scott. Mr. 1%. Debunk this.

[boutons_deux]

WC, you deny that Kock Bros and other wealthy assholes fund ALEC?

[Wild Cobra]

WC, you deny that Kock Bros and other wealthy assholes fund ALEC?

I don't know if they do or not. I don't stalk rich people's activities like you do. I worry about my own life.

If you disagree with how people game the system, then change the system instead of blaming them.

Are you 100% ethical and never take advantage of things when you can?

[scott]

It's all the Flouride. You're smart, I'm just a pawn. Busted!

[boutons_deux]

"I don't know if they do or not"

they are a textbook definition of a conspiracy. Do Your Own Research

I don't stalk rich people, but I guarantee you that rich people stalk all of us, with the intention of sucking our wealth down and dis-empowering us as citizens, patients, employees, etc.

[LnGrrrR]

I think ignorance is the root of all evils. Therefore, I think Parker is the root of all evils, personified.

[LnGrrrR]

Sure they are. Still, it's less the people's fault who learn how to game a system, than it is those who constantly vote the enablers in.

I heartily disagree. Tell me, which candidates are promising not to play the system? And which ones actually hold up to that claim?

[Parker2112]

It's all the Flouride. You're smart, I'm just a pawn. Busted!

Aw, come on scott...lets see that 3.8 run some laps

You've not hesitated in squashing other posters who dared to express doubt about the Fed's operation (and looking like a in the process...1%...3.8...LOLZ). Surely you could wad the OP in the palm of your hand and toss it out like the disposable conspiracy trash it is

Surely you wouldn't let a dumb ass like me walk away after calling you out...surely you would inlfate your clout a lil more (eagle scout? president's fitness club?) and stamp out these ridiculous conspiracy theories before they start spreading amongst other dumb ass 99% who didn't know better

Or is it just easier to smear my character and leave the policy arguments alone?

[Bill_Brasky]

I don't know if they do or not. I don't stalk rich people's activities like you do. I worry about my own life.

If you disagree with how people game the system, then change the system instead of blaming them.

Are you 100% ethical and never take advantage of things when you can?

People like you miss the point of Occupy entirely. It's not about crying because other people have more than you because you're jealous.

There was a time where a man working 40 hours a week could raise a family of 5. Today people are working 70 or 80 hours a week to just get by. Those are hard working people that any sensible person would applaud for their work effort, but again,the problem isn't about having or not having the drive to work that much. It's the question of whether or not it is fair that people have to work that much. You shouldn't have to work 80 hours a week. You CAN work that much. I've done that much. A lot of people here have done that much. But it shouldn't be a requirement to pay the bills.

So when people see the gap between the middle and upper class get bigger and bigger,and the amount of money the rich make each year keeps going up even if the success of their work is going down (see: bailout bonuses),all while the middle class are working harder and longer all so they can struggle to stay in the middle class... That's what people are complaining about.

[Parker2112]

Hats off to Bill Brasky for explaining the above in plain English...sadly, however, its still language that WC wont be able to comprehend.

[spursncowboys]

I don't understand it either. The rich making more money doesn't take from another's ability to make more money.

There is no “pie” to cut up. Wealth is not like oil, wealth is as abundant as the wind or sunlight. When we act as if wealth is a pie to be cut up we actually re the further creation of new wealth! The idea that there can only be a “few” wealthy people is based on a mindset that prevents people from believing they can create new wealth. Because people believe they can’t create more wealth they tend to either accept their “place” in the economic scheme or they tend to want to amass as much wealth as possible for fear that they will not be able to get their “piece of the pie”. This leads to a slave mentality on the part of most people. This is the beggar’s position of always asking for as much as possible while trying to give as little as possible but being forced to give more and more for less and less. We need to be liberated from this concept of wealth as a finite thing before we can fully take advantage of the tremendous leveraging power of participatory economics, hereafter simply referred to as Concordian economics, to create unlimited wealth and win the war against poverty.

[spursncowboys]

Also I thought they were mad that Banks got bail outs (forced upon them for some btw fwiw) and they couldn't find jobs. Then I thought it was about college tuition sky rocketing while professors are getting raises and what not.

[spursncowboys]

People like you miss the point of Occupy entirely. It's not about crying because other people have more than you because you're jealous.

There was a time where a man working 40 hours a week could raise a family of 5. Today people are working 70 or 80 hours a week to just get by. Those are hard working people that any sensible person would applaud for their work effort, but again,the problem isn't about having or not having the drive to work that much. It's the question of whether or not it is fair that people have to work that much. You shouldn't have to work 80 hours a week. You CAN work that much. I've done that much. A lot of people here have done that much. But it shouldn't be a requirement to pay the bills.

So when people see the gap between the middle and upper class get bigger and bigger,and the amount of money the rich make each year keeps going up even if the success of their work is going down (see: bailout bonuses),all while the middle class are working harder and longer all so they can struggle to stay in the middle class... That's what people are complaining about.

There was also a time when there weren't guaranteed college loans and federal grants for a majority of people going to school. Also that same period, which I'm assuming is before the 70's, there were drafts, and not woman in the workforce as much as now.

[Wild Cobra]

I heartily disagree. Tell me, which candidates are promising not to play the system? And which ones actually hold up to that claim?

You know how with stocks, there is a disclaimer to the effect that past performance may not represent future results? Well with politicians, I say past performance applies. We have people who vote for politicians who promise to game the system for them, and in bents generally have. Don't you think these same politicians will game the system for large contributors the same way they will for votes?

As long as we, as voters, vote in the politicians who promise use the stuff that goes outside "the general welfare," expect these same politicians to provide favors to large contributors.

[Wild Cobra]

People like you miss the point of Occupy entirely. It's not about crying because other people have more than you because you're jealous.

There was a time where a man working 40 hours a week could raise a family of 5. Today people are working 70 or 80 hours a week to just get by. Those are hard working people that any sensible person would applaud for their work effort, but again,the problem isn't about having or not having the drive to work that much. It's the question of whether or not it is fair that people have to work that much. You shouldn't have to work 80 hours a week. You CAN work that much. I've done that much. A lot of people here have done that much. But it shouldn't be a requirement to pay the bills.

So when people see the gap between the middle and upper class get bigger and bigger,and the amount of money the rich make each year keeps going up even if the success of their work is going down (see: bailout bonuses),all while the middle class are working harder and longer all so they can struggle to stay in the middle class... That's what people are complaining about.

Are you saying corporations are the root problem? I disagree. I do agree that a single family worker at one time could provide for a family, in almost any job available. There are several ways we did this to ourselves. To blame big business is being short sighted. Again, you are not looking at the root problems. You are looking at the symptoms.

[Wild Cobra]

Hats off to Bill Brasky for explaining the above in plain English...sadly, however, its still language that WC wont be able to comprehend.

No, I completely understood his point. Sorry you fail to understand mine.

[Wild Cobra]

There was also a time when there weren't guaranteed college loans and federal grants for a majority of people going to school. Also that same period, which I'm assuming is before the 70's, there were drafts, and not woman in the workforce as much as now.

Both spouses working is one reason why wages are down. Simple supply and demand economics at work.

[RandomGuy]

It's all the Flouride. You're smart, I'm just a pawn. Busted!

Translation:

"Parker you are an idiot and not worth my time."

[RandomGuy]

Aw, come on scott...lets see that 3.8 run some laps

You've not hesitated in squashing other posters who dared to express doubt about the Fed's operation (and looking like a in the process...1%...3.8...LOLZ). Surely you could wad the OP in the palm of your hand and toss it out like the disposable conspiracy trash it is

Surely you wouldn't let a dumb ass like me walk away after calling you out...surely you would inlfate your clout a lil more (eagle scout? president's fitness club?) and stamp out these ridiculous conspiracy theories before they start spreading amongst other dumb ass 99% who didn't know better

Or is it just easier to smear my character and leave the policy arguments alone?

Translation:

"Please, please, please, stroke my ego."

[Parker2112]

You know it makes you two look like butt buddies whenever you feel like you have to come in here and defend him. I'm sure an "economist" like scott can defend himself just fine if his positions are right.

Butt buddies indeed.

Scott may know more than most about the nuts and bolts, but he has yet to give the policy and legal precedent the slightest. That wont stop him from citing his "mental superiority" when he gets his chance. The OP is just a little more involved than he prefers.

RG! Keep up the bootlicking, you worm!

[RandomGuy]

You know it makes you two look like butt buddies whenever you feel like you have to come in here and defend him. I'm sure an "economist" like scott can defend himself just fine if his positions are right.

Translation:

"I'm going to throw in with own own butt buddy to get you and your butt buddy to stroke by butt buddy's ego".

[RandomGuy]

Butt buddies indeed.

Scott may know more than most about the nuts and bolts, but he has yet to give the policy and legal precedent the slightest. That wont stop him from citing his "mental superiority" when he gets his chance. The OP is just a little more involved than he prefers.

RG! Keep up the bootlicking, you worm!

Translation:

"Maybe RG will stroke my ego."

[RandomGuy]

The Fed is the root of the following evils:
1) massive bureaucracy which tends to eat up our civil liberties, our economic freedoms, etc,
2) endless(?) funding for endless wars which destabilize our security, serve war profiteers bank accounts, and put a huge burden on our future generations to pay for our immoral murder and exploitation of brown people across the globe
3) the extraction of the wealth of the lower and middle class through inflation tax, which most of the public does not understand and cannot discover through the controlled MSM,
4) enables the blatant insider fraud that our fed legislators currently engage in
5) charges interest for providing a function that could otherwise be done at cost, without putting America in extreme debt. Any monkey can pull zeroes out of his/her ass.
6) Encourages bad investments, causing bubbles which burst leaving us all wet, as it artificially keeps interests rates low, encouraging imprudent borrowing/investment without sufficient savings to justify low interest rates, after which it...
7) performs a manipulation of the business cycle, from boom to bust, in order to facilitate the concentration of wealth at the top of the financial ladder, through fluctuation of currency liquidity
8) As Greenspan admitted, BEST CASE SCENARIO is that the Fed could effectively mimic gold as a slow source of gradual inflation,
9) one of the major functions purported to justify the Fed is economic stability, however a study of history will show that over history we have averaged 1-2 major disruptions per decade.
10) the fed has reduced the dollar's value more than 90% since it took hold of our currency. This robs citizens on fixed income and who diligently and save responsibily.
11) The arrangement is illegal without Cons utional Amendment

Seriously though, all kidding aside, which do you want picked apart first?

We could just start at the beginning, I guess.

[The Fed is to blame for the] massive bureaucracy which tends to eat up our civil liberties, our economic freedoms, etc,

I see Point A, "the Fed", and Point B, the "massive bureaucracy"

Fed------------------------------------------> massive bureaucracy"

How exactly is the Fed to blame for massive bureacracy? Draw the line from point A to point B.

I don't see the Fed as really causing the need to have my meat/airplanes inspected. That is caused by bacteria and cracks in airframes.

[RandomGuy]

I don't understand it either. The rich making more money doesn't take from another's ability to make more money.

No one said it did.

[Agloco]

People like you miss the point of Occupy entirely. It's not about crying because other people have more than you because you're jealous.

There was a time where a man working 40 hours a week could raise a family of 5. Today people are working 70 or 80 hours a week to just get by. Those are hard working people that any sensible person would applaud for their work effort, but again,the problem isn't about having or not having the drive to work that much. It's the question of whether or not it is fair that people have to work that much. You shouldn't have to work 80 hours a week. You CAN work that much. I've done that much. A lot of people here have done that much. But it shouldn't be a requirement to pay the bills.

So when people see the gap between the middle and upper class get bigger and bigger,and the amount of money the rich make each year keeps going up even if the success of their work is going down (see: bailout bonuses),all while the middle class are working harder and longer all so they can struggle to stay in the middle class... That's what people are complaining about.

Clear, congent takes have no place in this forum tbh.

[Agloco]

Both spouses working is one reason why wages are down. Simple supply and demand economics at work.

Why are both spouses working again?