Cognitive dissonance | 22 comments (22 topical, 0 hidden)
Government employees (none / 2)

We have to agree with Hugh on this one. Government employees are just being selfish. Soldiers are just being selfish. Postmen are just being selfish. Educators are just being selfish. Policemen are just being selfish. Correction officers are just being selfish. Firemen are just being selfish. In fact, if one wishes to serve their community, it should only count as "service" if they volunteer their time for free and should work until they day they die with no retirement benefits.

Something tells me Hugh has never served his country. If he had, he would realize that even if you got promoted to the tippy-top of the federal totem-pole, you could still only earn $400,000k a year (VA doctors, including retention, performance and location incentives). Compare that to the private sector where there literally is no ceiling. In addition, consider that while the health care benefits one receives by being employed by the government, we're trying to extend those benefits to the private sector and you are the ones working against it. That makes you part of the problem that you are complaining about. Dumbass.

Hugh, I must insist that you actually address the facts Robrob provided instead of just offering your own talking points. Otherwise I'm just going to be forced to continue ass-fucking you with my throbbing hard reality. And no, I don't pull out.

"Terrorism is the war for the poor and powerless. War is the terrorism for the rich and powerful."

by JamesStevensDigArt on 07/30/2010 06:33:21 AM EST

Sorry for my attitude. (none / 2)

Please, let me apologize. It's been a difficult transition from interacting with soldiers to interacting with civilians. I have been working hard to curb my language habits in the "real world" and have been largely successful, but tend to use the internet as a release. Unfortunately some of the members here have undeservingly been on the receiving end of my attitude and that isn't fair.

I may not agree with you, and I may have the right to say what I want how I want, but in the spirit of civil discourse I really should be more considerate. I apologize.

"Terrorism is the war for the poor and powerless. War is the terrorism for the rich and powerful."

by JamesStevensDigArt on 07/30/2010 06:51:59 AM EST

[ Parent ]
He HASN'T served (none / 1)
Don't apologize when you're right. In fact, you should un-apologize.

by OneHitKill on 07/30/2010 10:25:56 AM EST

[ Parent ]
OHK is right. (none / 0)

In all my years here that is the best answer to one of Kenny's posts I have ever seen.

He should be apologizing to you if anything. 

BTW OHK, is un-apologize an actual word?

by z1p101 on 07/30/2010 08:27:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I would also accept de-pologize (none / 0)
It is if I say it is. Because I'm an English teacher.

by OneHitKill on 08/01/2010 08:37:24 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Please, allow me to retort. (none / 1)

"James, you haven't been around the forum long enough to be familiar with the long running debate between Robrob and HughTX on the subject of income taxes."

I haven't been around TYT that long. This is true. But this isn't my first time in a forum and I know what it looks like when someone doesn't respond to the points made in a post. You are a shining example of that sort of behavior. 

"Terrorism is the war for the poor and powerless. War is the terrorism for the rich and powerful."

by JamesStevensDigArt on 07/31/2010 10:29:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Two fold dodging (none / 2)

When I confront you regarding your avoidance of the points he made, your response is to avoid addressing the topic of your avoidance.

You may be on course to set a record in compound topic-dodging.

"Terrorism is the war for the poor and powerless. War is the terrorism for the rich and powerful."

by JamesStevensDigArt on 07/31/2010 11:51:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Its so sad (none / 0)
It's so sad that people like you are incapable of realizing that life doesn't always boil down to a black vs white issue. Despite the overwhelming complexity of the economy, you want to boil it down to a comical and ridiculous "us vs them" that's less advanced than a 9th grade economics class.

by ninespine on 08/01/2010 12:05:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Producers? (none / 1)

What's all this talk about "producers"? Who are these producers and who is trying to take their earnings? Democrats are talking about the top wealthiest people in the country.

You can argue principle all you want "It's their money, after all!" but from a practical standpoint, they could be doing a lot more for for the rest of us without even feeling it.

How many billionaires exist in America? How many of them have done enough work to warrant earning a billion dollars? None of them. They are examples of capitalism gone awry. Great for them, bad for everybody else.

Make no mistake. Capitalism has just as many problems as communism. That's why we have to blend them together and adjust that blend according to the current scenario.

But people like you don't get that. You think that an answer has to be an extreme in either direction. Hardcore libs think communism is the answer. It isn't. Hardcore cons think capitalism is the answer. It isn't. Furthermore, the answer is not static. It changes as the times change. As people change. As markets change.

But you don't give a fuck about any of that. You're an ideologue. you argue based on the principles of that ideology instead of the facts.

"Terrorism is the war for the poor and powerless. War is the terrorism for the rich and powerful."

by JamesStevensDigArt on 08/01/2010 03:56:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Betting on investment (none / 0)

You're betting on the notion that all these "producers" are going to invest their profits back into the economy when that's just not the case. It's the difference between relying on the good will of those individuals to do the right thing instead of taking the safe route of taxing them and investing it through public programs. If Joe thinks that buying 10 more trucks is going to be good for his profits, he'll do it. But in a time of economic uncertainty, he's going to be reluctant to do so, and that's when we need his investment the most.

Interesting though, that you would cite Warren Buffet, one of the most outspoken billionaires in favor of taxing the wealthy.

"Terrorism is the war for the poor and powerless. War is the terrorism for the rich and powerful."

by JamesStevensDigArt on 08/01/2010 11:09:10 PM EST

[ Parent ]
You're spitting sauce, and it's weak. (none / 0)

"Producers must invest their profits back into the economy if they want to expand operations. In business, you're either growing or withering. Its very similar to nurturing a plant."

Yeah, if they want to grow their business. If they just want to sustain their business, they don't grow it. That doesn't mean the business withers, as you put it. Samuel Adams (the beer) is a good example of a business model which remains small intentionally.

Public programs are not "drains" on anything except exceptionally high profits. And I'm fine with that.

"Joe, and millions of other producers are reluctant to invest in growth because they have no faith in Obommunism. That's why the economy is mired in recession."

The recession that started under Bush in 2002, was only temporarily masked by a wartime economy and the housing bubble, and eventually went into a deep recession still under Bush. You can make the argument that Obama hasn't fixed the economy, but don't act like the recession started because of "Obommunism". In fact, I'll argue right back that "Obommunism" hasn't even been enacted yet because it keeps getting filibustered and watered down in Congress. For all the conservative talk about the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail, no one has given Obama's would-be policies the chance to succeed or fail. We don't know yet. The biggest action Obama has taken was the bailout, but that also didn't start under Obama. That $700b bailout was the Bush administration's "Emergency Economic Stability Act of 2008." 

Remember? Do you remember? Do you? Are you that dumb or just that crooked?

"Terrorism is the war for the poor and powerless. War is the terrorism for the rich and powerful."

by JamesStevensDigArt on 08/02/2010 12:56:26 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Strange (none / 0)
You seem to have all the time in the world to argue about things other than the subject. How about explaining why wingnuts continue to think we are "overtaxed" when the actual facts are we are untertaxed on almost any scale and certainly for "wartime."

"No, you are a paid blogger assigned to counter anyone that posts something negative about the government or Obama." by Mcamelyne II on 05/17/2011

by Robrob on 08/04/2010 10:15:15 AM EST

[ Parent ]
his crain style beats your judo (none / 1)
"I used logical judo to flip the conversation to Democrat entitlement and lust for the hard-earned income of more worthy men."

and james flipped your logic on its head by destroying it. even though he appologized for his attitude (which he shouldn't have), he was right when he pointed out that government employees include fire, police, sanitation, education, correction officers, postal workers, and soldiers, not just politicians. I know you scoffed at that answer, but it doesn't make it any less true.

would you really consider someone like mitch mcconnel more worthy of receiving money than a soldier or even the family of a dead soldier?

hugh, stop pretending you're this stupid. you've came up with reasonable statements before. no ones buying it.

" And while I'm not much of a writer, and I'm certainly not very smart, for some reason people like to read what I write."- Hugh Everett

by Mutt1126 on 08/01/2010 04:05:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]
its typical kenny troll (none / 0)
hes trying to be condescending  by saying he has trolled here a long time and you are a newbie.

judging by your post you know enough lol


by Chinese Democracy on 08/01/2010 12:08:29 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Cognitive dissonance | 22 comments (22 topical, 0 hidden)