How many are paying attention to Venezuela?

[natstew]

Barb, shame on you. You accuse me without even a link!

I had JUST got done reading what you wrote elsewhere. I will, however, apologize if I can't find the link to it.

And I can't, and I have to nap for work tonight, so my apologies. I'll send you some green in penance, but I still believe what I wrote to be true.

No, I did not copy and paste that post. If I had, I'd readily admit it. Now, what I did was learn everything in that post and much more about Venezuela from news sources and internet.

I have an incurable curiosity, have since birth. It got me in lots of trouble as a child. One thing I did that got me in lots of trouble was to take apart my Grandfather's 1800's pocket watch to see what made it work.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Seriously? Is it that you cant or won't think on more than one level? Do you not understand what you typed, or is it that you don't like when you're called out on the boiler-plated talking points?

This is a thread about Venezuela.
For purposes of this discussion, that pretty much makes the Patriot Act irrelevant.

YOU pointed your bony finger at communists, socialists, and progressives alike as being authoritarian. I pointed out where that statement is not only wrong, but backwards. The OP tied what is happening in Venezuela to what he considers to be the progressive agenda. NUMEROUS posters have responded to that. Remove the pole from your ass and stop being such an asshole.

You assholes are authoritarian and it leads to failure and unrest instead of a functioning and prosperous society. It's why I posted the thread like I did but apparently you missed the point.

What isn't authoritarian about you people? You can call yourselves whatever name you want but your actions are all the same.

Healthcare- You want a mandate that everyone must buy it and then mandate what the insurance people and the hospitals must provide.

Wages- You want a mandate to raise the minimum wage no matter what the market can bear.

Taxes- Not high enough on those that actually made their money, nope they need to be forced to pay more.

Everything about you people is making someone else do what you want. You are nothing but authoritarian. You have never even entertained a single thought about a solution based on letting people be themselves and make their own decisions.

Now put up the required "you don't know me!" reply as you keep supporting the same damn policies I just told you that you would. I know you and your ilk, you are pathetic little beings. You jst simply don't learn from the mistakes of the past and insist on making the same mistakes again.

 

[JoeB131]

[
There is no such thing as wealth inequality because wealth was never supposed to be equal in the first place.
Only the envious little packer heads who have no ideas believe the myth.

No, guy, I can just read a wealth chart. 1% controls 43% of the wealth in this country. The top 20% control 87% of the wealth. That you are too stupid to see why this is a big problem, well, that's just being "low information".

[
Long before the term 'low information voter" was uttered, I referred to these people as "the uninformed"...
Closeted gay man? Now see ,here's an example of why you have zero credibility on this forum.
One Limbaugh is happily married to a woman. You know one of those with breasts and a vagina...

Actually, he was married to four different Vaginas, not one of which produced a baby. He was also busted in Philadelphia under the name Jeff Christie for soliciting a gay prostitute.

[
"Three million GOP voters did NOT stay home. In fact, Romney got more of the "conservative" and "republican" vote than McCain did. Heck, even the evangelicals, who fretted about a Mormon "Heretic" in 2008 were totally behind him in 2012, because there was a negro in the White House. "..
That is utter bullshit. But you can keep believing that if it makes you feel better.

Again, guy, I can read a chart. Fact is Romney improved over McCain with Conservatives by 4% and with Republicans by 2%.

and then there/s this.

Romney won over white evangelicals, Catholics - The Washington Post

Seventy-eight percent of white evangelical Christians went for Romney, up from 74 percent for 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain. Those voters were 26 percent of the electorate this year, as they were in 2008.

NOw, I find this ******* hilarious, because in 2008, I remember the Huck supporters going on about how Mormons were heretics and not really Christians.

Not only do rich people have nothing to do with me, I have no acquaintances who are what one would qualify as wealthy.
These people have ZERO affect on my life.

I'm sure you don't know anyone who is rich. You are probably too stupid to realize how much they are ******* up your life.

You loathe their very existence. All that hate is going to burn up your insides like a peptic ulcer. And where does it get you? Nowhere.
As previously stated, there were tons of well monied people who not only voted for Obama, they donated to his campaign and contributed to his causes.
So what the **** are we talking about here?
Joe, your argument has run out of gas.

I don't care who they vote for. Making them pay their fair share, making them act right, I could care less who they vote for.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

I had JUST got done reading what you wrote elsewhere. I will, however, apologize if I can't find the link to it.

And I can't, and I have to nap for work tonight, so my apologies. I'll send you some green in penance, but I still believe what I wrote to be true.

No, I did not copy and paste that post. If I had, I'd readily admit it. Now, what I did was learn everything in that post and much more about Venezuela from news sources and internet.

I have an incurable curiosity, have since birth. It got me in lots of trouble as a child. One thing I did that got me in lots of trouble was to take apart my Grandfather's 1800's pocket watch to see what made it work.

She reminds me of a teacher I had who thought she had the class stumped with this question:

What goes 1-1, 2-1, 3-1, 4-1 etc?

The answer was a chime clock. I knew this before hand and answered the question. She said I cheated. I told her it's not cheating if you have learned the answer before hand it's called knowledge. She still said it was cheating. What an idiot.

 

[HenryBHough]

Define "Fair Share".

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Define "Fair Share".

To the right it's what you earned. To the left it's what they view as someone made too much and now owes those that didn't make as much. But don't mistake their fair share as participating in the risk, work or actual making of something. They just want a fair share of the profit afterward.

 

[The T]

Define "Fair Share".

To the right it's what you earned. To the left it's what they view as someone made too much and now owes those that didn't make as much. But don't mistake their fair share as participating in the risk, work or actual making of something. They just want a fair share of the profit afterward.

In other words? Moochers.

 

[The T]

And I can't, and I have to nap for work tonight, so my apologies. I'll send you some green in penance, but I still believe what I wrote to be true.

No, I did not copy and paste that post. If I had, I'd readily admit it. Now, what I did was learn everything in that post and much more about Venezuela from news sources and internet.

I have an incurable curiosity, have since birth. It got me in lots of trouble as a child. One thing I did that got me in lots of trouble was to take apart my Grandfather's 1800's pocket watch to see what made it work.

She reminds me of a teacher I had who thought she had the class stumped with this question:

What goes 1-1, 2-1, 3-1, 4-1 etc?

The answer was a chime clock. I knew this before hand and answered the question. She said I cheated. I told her it's not cheating if you have learned the answer before hand it's called knowledge. She still said it was cheating. What an idiot.

Your teacher was obviously a Statist LIBERAL that had a low opinion of others...and filled with self-arrogance. (And typical).

 

[bripat9643]

[

The simple answer is that human trait known as self entitlement. People convinced that government has something to offer which they do not have to earn will vote for politicians that promise such gifts.
These people are frightened by the idea of individuals doing for themselves without interference from government.

Actually, you make Libertarians sound like Bullies who don't like to get called to the principal's office.

How does wanting to be left alone make someone a bully?

 

[thereisnospoon]

[
There is no such thing as wealth inequality because wealth was never supposed to be equal in the first place.
Only the envious little packer heads who have no ideas believe the myth.

No, guy, I can just read a wealth chart. 1% controls 43% of the wealth in this country. The top 20% control 87% of the wealth. That you are too stupid to see why this is a big problem, well, that's just being "low information".

[
Long before the term 'low information voter" was uttered, I referred to these people as "the uninformed"...
Closeted gay man? Now see ,here's an example of why you have zero credibility on this forum.
One Limbaugh is happily married to a woman. You know one of those with breasts and a vagina...

Actually, he was married to four different Vaginas, not one of which produced a baby. He was also busted in Philadelphia under the name Jeff Christie for soliciting a gay prostitute.





Again, guy, I can read a chart. Fact is Romney improved over McCain with Conservatives by 4% and with Republicans by 2%.

and then there/s this.

Romney won over white evangelicals, Catholics - The Washington Post

Seventy-eight percent of white evangelical Christians went for Romney, up from 74 percent for 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain. Those voters were 26 percent of the electorate this year, as they were in 2008.

NOw, I find this ******* hilarious, because in 2008, I remember the Huck supporters going on about how Mormons were heretics and not really Christians.

Not only do rich people have nothing to do with me, I have no acquaintances who are what one would qualify as wealthy.
These people have ZERO affect on my life.

I'm sure you don't know anyone who is rich. You are probably too stupid to realize how much they are ******* up your life.

You loathe their very existence. All that hate is going to burn up your insides like a peptic ulcer. And where does it get you? Nowhere.
As previously stated, there were tons of well monied people who not only voted for Obama, they donated to his campaign and contributed to his causes.
So what the **** are we talking about here?
Joe, your argument has run out of gas.

I don't care who they vote for. Making them pay their fair share, making them act right, I could care less who they vote for.

The numbers are what they are. Your premise is based on Keynesian theory of the zero sum game. That if one has more then another must have less. it is not true.
my earnings are my earnings. Yours are yours. The two are mutually exclusive.
Does it matter to you if Tom Cruise gets $25 million to make a movie. Or Joe Smith of the XYZ corporation gets 10 million bucks in stock options? It certainly has no effect on my situation.
So why the concern over what other people are paid?
So now you can explain to me how a rich person living in Aspen or Palm Beach is "******* up my life"...This should be interesting.
"Making them pay their fair share, making them act right, I could care less who they vote for.
Their fair share? That again? You people have been challenged on numerous occasions to come up with a figure of which you can deem "fair"...There was a thread on that very issue. And that thread broke down very early. Mainly because those to which it was directed could not come up with a number.
Acting right? Can you explain that? And then explain who will be bestowed the authority. Who will become the federal 'conduct czar'...
Like I previously stated, Joe, your argument has run out of gas.
You just post stuff, but cannot express the how what when where or why.

 

[The T]

[
There is no such thing as wealth inequality because wealth was never supposed to be equal in the first place.
Only the envious little packer heads who have no ideas believe the myth.

No, guy, I can just read a wealth chart. 1% controls 43% of the wealth in this country. The top 20% control 87% of the wealth. That you are too stupid to see why this is a big problem, well, that's just being "low information".





Actually, he was married to four different Vaginas, not one of which produced a baby. He was also busted in Philadelphia under the name Jeff Christie for soliciting a gay prostitute.





Again, guy, I can read a chart. Fact is Romney improved over McCain with Conservatives by 4% and with Republicans by 2%.

and then there/s this.

Romney won over white evangelicals, Catholics - The Washington Post

Seventy-eight percent of white evangelical Christians went for Romney, up from 74 percent for 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain. Those voters were 26 percent of the electorate this year, as they were in 2008.

NOw, I find this ******* hilarious, because in 2008, I remember the Huck supporters going on about how Mormons were heretics and not really Christians.






I'm sure you don't know anyone who is rich. You are probably too stupid to realize how much they are ******* up your life.

You loathe their very existence. All that hate is going to burn up your insides like a peptic ulcer. And where does it get you? Nowhere.
As previously stated, there were tons of well monied people who not only voted for Obama, they donated to his campaign and contributed to his causes.
So what the **** are we talking about here?
Joe, your argument has run out of gas.

I don't care who they vote for. Making them pay their fair share, making them act right, I could care less who they vote for.

The numbers are what they are. Your premise is based on Keynesian theory of the zero sum game. That if one has more then another must have less. it is not true.
my earnings are my earnings. Yours are yours. The two are mutually exclusive.
Does it matter to you if Tom Cruise gets $25 million to make a movie. Or Joe Smith of the XYZ corporation gets 10 million bucks in stock options? It certainly has no effect on my situation.
So why the concern over what other people are paid?
So now you can explain to me how a rich person living in Aspen or Palm Beach is "******* up my life"...This should be interesting.
"Making them pay their fair share, making them act right, I could care less who they vote for.
Their fair share? That again? You people have been challenged on numerous occasions to come up with a figure of which you can deem "fair"...There was a thread on that very issue. And that thread broke down very early. Mainly because those to which it was directed could not come up with a number.
Acting right? Can you explain that? And then explain who will be bestowed the authority. Who will become the federal 'conduct czar'...
Like I previously stated, Joe, your argument has run out of gas.
You just post stuff, but cannot express the how what when where or why.

They're going to play the wealth envy shit to death...to their own detriment.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Seriously? Is it that you cant or won't think on more than one level? Do you not understand what you typed, or is it that you don't like when you're called out on the boiler-plated talking points?

This is a thread about Venezuela.
For purposes of this discussion, that pretty much makes the Patriot Act irrelevant.

YOU pointed your bony finger at communists, socialists, and progressives alike as being authoritarian. I pointed out where that statement is not only wrong, but backwards. The OP tied what is happening in Venezuela to what he considers to be the progressive agenda. NUMEROUS posters have responded to that. Remove the pole from your ass and stop being such an asshole.

First let's get to the last thing....
Now you can make any kind of sexually deviant remark you like, is that true? And if I hit back in kind, you would expect the mods to do something, is that not correct? Double standard.
Ok, now, instead me referring to you as cee u next tuesday, I will take the high road and continue along.
So....Progresivism, liberalism, whatever is indeed an authoritarian ideology. The reasons are simple. This ideology seeks to accomplish certain things that in most cases the majority finds objectionable. Therefore the liberal uses government to enforce and mandate that all comply. That is authoritarian. There is no other way to label it.
Taxation. Forced purchase of certain goods or services. Obamacare for example. I cannot think of a more authoritarian way of accomplishing a political goal.
The fact is Venezuela's current form of government is a perfect example of the failure of central planning and command/control economics.
This is precisely the path Obama would like to take this country. He believes in the heavy hand of government. He is anti profit, anti market based economy. He was brought up to believe that this country is inherently unfair. He was also taught that anyone who accumulates wealth is doing so only because he or she has the ability to create victims. Meanwhile he was taught that the only way to achieve a socialist utopia is to exempt himself from the policies which government enacts. After all, the overseer cannot be bound by the same rules as those being ruled.
Anyway....is it this now a place for you to describe insertion of large objects into orifices unintended for such objects?
Would you care to get even more graphic?
Barb, don't go down that road. I can get pretty graphic myself and if the mods refuse to put a stop to your nonsense, well I figure there are no rules and then the gloves come off.
So, if you want to have a contest of crude, let's throw down. if you want to debate this issue, fine. Your call.

 

[thereisnospoon]

No, guy, I can just read a wealth chart. 1% controls 43% of the wealth in this country. The top 20% control 87% of the wealth. That you are too stupid to see why this is a big problem, well, that's just being "low information".





Actually, he was married to four different Vaginas, not one of which produced a baby. He was also busted in Philadelphia under the name Jeff Christie for soliciting a gay prostitute.





Again, guy, I can read a chart. Fact is Romney improved over McCain with Conservatives by 4% and with Republicans by 2%.

and then there/s this.

Romney won over white evangelicals, Catholics - The Washington Post

Seventy-eight percent of white evangelical Christians went for Romney, up from 74 percent for 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain. Those voters were 26 percent of the electorate this year, as they were in 2008.

NOw, I find this ******* hilarious, because in 2008, I remember the Huck supporters going on about how Mormons were heretics and not really Christians.






I'm sure you don't know anyone who is rich. You are probably too stupid to realize how much they are ******* up your life.

I don't care who they vote for. Making them pay their fair share, making them act right, I could care less who they vote for.

The numbers are what they are. Your premise is based on Keynesian theory of the zero sum game. That if one has more then another must have less. it is not true.
my earnings are my earnings. Yours are yours. The two are mutually exclusive.
Does it matter to you if Tom Cruise gets $25 million to make a movie. Or Joe Smith of the XYZ corporation gets 10 million bucks in stock options? It certainly has no effect on my situation.
So why the concern over what other people are paid?
So now you can explain to me how a rich person living in Aspen or Palm Beach is "******* up my life"...This should be interesting.
"Making them pay their fair share, making them act right, I could care less who they vote for.
Their fair share? That again? You people have been challenged on numerous occasions to come up with a figure of which you can deem "fair"...There was a thread on that very issue. And that thread broke down very early. Mainly because those to which it was directed could not come up with a number.
Acting right? Can you explain that? And then explain who will be bestowed the authority. Who will become the federal 'conduct czar'...
Like I previously stated, Joe, your argument has run out of gas.
You just post stuff, but cannot express the how what when where or why.

They're going to play the wealth envy shit to death...to their own detriment.

Ahh.,...It's one of their talking points now and will become a campaign issue this summer and fall.
One which won't gain them very much mileage.

 

[JQPublic1]

Maybe if you showered occasionally you wouldn't have the illusion people were shitting on you.
Everyone, capitalists included, work the laws to their advantage. There is nothing illegal or immoral about that. Would employees at Apple be better off if Apple paid billions of dollars in taxes to the Treasury or not?

Don't give up your day job, NEGGER!
It depends on what country the Apple employees are citizens of. Those tax dollars could be used in the USA to buy more plane/drones, encourage more research in solving medical or societal ills, or to repair our crumbling bridges. But even apple employees should be concerned about our national debt; something those billions would help to reduce!

Why is it you libs believe everything should begin and end with government?

Who says I am a lib? And where did you get the idea that I believe everything should begin and end with government?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Don't give up your day job, NEGGER!
It depends on what country the Apple employees are citizens of. Those tax dollars could be used in the USA to buy more plane/drones, encourage more research in solving medical or societal ills, or to repair our crumbling bridges. But even apple employees should be concerned about our national debt; something those billions would help to reduce!

Why is it you libs believe everything should begin and end with government?

Who says I am a lib? And where did you get the idea that I believe everything should begin and end with government?

Face palm

 

[auditor0007]

Mostly for the benefit of educating you left wing fools.

It?s Happening In Real Time. Pay Attention. | Is This Blog On?



How many times do we need to watch your failed policies come to life and die in front of our own eye's before you left wing idiots catch on?

Socialism and communism is a sure route to failure. Yet you keep promoting these same policies here. When the hell are you going to learn?

The problem with almost all of the far right is that they believe that American liberals support a socialist system like that in Venezuela. Cons are so far out there, they just can't see anything for what it really is. To prove my point is easy; you all believe Obama is a liberal. It's about the craziest thing a person could believe.

Obama is no liberal. What he is is a wanna be dictator. He'll use the progressives as his pawns but ultimately he is just a little petty tyrant.

Funny how it was Democrats and liberals saying the same exact stupid shit about GW.

 

[Barb]

This is a thread about Venezuela.
For purposes of this discussion, that pretty much makes the Patriot Act irrelevant.

YOU pointed your bony finger at communists, socialists, and progressives alike as being authoritarian. I pointed out where that statement is not only wrong, but backwards. The OP tied what is happening in Venezuela to what he considers to be the progressive agenda. NUMEROUS posters have responded to that. Remove the pole from your ass and stop being such an asshole.

First let's get to the last thing....
Now you can make any kind of sexually deviant remark you like, is that true? And if I hit back in kind, you would expect the mods to do something, is that not correct? Double standard.
Ok, now, instead me referring to you as cee u next tuesday, I will take the high road and continue along.
So....Progresivism, liberalism, whatever is indeed an authoritarian ideology. The reasons are simple. This ideology seeks to accomplish certain things that in most cases the majority finds objectionable. Therefore the liberal uses government to enforce and mandate that all comply. That is authoritarian. There is no other way to label it.
Taxation. Forced purchase of certain goods or services. Obamacare for example. I cannot think of a more authoritarian way of accomplishing a political goal.
The fact is Venezuela's current form of government is a perfect example of the failure of central planning and command/control economics.
This is precisely the path Obama would like to take this country. He believes in the heavy hand of government. He is anti profit, anti market based economy. He was brought up to believe that this country is inherently unfair. He was also taught that anyone who accumulates wealth is doing so only because he or she has the ability to create victims. Meanwhile he was taught that the only way to achieve a socialist utopia is to exempt himself from the policies which government enacts. After all, the overseer cannot be bound by the same rules as those being ruled.
Anyway....is it this now a place for you to describe insertion of large objects into orifices unintended for such objects?
Would you care to get even more graphic?
Barb, don't go down that road. I can get pretty graphic myself and if the mods refuse to put a stop to your nonsense, well I figure there are no rules and then the gloves come off.
So, if you want to have a contest of crude, let's throw down. if you want to debate this issue, fine. Your call.

Telling someone to get the stick out of their ass is a gender neutral figure of speech that has NOTHING to do with sex - deviant or otherwise.

You're "understanding" of the word "authoritarian" could use some depth.

 

[Edgetho]

Capitalism has failed also at times. The great depression and when our economy crashed in 2008 for a couple instances. Capitalism had to be propped up with taxpayer money. USA hated chavez because he increased the royalties on oil U.S. companies were taking out of Venezuela. What a criminal Chavez was in the republican mind. A democratically elected president raising royalties on assets (oil) exported out of his country.

You are easily amused, I see.

Yes, Capitalism fails at times.

But socialism fails EVERY time ALL the time.

 

[JoeB131]

[

The simple answer is that human trait known as self entitlement. People convinced that government has something to offer which they do not have to earn will vote for politicians that promise such gifts.
These people are frightened by the idea of individuals doing for themselves without interference from government.

Actually, you make Libertarians sound like Bullies who don't like to get called to the principal's office.

How does wanting to be left alone make someone a bully?

Because usually, when you guys complain about government, it's when it's telling you not to do something you shouldn't be doing.

 

[JoeB131]

[

The numbers are what they are. Your premise is based on Keynesian theory of the zero sum game. That if one has more then another must have less. it is not true.

We practiced Keynesian Economics through most of the 20th century, and we never enjoyed greater prosperity. Until the Rich got greedy and fucked everything up.

[
my earnings are my earnings. Yours are yours. The two are mutually exclusive.
Does it matter to you if Tom Cruise gets $25 million to make a movie. Or Joe Smith of the XYZ corporation gets 10 million bucks in stock options? It certainly has no effect on my situation.
So why the concern over what other people are paid?

Yes, it bothers me that Joe Smith of XYZ corporation gets 10 million in stock options, because more than likely, he's going to make decisions not based on the good of the company or his employees, but on what runs up his stock so he can cash out.

Now, I DOOOOOO love when you bring up "Hollywood Rich People". I'd be fine with that. The Star Players do well, but so do the underling. In a Tom Cruise Movie, the Writers, the Gaffers, the electricians, the actors playing the bit roles are all unionized and get union scale. And no one comes back to them and says, "Well, the movie flopped because Tom went on a crazy rant about Space Lord Zenu, we are going to have to cut all your pay!"

[
So now you can explain to me how a rich person living in Aspen or Palm Beach is "******* up my life"...This should be interesting.

Because he got that by cheating the person who did the actual hard work, more often than not.

The 1% of the population that has 43% of the wealth did NOT do 43% of the work. Period.

"Making them pay their fair share, making them act right, I could care less who they vote for.
Their fair share? That again? You people have been challenged on numerous occasions to come up with a figure of which you can deem "fair"...There was a thread on that very issue. And that thread broke down very early. Mainly because those to which it was directed could not come up with a number.

I think a fair number would be one everyone is satisfied with. Frankly, what they were paying Pre-Reagan was more than fair. (70% nominally, but more like 48%.) I think it also depends on the needs. during WWII, the top marginal rate was 93%, and it stayed that way until the 1960's until we paid off most of our WWII debt. Today, we fight a war against two little shitheel countries and run up 5 trillion in debt to the Chinese and you guys are all so fine with that.

[
Acting right? Can you explain that? And then explain who will be bestowed the authority. Who will become the federal 'conduct czar'...

Again, guy, we have a bunch of laws on the books, that define EXACTLY what good conduct is. And these rich assholes you worship find ways to abuse them.

Simple enough solution.

"Hey, we have a clean air law."

"Well, I'll just move my plant to China."

"Okay, now you can't get your product back into the country, and we are STILL going to charge you with polluting the air. Oh, by the way, your Jury is made up of 12 guys you laid off."

"Well, that doesn't sound so bad. A year in Club Fed..."

"Oh, sorry, you are going to SingSing and share a cell with Bubba the Ass-Rapist."

Conduct is going to get a lot better after that.

[
Like I previously stated, Joe, your argument has run out of gas.
You just post stuff, but cannot express the how what when where or why.

Guy, I've expressed it very well, you're just too stupid to understand.

I was thinking about using smaller words, but I don't think that's gonna help.