Luminous
non-existential luminary
um... greed. Our country runs on it.Doesn't "nationalized healthcare" work in Canada???
Just a question...tis all...
And if it does...then what's the beef?
:sarcastic: without selfishness no one would survive.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why do Liberals hate the rich and powerful?
- Thread starter Reverend Rick
- Start date
:sarcastic: without selfishness no one would survive.
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
I might be wrong, but I seem to remember that you were in the group of members that defended the billions of dollars that the oil companies got in tax breaks, ostensibly for "research and development".
McBell
Unbound
But didn't all that "research and development" create tons and tons and tons of jobs....?
The Voice of Reason
Doctor of Thinkology
Almost.
jacobweymouth
Active Member
Because they're self-hating.
J Bryson
Well-Known Member
There are liberals who hate the rich and powerful. There are also liberals like me who respect those who have gained their wealth through hard work, and while understanding of the desire to keep all of that which one has earned, also believe that a certain level of social welfare (short of a purely socialistic system) provides for domestic security and minimizes the temptations posed by radical politics like those seen in Weimar Germany (breeding ground for the Nazis), and Revolution-era Russia.
There are conservatives who disdain poor people. There are also conservatives who generously give to various charities in the hopes that they will effectively and efficiently assist those in need, and provide them with the tools that they need in order to lift themselves up without becoming reliant on government handouts, or giving in to the temptations of a sense of unearned entitlement.
There are conservatives who disdain poor people. There are also conservatives who generously give to various charities in the hopes that they will effectively and efficiently assist those in need, and provide them with the tools that they need in order to lift themselves up without becoming reliant on government handouts, or giving in to the temptations of a sense of unearned entitlement.
Luminous
non-existential luminary
:sarcastic: Yeah, i bet.
Last edited:
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
Conservatives believe in a social responsibility to help the poor as well but through a different system.
Luminous
non-existential luminary
Yeah, a system that is unchecked. An invisible/hope system. that might workout, but probably wont; people are inherently selfish because such people would certainly be more successful. "social responsibility"? how is that supposed to be enforced if not by the laws which govern the punishments/rewards for doing certain acts? I guess boycotting those who don't 'help the poor'. but people are usually unwilling to waste energy with such trivial persuits. It is far easier and efficient to have our representatives in office make laws and execute them.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
I assume you meant "execute the laws", but I got a good laugh out of another interpretation.
Luminous
non-existential luminary
:biglaugh:: ROTLMAO!I assume you meant "execute the laws", but I got a good laugh out of another interpretation.
Alceste
Vagabond
I hear this all the time, but the charity sector is ineffective for everything but the most photogenic, heart-string pulling causes. I want to be sure my support is targeted where it is genuinely needed. Without assurances my money isn't going to where it can do the most good for society, I wouldn't bother donating. These assurances come from research and oversight on a scale charities generally can't produce.
Unicef and the UN Children's fund, for example, dug tens of thousands of wells in India in the 80s without testing for water safety. The water these wells produce contains 10 times the maximum fluoride content deemed "safe" by the WHO. The result of this voluntary generosity is tens of millions of people afflicted by the symptoms of fluoride poisoning, which include crippling bone deformities and weaknesses, anaemia, stiff joints, kidney failure, muscle degeneration and cancer.
I was helping Unicef out in the 80s - I had a little box around my neck when I went out Trick or Treating.
I know it's fashionable to hate the government on principle in the US, but the fact is they do a much better job than the voluntary or private sector when it comes to public safety issues and the general betterment of society. In fact, governments are generally obsessed with public safety issues and the general betterment of society. That's what governments are for. A fiasco like the Unicef failure in India can and does ruin political parties and governments. Unicef can just abandon the "clean water" cause and jump to something like "starving kids" and nobody will notice the millions of cripples they've left in their wake.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Well, here's how I see it: I've been working full time for the past 15 years. All that time I've been paying into Social Security and counting on those funds as part of my retirement plan. Now, I am seriously doubting that I ever see a penny of that money. That means, simply, that SOMEONE ELSE got that money that I worked so hard to earn. I don't know who got it or where it went, but one thing's for sure - I don't have it anymore and I'm not likely to ever see it again.
I also haven't gotten a tax refund in 15 years. In fact, I pay thousands on April 15 every year IN ADDITION TO the taxes that I've already paid (and I pay extra each pay period too - to offset what I will owe at the end of the year).
I'm not really complaining about the tax bracket though. We live comfortably - we drive 3 or 4 year old vehicles, shop at Dillards, go on a one week family vacation to the beach or something similar each year, and go out to eat several nights a week. Our house is nice (though definitely not a luxury home), but we have a mortgage, two car payments, and two credit card payments. If one of us lost our job, we would definitely be hurting in about 6 weeks.
So in other words, I would NOT call our family wealthy. But Obama would - we won't be getting any tax breaks that I know of in this "stimulus" plan. And that tells me that - hey, if we're not on the receiving end, we must be on the CONTRIBUTING end. AND DAMN IT MY TAXES ARE HIGH ENOUGH.
I'm sorry - I just don't see the justice. I work my butt off every day - and so does my husband. We live in a nice house but we've worked our tails off to make it nice. Why would someone begrudge us the comfort level that we've worked so hard to achieve - or think that it's right to force us to contribute EVEN MORE of our hard earned money than we already do? We didn't always have these things - we started off at the bottom and worked our way up - no inheritances, no handouts, no lawsuit settlements - nothing but hard work on both our parts.
I give to charity very regularly ON MY OWN - about ten percent of my income. When I was poor, I still gave ten percent of my income to charity. What goes around comes around is my philosophy.
When I was poor, the only handout I ever got from the federal government was some free cheese.
I also haven't gotten a tax refund in 15 years. In fact, I pay thousands on April 15 every year IN ADDITION TO the taxes that I've already paid (and I pay extra each pay period too - to offset what I will owe at the end of the year).
I'm not really complaining about the tax bracket though. We live comfortably - we drive 3 or 4 year old vehicles, shop at Dillards, go on a one week family vacation to the beach or something similar each year, and go out to eat several nights a week. Our house is nice (though definitely not a luxury home), but we have a mortgage, two car payments, and two credit card payments. If one of us lost our job, we would definitely be hurting in about 6 weeks.
So in other words, I would NOT call our family wealthy. But Obama would - we won't be getting any tax breaks that I know of in this "stimulus" plan. And that tells me that - hey, if we're not on the receiving end, we must be on the CONTRIBUTING end. AND DAMN IT MY TAXES ARE HIGH ENOUGH.
I'm sorry - I just don't see the justice. I work my butt off every day - and so does my husband. We live in a nice house but we've worked our tails off to make it nice. Why would someone begrudge us the comfort level that we've worked so hard to achieve - or think that it's right to force us to contribute EVEN MORE of our hard earned money than we already do? We didn't always have these things - we started off at the bottom and worked our way up - no inheritances, no handouts, no lawsuit settlements - nothing but hard work on both our parts.
I give to charity very regularly ON MY OWN - about ten percent of my income. When I was poor, I still gave ten percent of my income to charity. What goes around comes around is my philosophy.
When I was poor, the only handout I ever got from the federal government was some free cheese.
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
EXACTLY! :clap Your post mirrors my own thoughts, exactly.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
All this tells me is that we need to reform some things, including Social Security.
Would he? If you make that much, then I have to wonder why you'd be hurting within 6 weeks of losing a job. Together, my wife and I make less than a third of what Obama would consider wealthy, and I've been out of a job (well, working part time at Petco) for 4 weeks now, and we're doing OK. Sure, we don't have kids, but we're not even close to getting near that tax bracket either.
You missed the middle portion that neither give more nor receive more. It's not just two options, it's three.
No on begrudges you that. No one wants you to have to change your lifestyle. That's why I question whether you'd even be hurt by the higher taxes on "wealthy people". Either you're living beyond your means or you wouldn't have to pay more taxes.
That's great. Let's just make it anarchy. No need for government at all. Everyone, just pick the charity you like and give them all of your tax dollars. That should work out well. Let me know, I'll be in France.
Now we get down to it. There seems to be some bitterness there. "I didn't get anything, so why should anyone else?" With that attitude nothing will ever get accomplished. I'm sorry you got a raw deal, but that doesn't mean everyone has to.
J Bryson
Well-Known Member
Abortions for some, tiny American flags for others!
Alceste
Vagabond
You don't know where it went??? Are you kidding me??? Have you been living under a rock or something? War is expensive. Compared to killing the poor in the Middle East, assisting the poor to subsist at home is a bargain.
blackout
Violet.
Originally Posted by Kathryn
Well, here's how I see it: I've been working full time for the past 15 years. All that time I've been paying into Social Security and counting on those funds as part of my retirement plan. Now, I am seriously doubting that I ever see a penny of that money. That means, simply, that SOMEONE ELSE got that money that I worked so hard to earn. I don't know who got it or where it went, but one thing's for sure - I don't have it anymore and I'm not likely to ever see it again.
Don't worry. None of us lives here that long anyway...
and you can't take it with you.....
In the grande scheme of things... it won't matter a hoot.