Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

WSJ "Obama speech most dishonest in decades"Follow

#152 Apr 19 2011 at 8:50 AM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Ailitardif, Star Breaker wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
I'm all for pride in your birthplace, but some people are goddamn idiots about it.

Can't all be from New York, just deal with it the best you can.


This reminds me, my sister-in-law got accepted to NYU for grad school...she is going to south florida. What the hell is that?


She may also be subscribing to the Bill Simmons theory of college choices: when in doubt, choose the school in warmer weather.


PS: I work in New York and I hate this city. Smiley: tongue
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#153 Apr 19 2011 at 8:55 AM Rating: Decent
****
9,258 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Drift,

Quote:
I'd wager a bet that a majority of the US debt was caused by using deficit spending to pay for an unnecessary war in Afghanistan and an unnecessary war in Iraq.


You'd lose that bet. We spend more on social services in a year than it would cost to run 10 wars in countries like afghanistan.


Quote:
Which makes me wonder, would you actually rather see education, health care, medicare, etc. go to sh*t because you want to see dead muslims?


If you weren't operating under the false premise that military spending is anywhere near what's being paid on social services (that are by and large failures) you might have a point.

Fact is only way the US is going to get out of the financial situation it's in is to stop stealing from the producers to support the non-producers. Of course that's easier said than done considering the Democrats have created a society of people who think it's the responsibility of the federal govn to feed, shelter, and provide healthcare for every single person (not just citizens) residing in the country. And they actually believe it's their right.




/facepalm

You completely missed the bloody point. And you didn't even address the important part.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#154 Apr 19 2011 at 8:58 AM Rating: Good
***
2,069 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
Ailitardif, Star Breaker wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
I'm all for pride in your birthplace, but some people are goddamn idiots about it.

Can't all be from New York, just deal with it the best you can.


This reminds me, my sister-in-law got accepted to NYU for grad school...she is going to south florida. What the hell is that?


NYU is INCREDIBLY expensive, and is located in the most expensive city in the country. South Florida is a much better idea if finances are what you have in mind. I mean, as a Gator I hate the 'Noles, but I used to date a girl who went to NYU - she'll be repaying her loans until she's 40.


She went to UGA, so she didn't even apply to Florida (though the program is better). I think she doesn't like UF because they beat UGA too often.

Also, she got funding for NYU and nothing for South Florida. But I just wanted her to go to NYU so I could get Doughnut Plant.
____________________________
http://www.marriageissogay.com/

Song of the day:
May 26, 2011 -- Transplants
#155 Apr 19 2011 at 9:34 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
*****
19,831 posts
varusword75 wrote:
I hate to break it to you but our country is better than all those places you just listed. More people have more sh*t in this country than all those countries you just listed combined.

Um, standard of living is not gauged by the amount of mass-produced Chinese crapola you can fit into a double-wide. Quite the opposite, actually: people who compulsively hoard unnecessary stuff are usually doing it in an attempt to fulfill some void in their lives. But hey, if you want to CONSUME, then go ahead and feed the capitalist machine.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#156 Apr 20 2011 at 10:53 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,827 posts
According to Washington Post ABC Poll Varus's majority is an minority.

Most Americans would rather see taxes increase on the wealthiest Americans then cuts in Medicare and Medicaid. They also don't support across the board tax increases, just on the filthy rich.

Which goes to show most Americans realize that the Republican Party is trying to send the country down the drain with cries of less taxes on the wealthy will create more jobs.
____________________________
This Post is written in Elnese, If it was an actual Post, it would make sense.

"England needs, examples of people who, leaving Heaven to decide whether they are to rise in the world, decide for themselves that they will be happy in it, and have resolved to seek, not greater wealth, but simpler pleasures; not higher fortune, but deeper felicity; making the first of possessions self-possession, and honouring themselves in the harmless pride and calm pursuits of peace." - John Ruskin
#157 Apr 20 2011 at 10:56 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:

You're a f*cking idiot. I'm consistently amazed you can figure out how to turn on your computer. There's a reason the US standard of living is the highest in the world. Maybe you should check that out before making more absurdly idiotic statements like the one you just did.


Unfortunately what is standard in the US is for the average citizen to have poorer health, education, and net worth than the average citizen in countries with more progressive tax systems and higher social spending. That's not even an argument the GOP is clinging to as readily anymore since it's becoming increasingly apparent that trickle down is bullsh*t. There's more emphasis on how the wealthy are under attack and 200,000/year isn't rich, and how it isn't fair, wah wah wah.

Quote:
You'd lose that bet. We spend more on social services in a year than it would cost to run 10 wars in countries like afghanistan.


The question is do we spend more per capita than other countries, and the answer is "not even close."
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#158varusword75, Posted: Apr 21 2011 at 8:37 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Debo,
#159 Apr 21 2011 at 8:45 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
16,277 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Debo,

Quote:
Um, standard of living is not gauged by the amount of mass-produced Chinese crapola you can fit into a double-wide. Quite the opposite, actually: people who compulsively hoard unnecessary stuff are usually doing it in an attempt to fulfill some void in their lives. But hey, if you want to CONSUME, then go ahead and feed the capitalist machine.


Translation: I can't buy sh*t because i'm broke poor white trash so buying stuff is bad.


You can't even afford internet and cable at home, so what the hell are you talking about?
#160 Apr 21 2011 at 9:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,921 posts
varusword75 wrote:


Quote:
There's more emphasis on how the wealthy are under attack and 200,000/year isn't rich, and how it isn't fair, wah wah wah.


200k a year isn't as much as you think for a dual income house with 3 children. Again just pitting the producers against the non-producers. Unfortunately there are nearly as many non-producers as there are producers and the non-producers (which are primarily democrats) have no intention of becoming producers as long as they can use the federal govn to steal from the producers to support their lives.


The hell it isn't! Smiley: lol My parents cleared about half of that with two kids (plus child support for another from a previous marriage), and they own their house and car, have no debt, and managed to help both kids with college payments. And they still have a bunch saved for retirement.

Granted, they are both very smart, frugal, and have had some good luck. But saying 200k a year isn't much is pure BS.

Also,
Quote:
Translation: I can't buy sh*t because i'm broke poor white trash so buying stuff is bad.
seems to say instead "Shoot, I really don't know what standard of living is."
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#161varusword75, Posted: Apr 21 2011 at 9:38 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Nads,
#162 Apr 21 2011 at 9:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,921 posts
varusword75 wrote:


Locked,

Quote:
But saying 200k a year isn't much is pure BS.


It sure as h*ll isn't filthy rich.


It's entirely subjective. I'd call someone making 200k a year rich. They're easily in the top 5% of earners in the US.
e U.S. Census Bureau offers income data by household and individual. It is to be noted that 42% of households have two incomes earners; thus making households' income levels higher than personal income levels. The 2005 economic survey revealed the income distribution for households and individuals whereby the top 5% of individuals had six figure incomes (exceeding $100,000) and the top 10% of individuals had incomes exceeding $75,000.

That's in 2005, but I'm sure it's similar to now. Making $200,000 as a household would put someone in the top 3% of earners in the US. I would call that "rich;" at the very least, "Upper-class" would be appropriate. "Filthy rich" would be tougher to define, IMO, but you didn't talk about "filthy rich"... you said "200k a year isn't much." It's more than what 97% of the country's households make Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#163varusword75, Posted: Apr 21 2011 at 11:59 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Locked,
#164 Apr 21 2011 at 12:14 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Locked,

Quote:
I'd call someone making 200k a year rich


I wouldn't. Then again i've actually associated with multi-millionaires so I can tell the difference between a single guy making 100k and someone worth 10's of millions.

Do you really think a dual income household with 3 kids earning a total of 200k is rich? Really?



It's all relative, ya idgit.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#165 Apr 21 2011 at 12:16 PM Rating: Good
****
9,258 posts
Quote:
I wouldn't. Then again i've actually associated with multi-millionaires so I can tell the difference between a single guy making 100k and someone worth 10's of millions.

Do you really think a dual income household with 3 kids earning a total of 200k is rich? Really?


Far richer than the vast majority of people worldwide. The average household income for a family in the US is approximately $46000. Considering that I was brought up in a household with half that, I think that 200k is far, far more than anyone actually needs.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#166varusword75, Posted: Apr 21 2011 at 12:19 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) driftless,
#167 Apr 21 2011 at 12:21 PM Rating: Decent
****
9,258 posts
But I'm not a democrat. Hell, even if I wanted to(which I don't), I couldn't be a Democrat, I'm Canadian. I can only be a New Democrat, and I don't even want that.

Quote:
Jealousy and envy directed at those who succeed is no way to go through life.


Oh, I'm not envious or jealous, I just get exasperated by peoples' obsessions with buying piles of stuff they don't need and still saying it's not enough.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#168 Apr 21 2011 at 12:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Varrus, Ignoring the hilarity of your assertion, it still doesn't change the fact that 200K is easily more then anyone needs.

Edited, Apr 21st 2011 1:22pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#169 Apr 21 2011 at 12:24 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,669 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Varrus, Ignoring the hilarity of your assertion, it still doesn't change the fact that 200K is easily more then anyone needs.

Edited, Apr 21st 2011 1:22pm by Xsarus
No it's not. I need far more.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#170varusword75, Posted: Apr 21 2011 at 12:29 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) drift,
#171 Apr 21 2011 at 12:40 PM Rating: Excellent
****
9,258 posts
Quote:
No you're exasperated that it's not you who's able to do that. Be honest with yourself. Who are you, or any politician for that matter, to say to what levels of wealth and success a person should be able to rise?


By god I am able to do that. I have saved so much money by not wasting it on useless things. One day, that amount will be large enough for me to take a Philosophy major at a University, or buy a more-than-adequate house, or put my future children through school, or travel the world. I don't need a fancy expensive car, I don't need a huge mansion, I don't need designer clothes. everything I need in life, can be bought for far less than I make.

I'm not trying to say that one shouldn't try to attain whatever level of success they want, I'm saying that success isn't measured by one's possessions, but by their achievements and by the strength of their character.

Quote:
I have a news flash most people aren't trying to be financially successful only to have that money stolen from them to support someone some politician thinks needs it more.


Wealth is not success, it can be a factor, but it is not success itself.

Quote:
It's thinking like this that is killing the free market. Why not do just the bare minimum if you're not going to be able to reap the fruits of your labour


But I do. I feel that I live a good and fruitful life. Sure, I don't have a BMW, but I walk, I see the wonders of the world as it is, I'm always looking towards the future and the better things to come, but I will always stop here and there just to enjoy what I have. Wealth, fame, power, who needs these things? I have life.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#172 Apr 21 2011 at 12:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,921 posts
Driftwood wrote:
Quote:
I wouldn't. Then again i've actually associated with multi-millionaires so I can tell the difference between a single guy making 100k and someone worth 10's of millions.

Do you really think a dual income household with 3 kids earning a total of 200k is rich? Really?


Far richer than the vast majority of people worldwide.
As you mentioned, far richer than the vast majority of America itself. Only 3% make more than that.

I went to the wedding of one such family last summer, actually. It was... disgusting, in a way. They rented out an entire country club building (appropriately called "The Mansion") for the entire afternoon and evening. The entire wedding had to have cost over $50,000. Champagne fountain? Check. Ice sculpture? Check.

My dad looked at my sister and said "I hope you don't expect anything like this. And if you want to elope, that's cool too." Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#173 Apr 21 2011 at 12:49 PM Rating: Good
****
9,258 posts
One more thing,

Quote:
And that's a big reason you're a democrat. You can't see yourself achieving this so you won't; and what's more you want to get back at anyone who does.


Indeed I can see myself achieving that and more. The question at hand is whether I need to in order to lead a rich life.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#174 Apr 21 2011 at 12:57 PM Rating: Good
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Driftwood wrote:
One more thing,
Quote:
And that's a big reason you're a democrat. You can't see yourself achieving this so you won't; and what's more you want to get back at anyone who does.

Indeed I can see myself achieving that and more. The question at hand is whether I need to in order to lead a rich life.

The problem with this post, and your entire approach to the questions in this thread, is that while you seem perfectly happy to have your views and perspectives imposed on the rest of the population, you'll be damned if you'll see the views and perspectives of others imposed or inflicted on you. It is liberal selfishness at its core. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, it is envy. You don't agree with the choices they make so it's ok to limit their ability to do so through confiscatory measures. You don't like the priorities they have so you don't mind a little punitive taxation to make it all right again. That's not liberty. It's understandable given you're a Canadian, but here there are still a great many who value having the option without being punished by jealous masses looking for a handout.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#175 Apr 21 2011 at 1:01 PM Rating: Decent
****
9,258 posts
Quote:
The problem with this post, and your entire approach to the questions in this thread, is that while you seem perfectly happy to have your views and perspectives imposed on the rest of the population, you'll be damned if you'll see the views and perspectives of others imposed or inflicted on you. It is liberal selfishness at its core. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, it is envy. You don't agree with the choices they make so it's ok to limit their ability to do so through confiscatory measures. You don't like the priorities they have so you don't mind a little punitive taxation to make it all right again. That's not liberty. It's understandable given you're a Canadian, but here there are still a great many who value having the option without being punished by jealous masses looking for a handout


The great flaw of being human is that you can't help but want to see the world be the way you want it to be. No one can honestly say that they don't disagree with people with different views. No one can honestly say that they want to see their views adopted as policy. We argue about these things. We all do it. I'm doing it. He's doing it. You're doing it. We are ALL doing it. And it can't be helped. Even the greatest thinkers and philosophers wouldn't be able say differently. The only thing that can be universal is the existence of a viewpoint. What that viewpoint is, is in the eye of the beholder.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#176 Apr 21 2011 at 1:07 PM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Driftwood wrote:
The great flaw of being human is that you can't help but want to see the world be the way you want it to be. No one can honestly say that they don't disagree with people with different views. No one can honestly say that they want to see their views adopted as policy. We argue about these things. We all do it. I'm doing it. He's doing it. You're doing it. We are ALL doing it. And it can't be helped. Even the greatest thinkers and philosophers wouldn't be able say differently. The only thing that can be universal is the existence of a viewpoint. What that viewpoint is, is in the eye of the beholder.

And here I thought the great flaw of being human was the frailty of the vessel.

I would never suggest that different viewpoints can't be expressed or even argued. I enjoy telling people they're too stupid to conscientiously breed. Since I am the beholder of your viewpoint you have just conceded the argument to me.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#177 Apr 21 2011 at 1:11 PM Rating: Decent
****
9,258 posts
Quote:
And here I thought the great flaw of being human was the frailty of the vessel.

I would never suggest that different viewpoints can't be expressed or even argued. I enjoy telling people they're too stupid to conscientiously breed. Since I am the beholder of your viewpoint you have just conceded the argument to me.


Have I? I am the beholder of your viewpoint, myself, so could it not be possible that you have just conceded the argument to me instead? Perhaps neither of us has won or lost.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#178 Apr 21 2011 at 1:14 PM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Driftwood wrote:
Have I? I am the beholder of your viewpoint, myself, so could it not be possible that you have just conceded the argument to me instead? Perhaps neither of us has won or lost.

Only in your screwed-up little Canadian mind, pal.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#179 Apr 21 2011 at 1:19 PM Rating: Default
****
9,258 posts
Quote:
Only in your screwed-up little Canadian mind, pal.


Just as you have only won in your "screwed-up little American mind", buddy.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#180 Apr 21 2011 at 1:49 PM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Driftwood wrote:
Quote:
Only in your screwed-up little Canadian mind, pal.


Just as you have only won in your "screwed-up little American mind", buddy.

I didn't win, you quit. Feels a little dirty, to be honest. You guys are worse at this than you are at hockey.

And Molsen sucks.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#181 Apr 21 2011 at 1:53 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,669 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Driftwood wrote:
Quote:
Only in your screwed-up little Canadian mind, pal.


Just as you have only won in your "screwed-up little American mind", buddy.

I didn't win, you quit. Feels a little dirty, to be honest. You guys are worse at this than you are at hockey.

And Molsen sucks.
Molson does suck, as does Driftwood. He's still better to have than a varus though.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#182 Apr 21 2011 at 1:54 PM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
Driftwood wrote:
Quote:
Only in your screwed-up little Canadian mind, pal.


Just as you have only won in your "screwed-up little American mind", buddy.

I didn't win, you quit. Feels a little dirty, to be honest. You guys are worse at this than you are at hockey.

And Molsen sucks.
Molson does suck, as does Driftwood. He's still better to have than a varus though.

At least we get to keep most of ours bottled up below the Mason-Dixon.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#183varusword75, Posted: Apr 21 2011 at 1:58 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Moe,
#184 Apr 21 2011 at 2:00 PM Rating: Decent
****
9,258 posts
Quote:
I didn't win, you quit.


Did I? From my point of view the argument wound down. You declared victory, but neither of us won or lost. We were talking, perhaps arguing about something, and then we weren't. And now we are again, but then we won't be, and maybe we will be again briefly, and then now, and so on. Is it really so clear as winning or losing in a discussion of any sort? Or do we just place more weight upon the concept of winning an argument than there really is?
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#185 Apr 21 2011 at 2:23 PM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Why do you keep referring to it as a win or lose scenario? Your low self esteem is troubling. Probably penis envy. It's understandable.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#186 Apr 21 2011 at 2:45 PM Rating: Default
****
9,258 posts
I wrote:
Is it really so clear as winning or losing in a discussion of any sort?
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#187 Apr 21 2011 at 2:54 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,369 posts
Driftwood wrote:
Quote:
Fact is liberals refuse to slash any of their social programs which amount to most of the US debt. The only program the liberals ever support cutting is the military.


Actually, I'd wager a bet that a majority of the US debt was caused by using deficit spending to pay for an unnecessary war in Afghanistan and an unnecessary war in Iraq.


What are you wagering? You'd lose. Badly. First off, if we're to use phrases like "using deficit spending", we should first start with a recognition that all dollars spent collectively either generate a deficit, or they don't. If we want to know what caused a deficit though, we should perhaps look at the spending deltas over time and see what things changed in terms of spending trends.

In 2000, the defense budget was $295B, discretionary domestic spending was $298B. In 2007 (the last year our debt was at a sustainable rate), defense spending was $547B while discretionary domestic spending was $458B. So defense spending outgrew domestic discretionary spending over that time period. Not surprising since we were fighting two wars. But remember, at that point the debt rate wasn't out of control. Thus, that spending increase wasn't what put us in this current debt crisis.

By 2010, those numbers had changed. Defense spending increased to $689B, while domestic spending increased to $614B. So in the three years when we went from sustainable debt to debt crisis, defense spending increased by $142B/year, while domestic spending increased by $158B. So discretionary domestic spending accounts for more of the increase in spending during the time when the debt became unsustainable. I'm not sure how you can argue that the majority was caused by wars.


And that's only the discretionary domestic spending btw. That's the smallest part of the problem. Social Security increased by $120B during those three years, Medicare increased by about $85B, Medicaid increased by about $80B, and Income Security (welfare essentially) increased by about $235B. So that's about $510B dollars in increased spending over a three year period. Add that to the modest discretionary domestic spending increase and the total comes in around $660B/year in increases spending. Now that $142B/year increase in defense doesn't look so huge, does it?


And btw, some of those numbers are more massive when you look at the relative increase. Social Security and Medicare increases were pretty much on their normal curve cost wise. But medicaid? That $80B increase was about a 50% jump in total cost (it went from $190B to $272B). Income Security increased by 110% (from $203B to $437B), an absolutely massive increase.


Let's look at the deltas though. We went from a $160B deficit in 2007 to a $1.2T deficit in 2010. So that's a $1040B difference. Revenue dropped by $400B during that time, so that leaves us with $640B in spending increases left to explain the increased deficit. Hmmm... That's almost exactly the spending increases we've seen. Now, if we subtract the Social Security and Medicare increases (because those increases were not super unusual), that puts the "domestic" spending increases at about $500B. Add in the $140B in military expense increases and we've pretty much explained the whole deficit delta.


Here's the thing though. We could exclude any of a number of dollar spending increases over that time period as "normal" spending increases (just as I did above with SS and Medicare). Coupled with a shrinking/sluggish economic growth, those numbers are problematic but don't necessarily represent "new spending increases". Where we really see the increase is in medicaid (which was never supposed to be more than a minor offshoot to medicare btw), and income security. The larger point is that you are absolutely 100% wrong to suggest that more than a very small factor to our current debt crisis is because of military spending.



It's just plain not true. It has never been true. Repeating it over and over wont make it any more true. Yet it's amazing how many people just repeat this talking point verbatim without ever bothering to check the facts themselves and in some cases even after they've had the facts shoved right in their faces and the false claim revealed for what it is. Please stop lying about this. I've probably heard this same claim made 7 or 8 times on this forum in just the last week or so. It is just not true.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#188 Apr 21 2011 at 2:57 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,369 posts
Driftwood wrote:
Far richer than the vast majority of people worldwide. The average household income for a family in the US is approximately $46000. Considering that I was brought up in a household with half that, I think that 200k is far, far more than anyone actually needs.


How much you earn should have nothing to do with how much you need.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#189 Apr 21 2011 at 3:05 PM Rating: Decent
****
9,258 posts
Quote:
How much you earn should have nothing to do with how much you need.


Exactly. If it doesn't, why do we act like we need to possess that kind of wealth? Why do we insist, as a society, that no matter what we already have, that we need more?
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#190varusword75, Posted: Apr 21 2011 at 3:15 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) drift,
#191 Apr 21 2011 at 3:38 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,369 posts
Driftwood wrote:
Quote:
How much you earn should have nothing to do with how much you need.


Exactly. If it doesn't, why do we act like we need to possess that kind of wealth? Why do we insist, as a society, that no matter what we already have, that we need more?


Because you don't really know what wealth is. Wealth is not a measure of what you "have", but what you've given to others and for which you have not yet received anything in return. Dollars are "IOUs" for products and services provided for others. When you take away the "wealth", you don't hurt the wealthy that much (unless you take all of it of course, but the economy would collapse long before that point). You hurt the people the wealthy provide goods and services to in return for that wealth.

Once you understand this concept, you'll understand that the goal of "tax the rich" is really counter productive.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#192 Apr 21 2011 at 4:29 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,831 posts
varusword75 wrote:
No you're exasperated that it's not you who's able to do that. Be honest with yourself. Who are you, or any politician for that matter, to say to what levels of wealth and success a person should be able to rise?

And who are you to say that amassing wealth is the endgame? Are you really trying to dictate that anyone worth less than a mil isn't really happy? For someone who claims to be a Renaissance Man you sure have an interest in useless material bullsh[i][/u]it.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#193 Apr 21 2011 at 4:44 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,831 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Moe,

Quote:
At least we get to keep most of ours bottled up below the Mason-Dixon.


Now if we could only keep all the d*mn yankees from migrating south. Of course if I lived up north i'd be trying to get the h*ll out as well.

Hell no. Anyone who's too much of a pussy to deal with a bit of weather can get the hell out.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#194 Apr 21 2011 at 4:46 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,831 posts
varusword75 wrote:
And what business is it of yours how much stuff someone else has?


Exactly. I'm glad you agree with us.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#195 Apr 21 2011 at 9:48 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Moe,

Quote:
At least we get to keep most of ours bottled up below the Mason-Dixon.


Now if we could only keep all the d*mn yankees from migrating south. Of course if I lived up north i'd be trying to get the h*ll out as well.
Fine, but your broke-ass states aren't getting our federal tax dollars either. It's the liberals that subsidize the sh*tty conservative states.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#196 Apr 21 2011 at 10:03 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,460 posts
Quote:
That $80B increase was about a 50% jump in total cost (it went from $190B to $272B)


80is not 50% of 190. It is 42% which is still large but not about 50, its really more about 40. But you can thank Mr. Bush and his crack team of retards for not addressing economic issues which were brought up in 2006, 2 years before the sh*tstorm, that cost a lot of people their jobs, their health coverage and forced a migration to government assisted health services.

I find it funny as hell that you and a lot of people put Obama on the hot seat when he inherited the most @#%^ed up economy the states has seen since the 30's. Its gotten better, be it because of Obamas economic policies, or natural correction remains to be seen, but one things for sure, the mandatory spending increases, are hardly his fault, that is a result of bad economic choices pre 2008, and the resulting collapse of 90% of the economic powers in the world.

Edited, Apr 22nd 2011 12:03am by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. @#%^ OFF YOU. @#%^ YOUR BULLsh*t SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS @#%^ING sh*tTY BINARY ASS. ALL DAY LONG.

#197 Apr 21 2011 at 11:43 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
200k a year isn't as much as you think for a dual income house with 3 children. Again just pitting the producers against the non-producers. Unfortunately there are nearly as many non-producers as there are producers and the non-producers (which are primarily democrats) have no intention of becoming producers as long as they can use the federal govn to steal from the producers to support their lives.


That's funny considering that the redistribution of wealth at the federal to state level trends heavily towards blue states paying for red states.

Quote:

The problem with this post, and your entire approach to the questions in this thread, is that while you seem perfectly happy to have your views and perspectives imposed on the rest of the population, you'll be damned if you'll see the views and perspectives of others imposed or inflicted on you. It is liberal selfishness at its core. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, it is envy. You don't agree with the choices they make so it's ok to limit their ability to do so through confiscatory measures. You don't like the priorities they have so you don't mind a little punitive taxation to make it all right again. That's not liberty. It's understandable given you're a Canadian, but here there are still a great many who value having the option without being punished by jealous masses looking for a handout.


This is such a naive sense of fairness and liberty that I wouldn't even know where to start, but in the interest of brevity, liberty is not the end-all, be-all. Government is about promoting what is best for all of the people, not just those with the most means, and people with an ecological understanding of the world unanimously accept that wealth, as a system of measurement that is entirely relative, is not "stolen" by the government through taxation, but rather is invested in the best interest of the nation in ways that the taxed individuals benefit from both directly and indirectly.

I mean, if nothing else, you should understand Jesus' point of view that all money belongs to the government that prints it, and they can take however much of it they want because they're the ones who give it. If you want to avoid taxation, you could always see how far you get on bartering.

____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#198 Apr 22 2011 at 6:32 AM Rating: Good
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,245 posts
Kachi wrote:
This is such a naive sense of fairness and liberty that I wouldn't even know where to start,

The safest place for you to start any response to something I write is stepping away from the keyboard, but since you insist...

Kachi wrote:
liberty is not the end-all, be-all. Government is about promoting what is best for all of the people, not just those with the most means

I couldn't agree more.
Kachi wrote:
people with an ecological understanding of the world unanimously accept that wealth, as a system of measurement that is entirely relative, is not "stolen" by the government through taxation, but rather is invested in the best interest of the nation in ways that the taxed individuals benefit from both directly and indirectly

That's completely false under a political system based on popular vote. Under a popular vote system government spends (definitely not invests) for a political return.
Kachi wrote:
I mean, if nothing else, you should understand Jesus' point of view that all money belongs to the government that prints it, and they can take however much of it they want because they're the ones who give it. If you want to avoid taxation, you could always see how far you get on bartering.

Your limited, and flawed, grasp of Christian tradition is amusing. Also, in the United Stated, barter is taxable as income.

____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#199varusword75, Posted: Apr 22 2011 at 10:45 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) bsphil,
#200 Apr 22 2011 at 10:54 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
varusword75 wrote:
good little goose-stepping kool-aid drinking...




It takes chrome plated balls to pull this one off.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#201 Apr 22 2011 at 1:21 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
varusword75 wrote:
glennbeck.com
Ahahahaha, you're showing yourself. You used to be better at hiding the fact that you're a deep-cover liberal impersonating a conservative to discredit it from within, but now you're just getting lazy.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 54 All times are in CDT
Aethien, feelz, Kavekk, paulsol, Technogeek, Anonymous Guests (49)