The Logic of ConservaRepub on Economy, UnEmployment & A Helping Hand from Govt.

[Quantum Windbag]

The economy is really bad and it's all Obama's fault but no one should need a helping hand because there are plenty of jobs except that unemployment is really way higher than the govt says it is - except when it comes to the people who are out of work and need a helping hand, then there's plenty of jobs so they don't need help but that doesn't mean the economy is good.
Got it!

A helping hand doesn't mean a way of life. There are jobs out there and many don't want them because they have to train for them and stop taking from the government.

Stop the government give aways and see how many more people will become employed. Stop the regulations and taxing small businesses so they are reluctant to hire and fear the future.

Then I suggest the mega-corp's spend some of that $2.5 Trillion they have in off-shore acct's to work training folks AND paying a livable wage.

Define living wage.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

LOL, so you're not different than DBlack or any of the others. You ignore the entire post that you have no reply to and then nitpick one part, which was still a worthless reply.

Newsflash! Guy Pinestra did his own scientific poll and it's officially now 10-1 that conservatives are more generous than liberals. LOL.

Debating you idiots is way too easy, you basically give up within 2 posts.

Listen numbnutz, you don't get to decide what i respond to, and your butthurt whining isn't going to make a damned bit of difference. Charity was NEVER supposed to be the job of government, so please stop trying to make it so.

If you feel that more needs to be done to help the poor, get off your lazy, liberal ass and DO SOMETHING. That's what grown-ups do, start acting like one.

And until you put your fat, lazy, liberal ass in a soup line or on a Habitat job, you'll have NO IDEA how accurate my statement is. Of course, you'd rather remain ignorant, sweating is for the peons, right?

LOL, let those true colors shine through Hoss. I'm pretty sure you just repeated your last post, except you forgot to include those sweet stats that you clued me in on last time. I'm fat and lazy though, you've got me pegged pretty good. Bravo good sir, bravo.

Have you ever directly answered a challenged to explain your own position with anything other than attacks on the other person?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What I find interesting is that Christians will argue laws based on their personal moral code. Things like gay marriage or abortion are perfectly fine to be legislated based on their religious beliefs. Try to legislate helping the poor or the sick and these same people pitch a fit and fall into it. Weird.

Oh, and just an "FYI", when it comes to the poor, charity isn't enough.

Strange, you must live in an alternate reality. I can, without even trying, point to a long history of Christians who advocated for more spending on social welfare programs and less spending on military programs, one of them happens to be in the White House right now, and another is the former Speaker of the House and the current Minority Leader. As a matter of fact, your link points to a group of Christians who are doing exactly what you said they don't.

Maybe you should get your head out of your ass.

 

[Fordsflylow]

How do you explain Prop 4 in California in your world of delusions?

Of course there are exceptions to every rule. At least in the world of reality, which is my world.

 

[Fordsflylow]

A helping hand doesn't mean a way of life. There are jobs out there and many don't want them because they have to train for them and stop taking from the government.

Stop the government give aways and see how many more people will become employed. Stop the regulations and taxing small businesses so they are reluctant to hire and fear the future.

Then I suggest the mega-corp's spend some of that $2.5 Trillion they have in off-shore acct's to work training folks AND paying a livable wage.

Define living wage.

I'll leave that to the experts; Minimum Wage Vs a Living Wage

 

[RDD_1210]

Speaking of hypocrisy...

And.....?

So you're not even the slightest bit ashamed of your own hypocrisy?

Which part is the hypocrisy?

 

[RDD_1210]

Listen numbnutz, you don't get to decide what i respond to, and your butthurt whining isn't going to make a damned bit of difference. Charity was NEVER supposed to be the job of government, so please stop trying to make it so.

If you feel that more needs to be done to help the poor, get off your lazy, liberal ass and DO SOMETHING. That's what grown-ups do, start acting like one.

And until you put your fat, lazy, liberal ass in a soup line or on a Habitat job, you'll have NO IDEA how accurate my statement is. Of course, you'd rather remain ignorant, sweating is for the peons, right?

LOL, let those true colors shine through Hoss. I'm pretty sure you just repeated your last post, except you forgot to include those sweet stats that you clued me in on last time. I'm fat and lazy though, you've got me pegged pretty good. Bravo good sir, bravo.

Have you ever directly answered a challenged to explain your own position with anything other than attacks on the other person?

Once, by accident.

 

[Fordsflylow]

Anyone but me see the contradiction in what I am about to spell out here? Those poor rich folks claim we peasants have caused class warfare. With their lobbyist army in DC, since the days of reagan, have tilted tax law in their favor. During this same period deficits have climbed, particularly under con pres', while their wealth and income has steadily increased and the blue collar worker's wage have been a joke.

= trickle-down is a pathetic failure!

Even before the Citizen's United ruling by the corporate court, but especially after, this years elections will be the most costly ever, with pledges upwards to $100 MILLION for each rich pos AND who will expect a return on their investment in romney. Those poor rich pos who not only own our govt, but also own individual con candidates who continue to blame the nations woes on the poor.

Yet they insist "they" have it rough and need to hoard even more more more. There claim that "more" tax cuts for them will create more jobs, even though the proof in the puddin from the bush days proves it does not work that way. In fact, all this has done is grow their coffers, and then they park those coffers off-shore to the tune of $2.5 trillion. They again "claim" they will bring it back to the US only IF they get yet ANOTHER tax break for doing so.

Yet somehow, they have working joe's/jane's defending this moronic bs.

Yet the lib's are the problem

Time to wake up America!!

 

[dblack]

I'll leave that to the experts; Minimum Wage Vs a Living Wage

Interesting. From the article:

Living wage is defined as the estimated amount of income necessary to live comfortably and put a family into the bracket of middle class.

So, would it be fair to say the end goal of the living wage campaign is to eliminate the middle class?

 

[Wry Catcher]

If you're so concerned with the people that need a helping hand I would urge you to go out and give them one, and quit trying to force the taxpayers into footing the bill for you.

A perfect example of a greedy callous conservative; clearly anyone who agrees with this anti American rhetoric is markedly similar to a criminal sociopath; a human being without empathy.

 

[Fordsflylow]

So, would it be fair to say the end goal of the living wage campaign is to eliminate the middle class?

Please explain, for us all to read, how you arrived at that crazy notion?

 

[dblack]

So, would it be fair to say the end goal of the living wage campaign is to eliminate the middle class?

Please explain, for us all to read, how you arrived at that crazy notion?

Well, if we move everyone currently living below middle class into the middle class, doesn't that make it the new lowest class? Sorta of a 'tall is small' kinda situation, eh?

Hmm... or maybe not. Because once we move everyone up to the old middle class, there'd then be a new middle class above the old middle class. Would the living wage then be adjusted to target the new middle class?

And if that worked .... wash, rinse, repeat?

 

[Fordsflylow]

So, would it be fair to say the end goal of the living wage campaign is to eliminate the middle class?

Please explain, for us all to read, how you arrived at that crazy notion?

Well, if we move everyone currently living below middle class into the middle class, doesn't that make it the new lowest class? Sorta of a 'tall is small' kinda situation, eh?

Hmm... or maybe not. Because once we move everyone up to the old middle class, there'd then be a new middle class above the old middle class. Would the living wage then be adjusted to target the new middle class?

And if that worked .... wash, rinse, repeat?

So, I assume, based on what you posted is you are all for trickle-down economics and the failure it has been. Is all well in the US after several decades of it or are we in a depression cause of it? How about we try consumer-side economics for several decades and compare notes after

 

[dblack]

So, I assume, based on what you posted is you are all for trickle-down economics and the failure it has been. Is all well in the US after several decades of it or are we in a depression cause of it? How about we try consumer-side economics for several decades and compare notes after

Hmmm I didn't say any of that. What are you going on about? I just think the definition of living wage offered up was irrational. Much of the discussion of such things is irrational because the people most motivated to help the less fortunate are emotionally driven. That's NOT a bad thing in my book, my s.o. is very much that type of person, but to apply effective economic policy you have to look at the reality of the situation.

 

[Fordsflylow]

So, I assume, based on what you posted is you are all for trickle-down economics and the failure it has been. Is all well in the US after several decades of it or are we in a depression cause of it? How about we try consumer-side economics for several decades and compare notes after

Hmmm I didn't say any of that. What are you going on about? I just think the definition of living wage offered up was irrational. Much of the discussion of such things is irrational because the people most motivated to help the less fortunate are emotionally driven. That's NOT a bad thing in my book, my s.o. is very much that type of person, but to apply effective economic policy you have to look at the reality of the situation.

I don't see where I'm not looking at the reality?

 

[dblack]

So, I assume, based on what you posted is you are all for trickle-down economics and the failure it has been. Is all well in the US after several decades of it or are we in a depression cause of it? How about we try consumer-side economics for several decades and compare notes after

Hmmm I didn't say any of that. What are you going on about? I just think the definition of living wage offered up was irrational. Much of the discussion of such things is irrational because the people most motivated to help the less fortunate are emotionally driven. That's NOT a bad thing in my book, my s.o. is very much that type of person, but to apply effective economic policy you have to look at the reality of the situation.

I don't see where I'm not looking at the reality?

That's what I was trying to explain (with perhaps too much snide humor). If you define the goal of the Living Wage campaign to move everyone into the "middle class", you have a contradictory situation. There will always be a lowest class and a middle class above them - it's a moving target. How far do you take that viscous cycle?

 

[Fordsflylow]

Hmmm I didn't say any of that. What are you going on about? I just think the definition of living wage offered up was irrational. Much of the discussion of such things is irrational because the people most motivated to help the less fortunate are emotionally driven. That's NOT a bad thing in my book, my s.o. is very much that type of person, but to apply effective economic policy you have to look at the reality of the situation.

I don't see where I'm not looking at the reality?

That's what I was trying to explain (with perhaps too much snide humor). If you define the goal of the Living Wage campaign to move everyone into the "middle class", you have a contradictory situation. There will always be a lowest class and a middle class above them - it's a moving target. How far do you take that viscous cycle?

My point is to at the very least keep up with inflation while the house of rep's votes themselves pay increases at whim. It is/was hard enough for one to climb out of poverty prior to this serious mess we are in now, I could only imagine how hard it is now having done it myself many moons ago.

I'm still waiting for leader boehner, who promised as #1 priority when taking the position, to put up for vote a 5% decrease in salary for house members. Then again, I've been waiting for them to do anything of worth since they took control.

Been good bantering with you. Gotta go to work! Later

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

I don't see where I'm not looking at the reality?

That's what I was trying to explain (with perhaps too much snide humor). If you define the goal of the Living Wage campaign to move everyone into the "middle class", you have a contradictory situation. There will always be a lowest class and a middle class above them - it's a moving target. How far do you take that viscous cycle?

My point is to at the very least keep up with inflation while the house of rep's votes themselves pay increases at whim. It is/was hard enough for one to climb out of poverty prior to this serious mess we are in now, I could only imagine how hard it is now having done it myself many moons ago.

I'm still waiting for leader boehner, who promised as #1 priority when taking the position, to put up for vote a 5% decrease in salary for house members. Then again, I've been waiting for them to do anything of worth since they took control.

Been good bantering with you. Gotta go to work! Later

You're going to be waiting awhile. The Debt ceiling made it clear Eric Cantor calls the shots over Boehner.

 

[JoeNormal]

Abnormal:

You poor poor pathetic stupid pussy. Your illiteracy gets noted (not merely because you are stupid and ignorant, but because you are too monumentally fucked up to even use an easy built in spell checker), and you start crying. Damn, girl. Get a tampon in that bleeding vagina of yours.

You are a little bitch.

And the late liberal comedian, John Belushi, doesn't want anything back. Have an adult explain "dead" to you, ya pussy derp motherfucker.

The late liberal comedian John Belushi would be pissed as hell that anyone as fucking douchy as you were using his video. Yeah, I'm kind of new around here but it hasn't escaped my notice that you never seem to have anything to say that wouldn't please your conservative puppet masters. You goddamned piece of shit.

Joe,
You are catching on. The tea parties very seldom have any way to discuss ideas on their web sites. The prefer to tell members what to believe. So in many cases, the tea parties send them to this discussion site. Google tea party us message board, and you will see what I am saying.
Most of the tea party members have no ability to discuss. No truth in their statements, just the dogma provided to them.
Some, however, get all expenses paid trips to attend Heritage Society "training" and come back with all the talking points. These guys are persistent, though still have a huge problem with proof. And a major amount of ignorance of history and economics. I know one of these guys, attended Heritage almost 2 years ago now. and he is now a total tea party tool.

So, these guys just spout dogma. Just stick with the provable facts, and they will either start spouting infantile insults at you, or give up. But they will never admit that they learned anything new.

Thanks Rshermr, I used to debate with Tea Party types on another board so I'm somewhat used to the tactics although I have to admit that some of the members here raise the drone factor to a whole new level.

 

[Liability]

It's amusing as hell to see IndependentOfLogic and AB-Normal trying to discuss any topic on the pretense that they have any handle on logic.