Meathead Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 i really dont think those that have a lot and think they should be able to keep even more have any guilt about it. they have essentially substituted money for their god image so it takes on a sort of religious value to them think about it: money becomes how they value themselves, how they set their parameters, how they make judgments, how they make sense of and measure the world. thats usually a function of a spiritual center, but of course when its money it cant help but be completely dysfunctional. youve seen the studies about how the rich tend to be far less empathetic, thats bc they have trained their minds to shut out the unfairness of the disparity by truly believing that they are special - the same thing that usually plagues most religious zealotry thats why you see so many of these poor idiots supporting more money flowing to the rich even if it hurts them in the process, bc they see themselves in the same manner despite not actually having the object of their worship. they side with the rich because those people do have what they view as their savior. its pretty sick and once its got a hold of you its very difficult to shake from from. thats what jesus meant by that whole 'camel thru the eye of the needle' allegory - hes not saying that the rich are barred from salvation per se, hes saying that the poisoning of the mind that the worship of money brings is the real barrier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 i really dont think those that have a lot and think they should be able to keep even more have any guilt about it. they have essentially substituted money for their god image so it takes on a sort of religious value to them think about it: money becomes how they value themselves, how they set their parameters, how they make judgments, how they make sense of and measure the world. thats usually a function of a spiritual center, but of course when its money it cant help but be completely dysfunctional. youve seen the studies about how the rich tend to be far less empathetic, thats bc they have trained their minds to shut out the unfairness of the disparity by truly believing that they are special - the same thing that usually plagues most religious zealotry thats why you see so many of these poor idiots supporting more money flowing to the rich even if it hurts them in the process, bc they see themselves in the same manner despite not actually having the object of their worship. they side with the rich because those people do have what they view as their savior. its pretty sick and once its got a hold of you its very difficult to shake from from. thats what jesus meant by that whole 'camel thru the eye of the needle' allegory - hes not saying that the rich are barred from salvation per se, hes saying that the poisoning of the mind that the worship of money brings is the real barrier What a crock of ****. Seriously where do you come up with this ****? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 What a crock of ****. Seriously where do you come up with this ****? You know what's really fun? Replace "money" with "Obama," and that makes about as much sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 You know what's really fun? Replace "money" with "Obama," and that makes about as much sense. That would mean I'd have to re-read that garbage so I'll pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 i really dont think those that have a lot and think they should be able to keep even more have any guilt about it. they have essentially substituted money for their god image so it takes on a sort of religious value to them think about it: money becomes how they value themselves, how they set their parameters, how they make judgments, how they make sense of and measure the world. thats usually a function of a spiritual center, but of course when its money it cant help but be completely dysfunctional. youve seen the studies about how the rich tend to be far less empathetic, thats bc they have trained their minds to shut out the unfairness of the disparity by truly believing that they are special - the same thing that usually plagues most religious zealotry thats why you see so many of these poor idiots supporting more money flowing to the rich even if it hurts them in the process, bc they see themselves in the same manner despite not actually having the object of their worship. they side with the rich because those people do have what they view as their savior. its pretty sick and once its got a hold of you its very difficult to shake from from. thats what jesus meant by that whole 'camel thru the eye of the needle' allegory - hes not saying that the rich are barred from salvation per se, hes saying that the poisoning of the mind that the worship of money brings is the real barrier Meat---I think you have mad cow disease---see your veternarian asap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 i really dont think those that have a lot and think they should be able to keep even more have any guilt about it. they have essentially substituted money for their god image so it takes on a sort of religious value to them think about it: money becomes how they value themselves, how they set their parameters, how they make judgments, how they make sense of and measure the world. thats usually a function of a spiritual center, but of course when its money it cant help but be completely dysfunctional. youve seen the studies about how the rich tend to be far less empathetic, thats bc they have trained their minds to shut out the unfairness of the disparity by truly believing that they are special - the same thing that usually plagues most religious zealotry thats why you see so many of these poor idiots supporting more money flowing to the rich even if it hurts them in the process, bc they see themselves in the same manner despite not actually having the object of their worship. they side with the rich because those people do have what they view as their savior. its pretty sick and once its got a hold of you its very difficult to shake from from. thats what jesus meant by that whole 'camel thru the eye of the needle' allegory - hes not saying that the rich are barred from salvation per se, hes saying that the poisoning of the mind that the worship of money brings is the real barrier I take it you don't know many wealthy people. Sounds like your impression of rich people is what Hollywood has been feeding you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 Seriously where do you come up with this ****? If I am not mistaken, I think they told you where they came up w/this, what you call, ****. The words of Jesus (in the Gospel of Matthew). Bob, have Johnny tell us what they have won! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 (edited) What a crock of ****. Seriously where do you come up with this ****? isn't his argument virtually the mirror image of yours against liberals who enjoy paying higher taxes so that they can feel superior? there's some truth to both parables but i like the source for meathead's better. Edited March 19, 2013 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 isn't his argument virtually the mirror image of yours against liberals who enjoy paying higher taxes so that they can feel superior? there's some truth to both parables but i like the source for meathead's better. Just what is Meathead's source for his ramblings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 isn't his argument virtually the mirror image of yours against liberals who enjoy paying higher taxes so that they can feel superior? there's some truth to both parables but i like the source for meathead's better. Except his source, if it's the one I think it is, encourages men to give freely of themselves; and expressly forbids taking from others. Ironically, it even lionizes a tax revolt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 I meant inequality and social stability have been discussed for as long as society's have existed. Progressive taxes and restraining inequality come into play in the early 20th c. for US. And that millenial discussion gave rise to the Magna Carta and subsequent societal changes that wrested wealth and control from a privileged few. The British notion that the sanctity of private property should be protected because the individual is in the best position to deal with that property, which has a positive follo won effect on the society at large is still a much better system than randomly redistributing that private property, or worse channeling that private property for a pet public good (which inevitably turns into a public bad) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 isn't his argument virtually the mirror image of yours against liberals who enjoy paying higher taxes so that they can feel superior? there's some truth to both parables but i like the source for meathead's better. When the hell have I said that liberals enjoy paying higher taxes so that they can feel morally superior? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterpan Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 the issue isnt how much the top x% pays its where the distribution and direction the income gap is going relative to tax percentage money has been flowing to the top for a very long time and the income gap is bigger than it has been in almost a century the rich have been getting fatter and fatter and while opportunity for most folks has been steadily shrinking. of course the rich should be paying the vast majority of taxes. from a historical perspective they are still much better off than they have been in a long, long time. they should be paying more, and they would never even miss it i always find it amazing average income folks can defend this somehow. its an absolute fantasy with no rational basis that if you keep funnelling money to the rich it somehow ends up in everybodys pocket. yet thats exactly what tea party lunatics want us to do with things like the ryan budget. its really indefensible Liberal policies funnel tons of money to the rich. Just look at Wal-Mart. They sell cheap crap. Most of their customers are low income. Many of them are spending either the money they should have paid to the government in taxes, or their welfare dollars, or at least money they have in access because their welfare/lack of taxes is subsidizing another aspect of their life. Now all that welfare money was taxed from the rich, or taxed from the middle class, or borrowed from China. When the rich get their own money back its water under the bridge, as they are also getting the middle classes and the Chinese’s money. Needless to say the Waltons are huge Democratic supporters and donors. This is true of all retail products and suppliers. Tobacco and alcohol companies benefit hugely from welfare programs because it gives the poor extra coin to spend on those items. Verizon and AT&T would suffer if people ahd to cancel their smart phone planes to buy food instead – do you follow me? The Middles class is being destroyed by taxes, which robs them of their pay, and has also destroys the job opportunities here. Meanwhile, the poor will always be poor when they are dependant, and the rich will keep on accepting all of that entitlement money at their stores or other places of business. But keep on believing that 'taxing the rich' will fix everything. It will only make it worse. Only natural market conditions with the government guaranteeing equal opportunity (not equal results) will work. Nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 When the hell have I said that liberals enjoy paying higher taxes so that they can feel morally superior? sorry. meant to link to dc tom. he said it recently in reply to my question whether he supposed liberals enjoyed paying high taxzes any more than cons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 sorry. meant to link to dc tom. he said it recently in reply to my question whether he supposed liberals enjoyed paying high taxzes any more than cons You do realize that this board doesn't have many "cons" don't you? : a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/neoconservative Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 (edited) When the hell have I said that liberals enjoy paying higher taxes so that they can feel morally superior? Not that you said it, but I might rephrase it a bit. People enjoy feeling morally superior. Some liberals are stupid enough to pay higher taxes for that feeling. Others are smart enough to avoid the higher taxes while still enjoying the same moral superiority. Edited March 19, 2013 by Joe Miner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 sorry. meant to link to dc tom. he said it recently in reply to my question whether he supposed liberals enjoyed paying high taxzes any more than cons I think most liberals who advocate redistribution feel they are solving the worlds problems when in most situations, they are making it worse. Tax and spend is the lazy way out. That being said, I am much more of a libertarian than a conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 You do realize that this board doesn't have many "cons" don't you? : a conservative who advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means http://www.merriam-w...neoconservative wait, con = neocon? my understanding was that they were distinct points on the bell curve, one correlating with "wingnut". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 wait, con = neocon? my understanding was that they were distinct points on the bell curve, one correlating with "wingnut". If so, then you and a few others have redefined it. Also, under your definition, you would also be a "con". Considering that you are on the polar opposite of the bell curve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 20, 2013 Share Posted March 20, 2013 what do you suppose the unemployment rate would be without minimum wage jobs? Your proposal would certainly give us the chance to find out. You are one delusional, ignorant dude. $30 happy meals anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts