The Rich Can't Be Trusted With Money

S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Nugachino said:
And the fickle can't be trusted with power.
Click to expand...
That's how we got the super-delegates, which is how Clinton was shoved down our throats and Trump got the nom of his party, due to lack thereof.

We would of had Sanders and he would've mopped the floor with Trump..

Must save wealthy at all costs..so they can amass more wealth, pay no taxes. Rinse. Repeat.
 
Last edited:
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
That's how we got the super-delegates, which is how Clinton was shoved down our throats and Trump got the nom of his party, due to lack thereof.

We would of had Sanders and he would've mopped the floor with Trump..

Must save wealthy at all costs.
Click to expand...
Sanders lost the popular vote for the Democrat nomination.


Anything else is...

 
Drowning-Man

Drowning-Man

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I refuse to let my wallet dictate my quality of life, as that's one of the least meaningful measures I can think of.

That said, the system is rather stacked against us average folks. The gleam of the land of opportunity has become the glint of fool's gold. Rates of upward mobility are stunted here in the States compared to other developed countries.

The middle class hasn't gotten a raise for the entire Obama administration, not that he didn't try. He was too busy fighting off both a major economic depression AND a republican congress openly determined to make him a failure.

We the Middle Class demand our prosperity back. It's been stolen from us by the oligarchs and their politician pawns and they're making a mess of things. Impoverishing us is bad enough, but now they're doing it to our kids yet unborn!

No, the rich definitely can't be trusted with such money and power. They'll destroy us all.
Click to expand...
ttystikk said:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/10/elections-rich-trusted-money-161016054546719.html

US elections: The rich can't be trusted with money
The more they have, the more they screw up

Also known as why I'm a leftist;

Classism is rampant in our nation today.

The more income inequality, the more wealth inequality. We have an amazing concentration of both underway in our country today.

The more wealth inequality, the more we have de facto aristocracy, complete with features of legal double standards for them vs common folk and capture of the political process as well as the engines of industry, finance and economy.

When this country raises taxes on the rich, we do better as a nation and achieve great things.

We will fail to do so as long as we let the rich run our futures like their own personal slot machines.
Click to expand...
mckenna.jpg
 
MrRoboto

MrRoboto

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
And the first place to spend all that money?

THE POOR.

We treat our economically disadvantaged like dogshit on bare feet in this country. Often, they are that way because of circumstances or health issues they have no control over. That we throw people away with such callous disregard in this country is despicable and stands in judgement of all those fabulous Ferraris driving to ever more extravagant coke and glam parties.

Feed, treat and house the old, the mentally ill, the infirm. Enact and enforce protections for those who are struggling, and fucking well make sure a day's pay and a month's wages can cover the bills.

Give average Americans the money instead of the Paris Gluttons of the world and watch the economy explode!
Click to expand...
The poor of the world flock to this country for a chance at the "American dream" and instantly find a better quality of life. I'm not against helping the elderly, young, sick, or handicapped. I am against giving a single penny to an able body individual. Give me something for my money. Pick up trash, sweep sidewalks, i dont care. No more something for nothing. Education liberates the poor.

As for the ultra rich, we can agree that greed is a real problem. Where we differ is that you want more government with more money to do more stupid wasteful shit to make themselves and their buddies wealthy. I think there is plenty of money in governments hand already. Use it wisely fuckers. Expanding government programs is a bad idea.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
MrRoboto said:
The poor of the world flock to this country for a chance at the "American dream" and instantly find a better quality of life. I'm not against helping the elderly, young, sick, or handicapped. I am against giving a single penny to an able body individual. Give me something for my money. Pick up trash, sweep sidewalks, i dont care. No more something for nothing. Education liberates the poor.

As for the ultra rich, we can agree that greed is a real problem. Where we differ is that you want more government with more money to do more stupid wasteful shit to make themselves and their buddies wealthy. I think there is plenty of money in governments hand already. Use it wisely fuckers. Expanding government programs is a bad idea.
Click to expand...
I think you've mistaken more taxes for more government corruption. I say watchdogs work just fine, when they're given teeth and left alone to do their jobs.

So swallowing the assumption that government spending equals corruption. Only those who intentionally mismanagement our collective interest are at fault, so hold them accountable! You'd be surprised how many of those committing such shenanigans are republicans.

As to the every man must have a job and no more welfare? Sure- as soon as we take care of everyone who CAN'T work, take care of their children in a national system instead of as an afterthought and pay decent wages.

I bet the above would go a long way towards solving the problem anyway.
 
GardenGnome83

GardenGnome83

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/10/elections-rich-trusted-money-161016054546719.html

US elections: The rich can't be trusted with money
The more they have, the more they screw up

Also known as why I'm a leftist;

Classism is rampant in our nation today.

The more income inequality, the more wealth inequality. We have an amazing concentration of both underway in our country today.

The more wealth inequality, the more we have de facto aristocracy, complete with features of legal double standards for them vs common folk and capture of the political process as well as the engines of industry, finance and economy.

When this country raises taxes on the rich, we do better as a nation and achieve great things.

We will fail to do so as long as we let the rich run our futures like their own personal slot machines.
Click to expand...
Fuckin PREACH!!!!!!
 
MrRoboto

MrRoboto

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I think you've mistaken more taxes for more government corruption. I say watchdogs work just fine, when they're given teeth and left alone to do their jobs.

So swallowing the assumption that government spending equals corruption. Only those who intentionally mismanagement our collective interest are at fault, so hold them accountable! You'd be surprised how many of those committing such shenanigans are republicans.

As to the every man must have a job and no more welfare? Sure- as soon as we take care of everyone who CAN'T work, take care of their children in a national system instead of as an afterthought and pay decent wages.

I bet the above would go a long way towards solving the problem anyway.
Click to expand...
You'd be hard pressed to find a congressman with a net worth under $5 million. D or R
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
Sanders lost the popular vote for the Democrat nomination.


Anything else is...

Click to expand...
Trump is the worst candidate, both in terms of qualifications and in ability to run a campaign in the modern era. We'll never know but I don't think it would have mattered who stood next to Trump at the debates. In my opinion, the debates showed Trump for what he is to the millions of people who were undecided at the time of the first debate. This is when Trump drove his campaign six feet under. He did it to himself. Clinton by comparison looked like the better prepared and qualified person for the job. Cut and paste Bernie in the same situation and he would have done just as well.

This presupposes he was able to attract high rates of support from African Americans, Hispanics and women in the primaries. Nobody can win the Democratic Party nomination without pulling higher rates of support from those groups than Bernie received in the primaries.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Big_Lou said:
Wait, so crusted old Caucasian racists don't represent us all??

Sigh, I've been misled all these years....
Click to expand...
Leaving racism out of it for the moment, the classism is pretty glaring.

We are living through yet another Gilded Age, where the rich get everything and everyone else gets to work harder while watching their own prosperity slipping away.

Tax breaks don't create growth. Cutting taxes on the rich does nothing good for the society as a whole. Cutting taxes does not stimulate the economy, balance the budget, cover infrastructure costs, pay for the national defense or anything else we need government for.

The only beneficiaries are the rich themselves.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Trump is the worst candidate, both in terms of qualifications and in ability to run a campaign in the modern era. We'll never know but I don't think it would have mattered who stood next to Trump at the debates. In my opinion, the debates showed Trump for what he is to the millions of people who were undecided at the time of the first debate. This is when Trump drove his campaign six feet under. He did it to himself. Clinton by comparison looked like the better prepared and qualified person for the job. Cut and paste Bernie in the same situation and he would have done just as well.

This presupposes he was able to attract high rates of support from African Americans, Hispanics and women in the primaries. Nobody can win the Democratic Party nomination without pulling higher rates of support from those groups than Bernie received in the primaries.
Click to expand...
Bernie's campaign was not going to have any trouble pulling female and minority voters away from the Chump's campaign, lol

But props for trying!
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Bernie's campaign was not going to have any trouble pulling female and minority voters away from the Chump's campaign, lol

But props for trying!
Click to expand...
Probably true. It's just that we are playing with what ifs in this case.

That said, Trump is an awful candidate and I think Bernie would have done very well in the debates, which is where Trump's campaign died.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Probably true. It's just that we are playing with what ifs in this case.

That said, Trump is an awful candidate and I think Bernie would have done very well in the debates, which is where Trump's campaign died.
Click to expand...
Just giving you some good natured grief, bro.

Agreed, on all counts.

So we get to get used to the idea of another Clinton presidency.

Will the republicans give her a chance?

Will she be more effective with her first 100 days?

How will her policy goals break along class lines?

I think SNL had it right on the money when they said this year's election is between a fascist Chump and a republican Shillary.

The other 90% of us were once again subverted, perhaps a little too openly this time. We'll see if the American electorate accepts their primaries being run by the establishment instead of reflecting their wishes.
 
GardenGnome83

GardenGnome83

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Just giving you some good natured grief, bro.

Agreed, on all counts.

So we get to get used to the idea of another Clinton presidency.

Will the republicans give her a chance?

Will she be more effective with her first 100 days?

How will her policy goals break along class lines?

I think SNL had it right on the money when they said this year's election is between a fascist Chump and a republican Shillary.

The other 90% of us were once again subverted, perhaps a little too openly this time. We'll see if the American electorate accepts their primaries being run by the establishment instead of reflecting their wishes.
Click to expand...
Right on, man. We won't forget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top