Proof the Military Justice System Works Properly...

[Gene Frenkle]

I wasn't referring to the botched copy/paste. What have you and I argued over mainly? I am from the deep south if that helps.

Oh, right...my hatred of rednecks. I got a little carried away with that during the later part of the Bush years and just after he left office. In retrospect, I don't really think I hate rednecks, but rather ignorance and any philosophy which doesn't value logic, reason and education. "Low information voters" were the easiest target at the time. I'm certainly far from perfect.

 

It reminds me how I didn't like Canadians for a while after Flutie left and they all seemed to start wearing Flutie Chargers jerseys to every Bills home game. Got over that one too, eventually.

[Gene Frenkle]

Nah, the fact that you have trouble breaking free of preconceived notions means you have trouble breaking free of preconceived notions.

Shiit man, who doesn't?

[DC Tom]

Shiit man, who doesn't?

 

Not me, I don't have preconceived notions.

[RI Bills Fan]

Not me, I don't have preconceived notions.

 

I've got a few I can spare.

 

PM me, I'll give you a real good deal...

[IDBillzFan]

Many, many philosophically self-centered posts?

 

What's the verdict on $200K per year? Does earning in the top 3% in the US and .01% in the world make one rich?

You think I post a lot of self-centered stuff? Okay, whatever. I'll try to be more like Gene and just post stuff that makes no sense at all.

 

So back to your typically liberal question: Does earning in the top 01% in the world make one rich?

 

If it does, then earning $175K/yr must make you rich because you'd be in the top .17% in the world. I mean, that's pretty impressive.

 

And if it does, then earning $165K/ must make you rich too, since you're at .23%.

 

And if it does, then earning $150K/year must make you rich, since you still only at .33%. Man, that's a lot of rich people.

 

In fact, let's just agree that the top 1% of the wage earners in the world -- that's right, people who earn more than 99% of the rest of the world -- must be the rich ones, okay? That seems fair. Who could argue with that, right?

 

Our magic number? A whopping, wealthy, greedy $47,500 a year. Yes, if you earn this amazing amount of money, you earn more money than 99% of the rest of the world. Based on your perception of things, how can that NOT be considrered rich.

 

See how easy it is to slide the number down? Of course you don't.

[DC Tom]

You think I post a lot of self-centered stuff? Okay, whatever. I'll try to be more like Gene and just post stuff that makes no sense at all.

 

So back to your typically liberal question: Does earning in the top 01% in the world make one rich?

 

If it does, then earning $175K/yr must make you rich because you'd be in the top .17% in the world. I mean, that's pretty impressive.

 

And if it does, then earning $165K/ must make you rich too, since you're at .23%.

 

And if it does, then earning $150K/year must make you rich, since you still only at .33%. Man, that's a lot of rich people.

 

In fact, let's just agree that the top 1% of the wage earners in the world -- that's right, people who earn more than 99% of the rest of the world -- must be the rich ones, okay? That seems fair. Who could argue with that, right?

 

Our magic number? A whopping, wealthy, greedy $47,500 a year. Yes, if you earn this amazing amount of money, you earn more money than 99% of the rest of the world. Based on your perception of things, how can that NOT be considrered rich.

 

See how easy it is to slide the number down? Of course you don't.

 

It's all about you, isn't it?

[OCinBuffalo]

You think I post a lot of self-centered stuff? Okay, whatever. I'll try to be more like Gene and just post stuff that makes no sense at all.

 

So back to your typically liberal question: Does earning in the top 01% in the world make one rich?

 

If it does, then earning $175K/yr must make you rich because you'd be in the top .17% in the world. I mean, that's pretty impressive.

 

And if it does, then earning $165K/ must make you rich too, since you're at .23%.

 

And if it does, then earning $150K/year must make you rich, since you still only at .33%. Man, that's a lot of rich people.

 

In fact, let's just agree that the top 1% of the wage earners in the world -- that's right, people who earn more than 99% of the rest of the world -- must be the rich ones, okay? That seems fair. Who could argue with that, right?

 

Our magic number? A whopping, wealthy, greedy $47,500 a year. Yes, if you earn this amazing amount of money, you earn more money than 99% of the rest of the world. Based on your perception of things, how can that NOT be considrered rich.

 

See how easy it is to slide the number down? Of course you don't.

Hey, no reply.

 

No reply at all. There's no reply at all, no reply at all.

 

Oooooh! Ooooh!

 

No reply at all.

[Gene Frenkle]

You think I post a lot of self-centered stuff? Okay, whatever. I'll try to be more like Gene and just post stuff that makes no sense at all.

 

So back to your typically liberal question: Does earning in the top 01% in the world make one rich?

 

If it does, then earning $175K/yr must make you rich because you'd be in the top .17% in the world. I mean, that's pretty impressive.

 

And if it does, then earning $165K/ must make you rich too, since you're at .23%.

 

And if it does, then earning $150K/year must make you rich, since you still only at .33%. Man, that's a lot of rich people.

 

In fact, let's just agree that the top 1% of the wage earners in the world -- that's right, people who earn more than 99% of the rest of the world -- must be the rich ones, okay? That seems fair. Who could argue with that, right?

 

Our magic number? A whopping, wealthy, greedy $47,500 a year. Yes, if you earn this amazing amount of money, you earn more money than 99% of the rest of the world. Based on your perception of things, how can that NOT be considrered rich.

 

See how easy it is to slide the number down? Of course you don't.

First, I'm not saying you're a self-centered person in the sense you're probably thinking of. I'm saying, like I have before, that the Conservative philosophy that you whole-heartedly subscribe to is a selfish, self-centered philosophy. It's not intended as a personal attack on your character.

 

Second, forget the rest of the world (I'm sure it will be difficult for you )...

Does earning in the top 2.67% in the USA (the richest country in the world) make one rich?

[Gene Frenkle]

Hey, no reply.

 

No reply at all. There's no reply at all, no reply at all.

 

Oooooh! Ooooh!

 

No reply at all.

Christ on a cross, don't you think some people might have actual work to do once in a while?

 

Isn't there a project that's going unmanaged right now?

[IDBillzFan]

First, I'm not saying you're a self-centered person in the sense you're probably thinking of. I'm saying, like I have before, that the Conservative philosophy that you whole-heartedly subscribe to is a selfish, self-centered philosophy. It's not intended as a personal attack on your character.

 

Second, forget the rest of the world (I'm sure it will be difficult for you )...

Does earning in the top 2.67% in the USA (the richest country in the world) make one rich?

I understand what you mean by self-centered. It's one of the biggest liberal talking points: conservatives don't care about other people...they only care about themselves. Which is a great argument, if only it were accurate.

 

As regards to your second question, the answer is no, all people who earn $200,000/year are not rich.

[Magox]

I'm saying, like I have before, that the Conservative philosophy that you whole-heartedly subscribe to is a selfish, self-centered philosophy.

Gene likes the Kool Aid, he really really does.

[Gene Frenkle]

I understand what you mean by self-centered. It's one of the biggest liberal talking points: conservatives don't care about other people...they only care about themselves. Which is a great argument, if only it were accurate.

 

As regards to your second question, the answer is no, all people who earn $200,000/year are not rich.

Gene likes the Kool Aid, he really really does.

LABillz, I appreciate your opinion, but your perspective is warped.

 

Please enlighten me as to how it's not a selfish philosophy.

[Magox]

LABillz, I appreciate your opinion, but your perspective is warped.

 

Please enlighten me as to how it's not a selfish philosophy.

No, you tell me how in your view that conservatism is a "selfish philosophy".

 

I'm dying to hear this.

[IDBillzFan]

No, you tell me how in your view that conservatism is a "selfish philosophy".

 

I'm dying to hear this.

Exactly. I'm not the one who thinks it's selfish, so trying to explain why it's not selfish is ridiculous. How can I defend something I don't think exists.

 

So tell us Gene...why is being a conservative the same as being selfish?

[DC Tom]

LABillz, I appreciate your opinion, but your perspective is warped.

 

Please enlighten me as to how it's not a selfish philosophy.

 

Please define the philosophy.

[Gene Frenkle]

Please define the philosophy.

In this context:

 

A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory.

A system of values by which one lives.

 

 

Now you can tell me why I'm wrong for using the term philosophy.

[Gene Frenkle]

So tell us Gene...why is being a conservative the same as being selfish?

Because it's all about keeping what's MINE, MINE, MINE! (and f the rest of em!)

 

I've observed that neither my 4 year old and my 2 year old have not yet grown out of being "conservatives" yet.

[DC Tom]

In this context:

 

A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory.

A system of values by which one lives.

 

 

Now you can tell me why I'm wrong for using the term philosophy.

 

Not "Please define philosophy." Please define THE philosophy. "The" referring to "conservative", of course.

 

Ya friggin' hockey puck.

[Magox]

Because it's all about keeping what's MINE, MINE, MINE! (and f the rest of em!)

 

I've observed that neither my 4 year old and my 2 year old have not yet grown out of being "conservatives" yet.

So what you're really saying is that those who make "more" money, should shoulder the load EVEN more than they already are. Riiiiiiiight!!!

 

Nevermind the fact that over 50% of the public aren't paying income taxes, and that the top 5% are paying 61% of total income tax revenues, or even better yet, the 50% that ARE paying incomes taxes, account for over 97% of total income tax receipts. But I get it, this in your view is "MINE, MINE, MINE, Selfish Conservativism philosophy"

 

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

 

Funny how facts can make people's statements look awfully foolish.

 

[Gene Frenkle]

Not "Please define philosophy." Please define THE philosophy. "The" referring to "conservative", of course.

 

Ya friggin' hockey puck.

I guess I'm used to you picking on small stuff.

 

I'll stick with the MINE MINE MINE definition.