rehmwa 2 #51 April 29, 2013 Sure, in your world, the only effect is the final effect. So only two ways to create jobs then: 1 - government does it - and it's all beautiful and for the good of all 2 - ultra rich do it - but they don't like it and hate their workers 3 - clearly a middle class person or someone with little means has never started their own business and if they did get to keep a little bit more of each paycheck they'd just blow it instead from that perspective I understand your position either way, we've done a good job of telling each other their comments are non-sequitors, so I'm satisfied. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #52 April 29, 2013 So you could have taken my comment at face value and explained the statement you made, but instead you took the cliched old 'in your world waffle waffle strawman' route. Yep, satisfying to know where we stand.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #53 April 29, 2013 I just don't enjoy threading with you Jakee. You're too grim and it got old a long time ago. So I stopped trying. I'm sure in person we'd be fine, but it's just plain painful on the forum. Your social philosophy is pretty clear and there's a distinct difference in approach that's not really overcome with simple debate. Your point that my thread was supposedly leading down the 'wealthy job creators" line is the same "in your world waffle waffle" technique you just accused me of. Surprise, you get what you dish out. But you don't even see it. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #54 April 29, 2013 QuoteYour social philosophy is pretty clear and there's a distinct difference in approach that's not really overcome with simple debate. When was the last time you tried simple debate? I've forgotten. QuoteYour point that my thread was supposedly leading down the 'wealthy job creators" line is the same "in your world waffle waffle" technique you just accused me of. Your post was specifically about job creation. If I assumed the reason you mentioned that was due to the common 'wealth creator' argument then, when called on the assumption I gave a straight down the line invitation to explain what you meant. What you do with that invitation is your concern, but blaming others for your unwillingness to discuss your own point is strange.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #55 April 29, 2013 Quote Are you suggesting that the 93% who didn't get richer are all shufflers, and whiners, and extortionists, and lazy-bums and freeloaders? You are full of BS, as usual. You're on a roll! Two in a row! Again, "Well, I already expected another Kallend misguided assumption. Another, holier-then-thou comment from the egotist. Sorry, but, no."My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #56 April 29, 2013 QuoteSo you could have taken my comment at face value and explained the statement you made, but instead you took the cliched old 'in your world waffle waffle strawman' route. Yep, satisfying to know where we stand. Well, jakee. If that's what he did, it's obvious he learned it from a pro....you.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #57 April 29, 2013 Quote s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/29511/small/wealth-recovery-0-1.png?1366838731 Clearly we're sliding into socialism I see you resurrected the thread with a graphic saying the same thing as the original article you cited. So to also be repetitive, this is no surprise and if you examine the graphic in a couple more years then the 93% will no longer be negative as housing prices recover. Quote Pew says the main reason for the widening gap is that affluent households have stocks and other financial holdings that increased in value, while the less wealthy have more of their assets in their homes, which haven't fully regained their value since the housing downturn. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #58 April 29, 2013 Quote.2%... 1%... 7%... What certainly is experiencing solid growth is the size of the group of people you'll call "rich" at any given moment. Irrelevant.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #59 April 29, 2013 QuoteDo people who suffer from wealth envy automatically suffer from penis envy? No, the ones with penis envy just buy guns.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #60 April 29, 2013 QuoteQuoteDo people who suffer from wealth envy automatically suffer from penis envy? No, the ones with penis envy just buy guns. How many guns do you own?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #61 April 29, 2013 QuoteQuote Are you suggesting that the 93% who didn't get richer are all shufflers, and whiners, and extortionists, and lazy-bums and freeloaders? You are full of BS, as usual. You're on a roll! Two in a row! Again, "Well, I already expected another Kallend misguided assumption. Another, holier-then-thou comment from the egotist. Sorry, but, no." OK, so your comment was unrelated to the topic of the thread. Thanks for admitting that.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #62 April 30, 2013 QuoteQuote.2%... 1%... 7%... What certainly is experiencing solid growth is the size of the group of people you'll call "rich" at any given moment. Irrelevant. So when you refer to the "rich" in the context of complaining, suggesting policy, or, as I'll refer to posts like the OP in this thread, disapproving gesticulation, we shouldn't presume to have any idea who the hell you're talking about, got it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #63 April 30, 2013 Quote So when you refer to the "rich" in the context of complaining, suggesting policy, or, as I'll refer to posts like the OP in this thread, disapproving gesticulation, we shouldn't presume to have any idea who the hell you're talking about, got it. Moving target and all that. Mobile goalposts. Catch hm with his pants down (happens a lot) and things start shifting. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #64 April 30, 2013 You like that? Try getting him to define "nutter" in terms of denying them rights.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #65 April 30, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/embed/Nhr8kG6PEOc?feature=player_detailpage Flashbang Bra Holster. This is not another simple gun post. It's about rich women refusing to redistribute their hard earned wealth.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #66 April 30, 2013 Bullshit!! If you gave most poor people $1 million, most would squander it away on a new car and other toys and would be broke again in a few years. Most people who have money, have it because they know how to make it and what to do with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisD 0 #67 April 30, 2013 Somebody tell me when as a Nation we switched from a country that fostered individual participation in government, despised corporations, (our forefathers saw corporations as a neccesary EVIL. Corporations had a very limited role and were highly controled.) To a Nation that now speaks of "Wealth Builders???" How's the following quote for ya, (socialism in action:) "WE THE PEOPLE,..." C Apparently when we the people get together to form a more perfect union, this somehow conflicts with corporate greed???But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #68 April 30, 2013 QuoteBullshit!! If you gave most poor people $1 million, most would squander it away on a new car and other toys and would be broke again in a few years. Most people who have money, have it because they know how to make it and what to do with it. FAIL. 93% of the population isn't poor. There is a large (but shrinking) middle class. Over the past 30 years there has been a very distinct shift in the wealth of the nation from the middle class to the rich.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #69 April 30, 2013 >Bullshit!! >If you gave most poor people $1 million, most would squander it away on a new car >and other toys and would be broke again in a few years. If you gave ANYONE $1 million there's a good chance they'd squander it away on a new car and other toys and be broke again in a few years. Google lottery winners. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #70 April 30, 2013 Quote>Bullshit!! >If you gave most poor people $1 million, most would squander it away on a new car >and other toys and would be broke again in a few years. If you gave ANYONE $1 million there's a good chance they'd squander it away on a new car and other toys and be broke again in a few years. Google lottery winners. Nope, not if they were already rich. Part of getting there is learning to delay gratification and invest wisely. Something inherently lacking in many poor people. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #71 April 30, 2013 QuotePart of getting there is learning to delay gratification and invest wisely. ooooh - I need to learn this. RIGHT NOW ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #72 April 30, 2013 QuoteQuoteBullshit!! If you gave most poor people $1 million, most would squander it away on a new car and other toys and would be broke again in a few years. Most people who have money, have it because they know how to make it and what to do with it. FAIL. 93% of the population isn't poor. There is a large (but shrinking) middle class. Over the past 30 years there has been a very distinct shift in the wealth of the nation from the middle class to the rich. Wrong again. According to the government we have 50 million people below the poverty line. I guess you just proved this poll correct. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/education/25_think_most_college_professors_share_values_of_u_s_society Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #73 April 30, 2013 QuoteQuotePart of getting there is learning to delay gratification and invest wisely. ooooh - I need to learn this. RIGHT NOW Yeah, but buy that new TV or car first. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #74 April 30, 2013 QuoteQuotePart of getting there is learning to delay gratification and invest wisely. ooooh - I need to learn this. RIGHT NOW I got a book to sell you for $19.95. Guaranteed to make me rich. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #75 April 30, 2013 >I got a book to sell you for $19.95. Guaranteed to make me rich. When you put it that way, rehm can't afford NOT to buy it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
