The Fruits Of Democrat Success -

[Billy_Kinetta]

- are fast approaching.

Which American Cities Will File Bankruptcy Next?

 

[dturner1157]

Oh! Ok. I was thinking when I saw this thread that any fruit mentioned in relation to Democrats must be rotten. And then I saw the link confirming it LOL

 

[Theowl32]

- are fast approaching.

Which American Cities Will File Bankruptcy Next?

As Saul Alinsky and soros and every hippy marxist professor along with every commie American hating hollywood director/producer would have it.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

- are fast approaching.

Which American Cities Will File Bankruptcy Next?

As Saul Alinsky and soros and every hippy marxist professor along with every commie American hating hollywood director/producer would have it.

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Cloward–Piven strategy
The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".
Cloward–Piven strategy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward–Piven_strategy

 

[JoeB131]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table,

Until the liberals made it so hard that you have to have 2 people working just to make a living, because the liberals destroyed the nuclear family.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Who was the president for the past 8 years and how great was his economic plan?

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke.

GM and Chrylser had a pension plan and ended up going bankrupt and only the TAX payers bailed them out because Obama made it so.

, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

So the liberals want everyone on foodstamps, so those people will owe the government for being fed.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

47% don't pay taxes....

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable.

Does that mean that WELFARE will no longer be necessary as everyone is paid the same?

 

[forkup]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

It is in a way. As long as you convince people like the writer of this OP. That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income. What's more they will fight any legislation designed to come to a fair income distribution. The problem lies not in a bloated military establishment, nor does it lie with the rich. No the problem is Joe getting a pension. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so damn tragic.U.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

It is in a way. As long as you convince people like the writer of this OP. That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income. What's more they will fight any legislation designed to come to a fair income distribution. The problem lies not in a bloated military establishment, nor does it lie with the rich. No the problem is Joe getting a pension. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so damn tragic.U.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income.

Please explain how they "TAKE"?

 

[dannyboys]

- are fast approaching.

Which American Cities Will File Bankruptcy Next?

It's easy. Just make a list of all the DEM run US cities. Then throw a dart at the list.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

It is in a way. As long as you convince people like the writer of this OP. That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income. What's more they will fight any legislation designed to come to a fair income distribution. The problem lies not in a bloated military establishment, nor does it lie with the rich. No the problem is Joe getting a pension. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so damn tragic.U.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

The past 8 years we had a Socialist community agitator who wanted to fundamentally transform America, how could inequality keep getting uglier?

 

[forkup]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

It is in a way. As long as you convince people like the writer of this OP. That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income. What's more they will fight any legislation designed to come to a fair income distribution. The problem lies not in a bloated military establishment, nor does it lie with the rich. No the problem is Joe getting a pension. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so damn tragic.U.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income.

Please explain how they "TAKE"?

Semantics is really the best counterargument you have?
1.take
lay hold of (something) with one's hands; reach for and hold.
"he leaned forward to take her hand"
synonyms: lay hold of, take hold of, get hold of, get into one's hands
That's the meaning of take a I was referring too.
Unless you can question the validity of the rise in income inequality, my argument stands.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

It is in a way. As long as you convince people like the writer of this OP. That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income. What's more they will fight any legislation designed to come to a fair income distribution. The problem lies not in a bloated military establishment, nor does it lie with the rich. No the problem is Joe getting a pension. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so damn tragic.U.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income.

Please explain how they "TAKE"?

Semantics is really the best counterargument you have?
1.take
lay hold of (something) with one's hands; reach for and hold.
"he leaned forward to take her hand"
synonyms: lay hold of, take hold of, get hold of, get into one's hands
That's the meaning of take a I was referring too.
Unless you can question the validity of the rise in income inequality, my argument stands.

How is it take, when people are willingly giving up their monies for products or services provided, while your politicians TAKE by FORCE your taxes then pay themselves from those taxes? Are you a stupid fuck who has wealth envy because you aren't smart enough to be a crooked politician(redundant statement) or able to provide something that someone else wants? I would say yes, you are a stupid fuck.

 

[forkup]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

It is in a way. As long as you convince people like the writer of this OP. That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income. What's more they will fight any legislation designed to come to a fair income distribution. The problem lies not in a bloated military establishment, nor does it lie with the rich. No the problem is Joe getting a pension. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so damn tragic.U.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

The past 8 years we had a Socialist community agitator who wanted to fundamentally transform America, how could inequality keep getting uglier?

Couple of things. First of calling Obama a socialist is ridiculous. He didn't go for single payer. In fact ACA subsidizes private insurance companies, about the least socialist thing you can do. Second the reason income inequality is getting uglier is not because of Democrats or Republicans, but campaign finance. As long as it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to get elected and as long as it's big business funding those campaigns, nothing will change because both sides are not about to bite the hand that feeds them.
Lastly, its a deflection. The premise wasn't Democrats vs Republicans, it was how you are convinced that only one side is the cause of the problem.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

It is in a way. As long as you convince people like the writer of this OP. That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income. What's more they will fight any legislation designed to come to a fair income distribution. The problem lies not in a bloated military establishment, nor does it lie with the rich. No the problem is Joe getting a pension. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so damn tragic.U.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

The past 8 years we had a Socialist community agitator who wanted to fundamentally transform America, how could inequality keep getting uglier?

Couple of things. First of calling Obama a socialist is ridiculous. He didn't go for single payer. In fact ACA subsidizes private insurance companies, about the least socialist thing you can do. Second the reason income inequality is getting uglier is not because of Democrats or Republicans, but campaign finance. As long as it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to get elected and as long as it's big business funding those campaigns, nothing will change because both sides are not about to bite the hand that feeds them.
Lastly, its a deflection. The premise wasn't Democrats vs Republicans, it was how you are convinced that only one side is the cause of the problem.

That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income.

Just as a reminder what you said before, but now blame campaign finance once you are proven wrong. Then you do the typical liberal bullshit argument, that if one side ruins the country then the other side is just as bad. Obama did nothing to bring Jobs back to the US, but made GE, Apple, GM and other leave for China because over there it is cheaper to make goods and Obama gave them his blessing by bringing up TPP. Now with President Trump revoking the executive orders the shit fuck Obama did, jobs are coming back and more people are getting JOBS. Now once again, tell me how the rich "TAKE" your money , while liberal politicians FORCE you go give up your money so they can make their millions?

 

[JoeB131]

Until the liberals made it so hard that you have to have 2 people working just to make a living, because the liberals destroyed the nuclear family.

And how did they do that, exactly? No, seriously, I would love to hear this logic.

Here's why you need two people to make a living. Because the Right Wing got rid of all the union jobs like the one my Dad had. Because we went from a country where you could work at the same company from high school to retirement, to one where we change jobs every five years on average and could be fired on a whim. Has this weakened the family? Maybe. Or maybe people just concluded you don't stay in a marriage that doesn't work "for the children", because frankly, you aren't doing the kids a lot of good, anyway.

Who was the president for the past 8 years and how great was his economic plan?

Considering it got us out of Bush's disaterous recession, pretty good. But the problem was there long before Obama got there. It'll be there long after he's gone.

But Ooooobama didn't fix the problems after we sabotaged everything he tried to do.

GM and Chrylser had a pension plan and ended up going bankrupt and only the TAX payers bailed them out because Obama made it so.

It went bankrupt because they were too busy paying shareholders instead of putting money aside like they were supposed to.... All Obama did was make sure the pensions gotten taken care of before the gamblers.

So the liberals want everyone on foodstamps, so those people will owe the government for being fed.

I'm not sure anyone 'wants' that, but that's the end result in a Gig Economy, isn't it.

47% don't pay taxes....

47% don't pay income taxes. They do pay FICA, Medicare, Sales Taxes, Sin Taxes, Property taxes (directly or indirectly), fees and other ways the government generates revenues.

The income tax initially was ONLY supposed to be a tax on the rich. It just got expanded to nearly everyone else.

 

[forkup]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

It is in a way. As long as you convince people like the writer of this OP. That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income. What's more they will fight any legislation designed to come to a fair income distribution. The problem lies not in a bloated military establishment, nor does it lie with the rich. No the problem is Joe getting a pension. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so damn tragic.U.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income.

Please explain how they "TAKE"?

Semantics is really the best counterargument you have?
1.take
lay hold of (something) with one's hands; reach for and hold.
"he leaned forward to take her hand"
synonyms: lay hold of, take hold of, get hold of, get into one's hands
That's the meaning of take a I was referring too.
Unless you can question the validity of the rise in income inequality, my argument stands.

How is it take, when people are willingly giving up their monies for products or services provided, while your politicians TAKE by FORCE your taxes then pay themselves from those taxes? Are you a stupid fuck who has wealth envy because you aren't smart enough to be a crooked politician(redundant statement) or able to provide something that someone else wants? I would say yes, you are a stupid fuck.

I think you are confusing take with steal. If you give me money wouldn't me receiving that money equal taking it? For someone calling someone else an idiot you seem to have troubles with reading comprehension. And no I have absolutely no problem with people earning money. I have a problem with people earning money and not paying as much as they can afford, while other people lack basic necessities that are provided in all other industrialized nations.

 

[JoeB131]

Now with President Trump revoking the executive orders the shit fuck Obama did, jobs are coming back and more people are getting JOBS. Now once again, tell me how the rich "TAKE" your money , while liberal politicians FORCE you go give up your money so they can make their millions?

Except nothing of the sort is happening. Trump is merely coasting on the job growth of the last 7 years....

But, but but, Obama didn't fix things fast enough!!!!

 

[Rustic]

Don't worry, when those cities go broke, you can bet the lame stream media will be blaming President Trump for it, like Obama blamed Bush for Obama's failed economic policies....

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists andpolitical activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Thanks to socialism, the country is bankrupt

 

[Rustic]

Uh, the economy was in full roaring recession when Obama got there.

But you keep on with your alternative history.

Except what is overloading the system now? Look, back in 1966, if you were poor, you could get a job that put food on the table, even if you had a barely HS Education.

Now we have College grads who can't find jobs, even in a period of supposed "Full Employment".

Jobs don't offer pensions anymore, and 401K's are a joke. We are increasingly going to the "Gig Economy" of Uber and Dog Walkers and Thumbtack.com.

So, yeah, those fucking working people, they just refuse to fucking starve because the Rich want more Dressage Horsies.

You see, I get where you come from. Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.

You miss the old America of your fathers where you could get a good union job and make a good living and only the most useless people got welfare.

But now 40% of households on food stamps have jobs.

A "universal income" is probably going to be inevitable. Maybe that's not a good thing, but it's not like your side is coming up with a better alternative. Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

Trump finding people for white trash to hate on is not an answer.

It is in a way. As long as you convince people like the writer of this OP. That it is the other sides fault, most people are perfectly happy to overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income. What's more they will fight any legislation designed to come to a fair income distribution. The problem lies not in a bloated military establishment, nor does it lie with the rich. No the problem is Joe getting a pension. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so damn tragic.U.S. inequality keeps getting uglier

overlook that the top incomes take a ridiculous amount of the total income.

Please explain how they "TAKE"?

Semantics is really the best counterargument you have?
1.take
lay hold of (something) with one's hands; reach for and hold.
"he leaned forward to take her hand"
synonyms: lay hold of, take hold of, get hold of, get into one's hands
That's the meaning of take a I was referring too.
Unless you can question the validity of the rise in income inequality, my argument stands.

How is it take, when people are willingly giving up their monies for products or services provided, while your politicians TAKE by FORCE your taxes then pay themselves from those taxes? Are you a stupid fuck who has wealth envy because you aren't smart enough to be a crooked politician(redundant statement) or able to provide something that someone else wants? I would say yes, you are a stupid fuck.

I think you are confusing take with steal. If you give me money wouldn't me receiving that money equal taking it? For someone calling someone else an idiot you seem to have troubles with reading comprehension. And no I have absolutely no problem with people earning money. I have a problem with people earning money and not paying as much as they can afford, while other people lack basic necessities that are provided in all other industrialized nations.