused you. lol
 
Last edited:
Oh so you knew that the 47% was in reference to those who don't pay income taxes and yet you misrepresented it intentionally as you tried to claim that "lower 47% do not pay anything and/or become a net drain on the economy"

Don't even try to blame me for your dishonesty. Whatever happened to the personal responsibility that the right used to preach about?
Sorry, I didn't realize the goal posts were mobile in this discussion. It is considered common knowledge that when discussing the 47% who don't pay taxes, it is referring to ONLY income tax. All other taxes are pretty much ignored as consumption or excise taxes included in the cost of doing business or commerce.

I can't help it that you are unable to accept your own failures when trying to score political points by changing definitions and get caught doing it. I'd like to see you take some personal responsibility in being a dishonest fraud too. Not that I expect it, but it would be particularly generous of you to have some.

Love how you were unable to digest the rest of what I said.

Are we now claiming that the lower 47% of wage earners don't pay 0% or make money off of 'paying their taxes' now? Have we moved into denial yet, or stuck on anger? I do get those two mixed up. Bargaining's fun and Depression's quiet as you just don't say anything more, too ashamed to voice your ignorance. I don't suppose you could be a good chap and just speed things up to acceptance of your philosophical failure and grow up, could you?

Hey it's not my fault you began by being dishonest as you tried to argue they "do not pay anything." Those are your words not mine. So before you play ignorant and try to dump your mistep onto me perhapos you should choose your words more wisely in the future?

Furthermore care to explain what I failed at? After all I am not the one running away from my own words. I posted two postions held by rightwingers that contradict their usual rhetoric about class warfare and you chime in with your spin trying to put words into my mouth and assign postions to me that I have not taken so you can label me as something that I am not.

PS I responded to your drivel filled diatribe in another post. You were so longwinded as you tried to put words into my mouth I decided to respond in multiple posts. Sorry if that confused you. lol
assign positions? I see, you imply, prevaricate and insinuate meanings, then when they no longer fit, you change them. Nice.

If you don't like how people take your words because 'they aren't what you mean', I suggest you find better words. The problem is not the listener, but the speaker. If common context is too much for you and your 47% game playing, maybe you shouldn't be commenting in a public forum.

2zyfr4j.jpg
 
Sorry, I didn't realize the goal posts were mobile in this discussion. It is considered common knowledge that when discussing the 47% who don't pay taxes, it is referring to ONLY income tax. All other taxes are pretty much ignored as consumption or excise taxes included in the cost of doing business or commerce.

I can't help it that you are unable to accept your own failures when trying to score political points by changing definitions and get caught doing it. I'd like to see you take some personal responsibility in being a dishonest fraud too. Not that I expect it, but it would be particularly generous of you to have some.

Love how you were unable to digest the rest of what I said.

Are we now claiming that the lower 47% of wage earners don't pay 0% or make money off of 'paying their taxes' now? Have we moved into denial yet, or stuck on anger? I do get those two mixed up. Bargaining's fun and Depression's quiet as you just don't say anything more, too ashamed to voice your ignorance. I don't suppose you could be a good chap and just speed things up to acceptance of your philosophical failure and grow up, could you?

Hey it's not my fault you began by being dishonest as you tried to argue they "do not pay anything." Those are your words not mine. So before you play ignorant and try to dump your mistep onto me perhapos you should choose your words more wisely in the future?

Furthermore care to explain what I failed at? After all I am not the one running away from my own words. I posted two postions held by rightwingers that contradict their usual rhetoric about class warfare and you chime in with your spin trying to put words into my mouth and assign postions to me that I have not taken so you can label me as something that I am not.

PS I responded to your drivel filled diatribe in another post. You were so longwinded as you tried to put words into my mouth I decided to respond in multiple posts. Sorry if that confused you. lol
assign positions? I see, you imply, prevaricate and insinuate meanings, then when they no longer fit, you change them. Nice.

If you don't like how people take your words because 'they aren't what you mean', I suggest you find better words. The problem is not the listener, but the speaker. If common context is too much for you and your 47% game playing, maybe you shouldn't be commenting in a public forum.

2zyfr4j.jpg

Your problem is that you did NOT "take MY words." You assigned words to me that I NEVER stated and then you tried to criticize me for things I never said. Where as YOU were the one that stated that the 47% "did not pay anything" and are now turning tail and runnning away from your own words as you try to blame me for your dishonesty.

When and where in this post or any posts did I express any of the positions that you assigned to me over the last few posts??

Is the right envious of the poor when members of GOP talk about "broadening the taxbase" and making the 47% that are too poor to pay income taxes pay their fair share?
Or how about in places like Wisconsin where republicans tried to make private sector workers "envious" of public sector workers by talking about how those public sector workers have better benefits than private sector workers do so we need to take them away from them.

How is it that when the right engages in it they seem to have no problem with class warfare?

Go on and show me when and where I said anything that you have been attributing to me?? Quote my statements and then show how your statements match what I said. Don't worry, I won't be holding my breath in anticipation because you and I both know that you won't do it because you can't.

PS I am still waiting on you to show what I have failed at? LOL

BTW you tried to call me out for not responding to part of your post even though I did and yet you skipped my previous post about your "merit warfare" and jumped straight to this one. LOL I guess that "you were unable to digest the rest of what I said." LOL
 
Last edited:
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- According to Mitt Romney, the nation's growing focus on income inequality is all about envy.

"You know, I think it's about envy. I think it's about class warfare," the leading Republican presidential candidate said Wednesday on The Today Show.

When asked if there are any fair questions about wealth distribution, Romney replied, "It's fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms and discussions about tax policy and the like."

Is your position that income inequality should be eliminated?
 
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- According to Mitt Romney, the nation's growing focus on income inequality is all about envy.

"You know, I think it's about envy. I think it's about class warfare," the leading Republican presidential candidate said Wednesday on The Today Show.

When asked if there are any fair questions about wealth distribution, Romney replied, "It's fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms and discussions about tax policy and the like."

Is your position that income inequality should be eliminated?

Of course it's not.
 
merit warfare from fitz.

I engage in 'merit warfare'. What have YOU done to deserve the life you want, versus the life you have?

He used this line of BS to try and defend his position on taking benefits away from public sector workers whome he calls servants who should never make more than their masters. If you didn't earn it according to how fitz defines it then he feels justified in taking it away from you. Sounds like class warfare to me. How do you define class warfare fitz and how do you decide who earned it and who didn't??

The public sector should NEVER be superior in pay and benefit to the private sector employment. Ever. Lest it forget that they are public SERVANTS and the servant never makes more than it's master, the taxpayers... which in this case is only the upper 53% of wage earners in this nation.

Oh and see that little gem at the end where he restates his claim that the 47% pay nothing. Only the 53% are taxpayers right fitz?? Furthermore, fitz are you actually trying to claim that public workers pay no taxes?
 
Last edited:
A rich person, like Romney, saying that others are envious of his wealth is presumptuous, and does not reflect reality, only his personal defense of others resentment, for reasons which he could never understand, because he has never been in their shoes. What is even more presumptuous is the implication that people want to be him, or like him, even if only in financial wealth. It communicates the idea that the others are worth less intrinsically, because they do no have his money. It says a lot about how he sees the less wealthy, and therefore, how they will be regarded and treated once he is in office, should he win. His arrogance hopefully will not get that far.
 
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- According to Mitt Romney, the nation's growing focus on income inequality is all about envy.

"You know, I think it's about envy. I think it's about class warfare," the leading Republican presidential candidate said Wednesday on The Today Show.

When asked if there are any fair questions about wealth distribution, Romney replied, "It's fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms and discussions about tax policy and the like."

Is your position that income inequality should be eliminated?

Of course it's not.

I wasn't asking you, dipstick.

If it's "an issue," then you must be opposed to it. Otherwise, why bring it up?

The nation isn't focusing on income inequality, only turds like you are.
 
A rich person, like Romney, saying that others are envious of his wealth is presumptuous, and does not reflect reality, only his personal defense of others resentment, for reasons which he could never understand, because he has never been in their shoes. What is even more presumptuous is the implication that people want to be him, or like him, even if only in financial wealth. It communicates the idea that the others are worth less intrinsically, because they do no have his money. It says a lot about how he sees the less wealthy, and therefore, how they will be regarded and treated once he is in office, should he win. His arrogance hopefully will not get that far.

If other people don't want Romney's money, then why all this constant harping about the rich "paying their fair share?"

That's obviously an appeal to envy. Only the sleaziest brand of demagogue would deny it.
 
Funny how everyone is talking about class envy and the rich "paying their fair share."

What happened to the debt, the deficit and the shitty job Barry's doing??

Oh wait. I forgot. Barry doesn't want to focus on that. Class warfare is much easier and it certainly takes everyones eye off the ball.
 
Funny how everyone is talking about class envy and the rich "paying their fair share."

What happened to the debt, the deficit and the shitty job Barry's doing??

Oh wait. I forgot. Barry doesn't want to focus on that. Class warfare is much easier and it certainly takes everyones eye off the ball.

Deficits are a serious issue.

But why do we have deficits...

1) Because so many middle class manufacturing jobs have vanished, and the service jobs that replaced them don't pay as much and therefore don't produce as much revenue.

2) Because government has to spend more helping people when there is 9% unemployment than when there is 4% unemployment

3) Because the wealthy have manipulated the tax system in such a way where they aren't paying their fair share.

Now, all that said, I absolutely think the government needs to get ITS house in order before it comes back and asks for more taxes. It needs to weed out every bit of inefficiency and waste and fraud. It should only pay for the essentials. And some hard choices are going to need to be made, like can we afford to be the world's policeman.

But eventually, we are going to have to ask the wealthy to pony up.
 

Forum List

Back
Top