Obama Announces Full Support for Gay Marriage

May 9, 2012 | Posted by: Top Mod2 | Full story: politix.topix.com

It's a historic day for gay rights activists: Obama has just announced his support for gay marriage.

Comments
21,681 - 21,700 of 26,178 Comments Last updated Oct 27, 2013

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22518
Oct 15, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Jupiter wrote:
<quoted text>
I wonder what would happen if we did away with income tax and raised taxes on consumption. Just curious...I'm no economist.
Good question. Might kill consumer spending and stimulate a huge black market for goods.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22519
Oct 15, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Are you going to pretend that the rich do not benefit more from the government and from civil activities than the poor do? They have greater access and priority status. Why should they not pay proportionately for that?
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
It is impossible to elevate the poor by dragging down the rich.
Is not the whole idea and premise of the American dream to go from rags TO riches, and not go from riches to rags?
Do you not have the whole scenario completely upside down?
There is no moral justification whatsoever to villify one group of folks and uphold another. That is NOT equality. That is intentional inequality.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22520
Oct 15, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The "rags to riches" model has never been a common phenomenon, and it is even more unlikely in this economy. The jobs simply ar4 not there. There are over 300 million people in this country--do you really think that we even print enough money for everyone to be rich? No matter how hard someone works, they are just as likely to fail as to succeed.

The vast majority of wealth in this country is held by a very small percentage; it is economically impossible to "raise up" the poor.
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
"should be enough to cause a serious difference in their available cash"
WHY?
WHY do you advocate bringing others down?
Would not we be better serving the needs of the poor if we spend our time and efforts making an environment where they can pull themselves up from their poverty rather than tear others down to hand them a handout?
Your way only gives them a fish for one meal, and they are still left to wait and beg for another meal - taken from someone else.
Why not teach them to fish for their own meal so they can feed themselves from then on?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22521
Oct 15, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
"should be enough to cause a serious difference in their available cash"
WHY?
WHY do you advocate bringing others down?
Would not we be better serving the needs of the poor if we spend our time and efforts making an environment where they can pull themselves up from their poverty rather than tear others down to hand them a handout?
Your way only gives them a fish for one meal, and they are still left to wait and beg for another meal - taken from someone else.
Why not teach them to fish for their own meal so they can feed themselves from then on?
Bringing others down? Surely you jest!

Suppose wealthy people acted in their own enlightened self interest. They would realize that keeping jobs and companies alive and well rather than outsourcing, is in their best interest. The same with supporting broad based health care programs rather than the shoddy parasitic insurance/big business model. More people working means more people can pay taxes and spend money, which in turn makes rich people richer. If small business owners did not bear the burden of health care and workers comp, more people would get hired. I bought a part for my Ford Truck the other day. It was made in China. I did not benefit from the fact it was made in China because the price I paid was just as much as it would cost to make it at home. The parasites profited, not me. The parasites made money rather than American workers. Get the picture?

“laugh until your belly hurts”

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22522
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
It is impossible to elevate the poor by dragging down the rich.
Is not the whole idea and premise of the American dream to go from rags TO riches, and not go from riches to rags?
Do you not have the whole scenario completely upside down?
There is no moral justification whatsoever to villify one group of folks and uphold another. That is NOT equality. That is intentional inequality.
asking those who have benefited from the system to pay for it isn't 'vilifying' them. it's asking them to give back what they've gained in order to keep the system working. not only that, but one would think that they'd be happy; even excited to have the opportunity to do so.

like i said, a person with a 5 million dollar a year income will hardly miss 4 million of it. unless one's incredibly stupid, it's impossible to waste 5 million dollars in one year, anyway... or even 1 million. i mean, how much can one eat, anyway?

“laugh until your belly hurts”

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22523
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
"should be enough to cause a serious difference in their available cash"
WHY?
WHY do you advocate bringing others down?
Would not we be better serving the needs of the poor if we spend our time and efforts making an environment where they can pull themselves up from their poverty rather than tear others down to hand them a handout?
Your way only gives them a fish for one meal, and they are still left to wait and beg for another meal - taken from someone else.
Why not teach them to fish for their own meal so they can feed themselves from then on?
oh, bullshit.

give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day.

teach a man to fish and he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day.

you are right, though. nobody should have to 'beg' for a meal... it should be given to them gladly by those who have it. let's look at it this way. what if a man has an income of 5 million dollars a year... wouldn't it be better if he invited 50 families of 4 to live in his mansion with him and eat at his table with him?

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22524
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
... wouldn't it be better if he invited 50 families of 4 to live in his mansion with him and eat at his table with him?
Wouldn't it be better if he gave them jobs instead so they could feed thenselves?

Is a man that is capable of creating a job and paying another's salary going to do so when he feels put upon by outside influence to forcefully take a great chunk of his stash, against his will, and give it to others?

You shoot down the very goal of your own premise.
You advocate continually giving a non-fisherman the tools to continue to drink beer in another's boat, and eat from another's table, and not their own.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22525
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

cpeter1313 wrote:
The "rags to riches" model has never been a common phenomenon, and it is even more unlikely in this economy. The jobs simply ar4 not there. There are over 300 million people in this country--do you really think that we even print enough money for everyone to be rich? No matter how hard someone works, they are just as likely to fail as to succeed.
The vast majority of wealth in this country is held by a very small percentage; it is economically impossible to "raise up" the poor.
<quoted text>
Perhaps you should stick to arguing for your singular gay rights cause my friend, and avoid branching out into other areas. You are better at that cause and purpose.

You argue against your own point when you say > "it is economically impossible to "raise up" the poor.", but yet you do not keep that from stopping you trying, by forcefully taking from the rich and giving it to the poor. Your way KEEPS them poor.

The American dream way, creates incentive, and yes, only a few will succeed to their wildest dreams. It allows them TO dream about better days and strive to get there. Almost all of them, will in fact however, utilize that image and motivation of the American dream, to gain a footing that is a better and higher footing than they started out with and from, and THAT my friend is the goal - to keep on dreaming that dream, and keep on living the life that the dream elevates you to - whatever level that may be that the dream takes you.

Killing the dream by saying it only works for a select few is not only a travesty and a serious mistake. As an American, it is unforgivable and treachery to the American people themselves, and the principles that uphold their dreams.

You give me a shelf stocker with a dream - an American dream - and I'll show you someone capable of making history and a good living. You show me someone without a dream, and I'll give you a stock clerk , or a beggar, and nothing more.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22526
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

cpeter1313 wrote:
Are you going to pretend that the rich do not benefit more from the government and from civil activities than the poor do? They have greater access and priority status. Why should they not pay proportionately for that?
<quoted text>
They do.
They shop in shops that you and I do not as we can not afford it.
They fly first class and I fly coach. I do not hate them for it like you do however. I strive to get to the point where I can afford it too. You do not strive for such apparently, and prefer to eliminate first class from the plane, and from our society as a whole.

Are you going to continue to pretend that the poor do not dream of flying first class some day? What happens to their dream when you forcefully remove first class from the plane? Do they then dream of handouts and next month's allowance from federal extortion money? You think that dream noble and worthy of seeking?

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22527
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

cpeter1313 wrote:
The "rags to riches" model has never been a common phenomenon, and it is even more unlikely in this economy.
Actually the rags to riches model is the ONLY one in the world sir. It is THE goal the world over my friend.

What you meant to say is that only a small percentage of people in the world ever become truly monetarily wealthy. THAT sir, is true in every single society on Earth, irregardless of their political structure, or the people in question. It always has been thus and thus twill always be.
If becoming wealthy was easy sir, there would be no such thing as the poor.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22528
Oct 17, 2012
 
cpeter1313 wrote:
Are you going to pretend that the rich do not benefit more from the government and from civil activities than the poor do? They have greater access and priority status. Why should they not pay proportionately for that?
<quoted text>
i would like to argue that point. Please explain to me how the wealthy get more government than the poor.
The Troll Stopper

Blacksburg, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22529
Oct 17, 2012
 
Wow, this thread sure got completely off-topic.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22530
Oct 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Bringing others down? Surely you jest!
Suppose wealthy people acted in their own enlightened self interest. They would realize that keeping jobs and companies alive and well rather than outsourcing, is in their best interest. The same with supporting broad based health care programs rather than the shoddy parasitic insurance/big business model. More people working means more people can pay taxes and spend money, which in turn makes rich people richer. If small business owners did not bear the burden of health care and workers comp, more people would get hired. I bought a part for my Ford Truck the other day. It was made in China. I did not benefit from the fact it was made in China because the price I paid was just as much as it would cost to make it at home. The parasites profited, not me. The parasites made money rather than American workers. Get the picture?
As a business owner or a business manager for another owner, it is their specific and sole purpose to make money - to profit.
That being said, when the environment where you have your business located becomes so inhospitable to your bottom line, that a change is needed to compensate, you are forced to find product or personage to make ends meet once again, to achieve your goal of - profit.

You erroneously blame ALL business and their methodology for the failings and shortcomings of the guilty. If your neighbor owns a yellow house right next to your yellow house, are you guilty of murder because your neighbor kills his wife?

It is the classic "look over there" magic trick that you have fallen for my friend. You accuse the right hand of trickery, when it is the left hand that is pulling the fast one on you.
You blame free enterprise for the current fiasco, when the truth be known that it is the stifling of free enterprise which has created the situation ... political magicians blaming the bottle of elixir instead of blaming the drinker of the elixir.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22531
Oct 17, 2012
 
dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
asking those who have benefited from the system to pay for it isn't 'vilifying' them. it's asking them to give back what they've gained in order to keep the system working. not only that, but one would think that they'd be happy; even excited to have the opportunity to do so.
like i said, a person with a 5 million dollar a year income will hardly miss 4 million of it. unless one's incredibly stupid, it's impossible to waste 5 million dollars in one year, anyway... or even 1 million. i mean, how much can one eat, anyway?
Asking for an equal income tax percentage across the board solves your perceived dilemma.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22532
Oct 17, 2012
 
cpeter1313 wrote:
Are you going to pretend that the rich do not benefit more from the government and from civil activities than the poor do? They have greater access and priority status. Why should they not pay proportionately for that?
<quoted text>
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>i would like to argue that point. Please explain to me how the wealthy get more government than the poor.
As well you should argue the contrary on that "point".

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22533
Oct 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
oh, bullshit.
give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day.
teach a man to fish and he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day.
you are right, though. nobody should have to 'beg' for a meal... it should be given to them gladly by those who have it. let's look at it this way. what if a man has an income of 5 million dollars a year... wouldn't it be better if he invited 50 families of 4 to live in his mansion with him and eat at his table with him?
Give me the fish.

I hate fishing.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22534
Oct 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
As a business owner or a business manager for another owner, it is their specific and sole purpose to make money - to profit.
That being said, when the environment where you have your business located becomes so inhospitable to your bottom line, that a change is needed to compensate, you are forced to find product or personage to make ends meet once again, to achieve your goal of - profit.
You erroneously blame ALL business and their methodology for the failings and shortcomings of the guilty. If your neighbor owns a yellow house right next to your yellow house, are you guilty of murder because your neighbor kills his wife?
It is the classic "look over there" magic trick that you have fallen for my friend. You accuse the right hand of trickery, when it is the left hand that is pulling the fast one on you.
You blame free enterprise for the current fiasco, when the truth be known that it is the stifling of free enterprise which has created the situation ... political magicians blaming the bottle of elixir instead of blaming the drinker of the elixir.
What about providing goods and services? Speculation is a parasitic relationship which ultimately leads to decline.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22536
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
asking those who have benefited from the system to pay for it isn't 'vilifying' them. it's asking them to give back what they've gained in order to keep the system working. not only that, but one would think that they'd be happy; even excited to have the opportunity to do so.
like i said, a person with a 5 million dollar a year income will hardly miss 4 million of it. unless one's incredibly stupid, it's impossible to waste 5 million dollars in one year, anyway... or even 1 million. i mean, how much can one eat, anyway?
"it's asking them to give back what they've gained in order to keep the system working"

What's wrong with the system?

If they gained their wealth through this system, and you think it a bad thing, then why say they must give back their gains to keeo it going?

What happened to the system?

EXACTLY how much is ONE person allowed to make in one year in order for you to say they made their "fair share"?

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22537
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
What about providing goods and services? Speculation is a parasitic relationship which ultimately leads to decline.
What about them?
What kind of speculation are you talking about, and what decline are you talking about?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22539
Oct 19, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
What about them?
What kind of speculation are you talking about, and what decline are you talking about?
Economies are based upon the exchange of goods and services. When too many speculators get involved, it degrades the relationship. For example, call most customer service numbers and see if you actually get service. Companies controlled by parasitic "investment groups" don't give a shit about the customers. They not only outsource manufacture but also customer service. What happened to creating jobs for our friends and neighbors right here at home?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••