Is Elizabeth Warren worse than Hillary Clinton?

[calamity]

we in the top one percent voted for Reagan in many cases. He did what we wanted him to do.

Destroy the middle class? Yeah. I know.

 

[calamity]

Why would anyone not like it? Was it those who made this average wage who took the risk to make the average wage earner more productive? The fact is the average wage earner is not willing to take the risk with their own wage. Yet most could. They choose not to. The risk of failure is a greater motivator to many than the risk of success.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks more like it was done on the backs of the middle class, who ended up getting ripped off by that 1%.

 

[TurtleDude]

Destroy the middle class? Yeah. I know.

what nonsense. cut our taxes. we got tired of subsidizing the middle and lower classes. we still do but not at the confiscatory rates we got from the Democrats

 

[TurtleDude]

Looks more like it was done on the backs of the middle class, who ended up getting ripped off by that 1%.

what silly whining. who exactly do you think the top one percent are? you probably are thinking the Kochs and Buffett, Gates and Soros (most of those are democrats btw). top one percent is mainly made up of the people who pay the highest effective tax rates and most of us don't have the power to influence elections, set our own rates of compensation, manipulate stocks and do all the stuff that the slow witted sheeple believe and that assholes like Warren claim

 

[Middleground]

what nonsense. cut our taxes. we got tired of subsidizing the middle and lower classes. we still do but not at the confiscatory rates we got from the Democrats

Let me ask you this, TD. What do you think will happen when the rich keep on getting richer to the point where something has got to give? At what point does it become worrisome? Or do you think nothing will change when the upper crust owns 85/90/95% of total wealth?

 

[TurtleDude]

Let me ask you this, TD. What do you think will happen when the rich keep on getting richer to the point where something has got to give? At what point does it become worrisome? Or do you think nothing will change when the upper crust owns 85/90/95% of total wealth?

you mean like other people will stop looking to the government to take care of them

let me ask you are more realistic question-what would it mean in terms of the economy if those of us who are "rich" (meaning I make more than I have to spend and thus I have money left over that I invest every year and thus double my wealth every several years). could not become richer? that would mean investments no longer earn money. Think about what hat would mean.

the problem in the USA is not the rich getting richer. its the fact that too many people are not able to cope without the government interfering in their lives. and WAY too many people are having children at rates they cannot properly handle

if you

a) complete HS

b) don't have a felony conviction

c) and don't have children out of marriage

your chances of being in poverty are less than one on 20

 

[Verax]

you mean like other people will stop looking to the government to take care of them

let me ask you are more realistic question-what would it mean in terms of the economy if those of us who are "rich" (meaning I make more than I have to spend and thus I have money left over that I invest every year and thus double my wealth every several years). could not become richer? that would mean investments no longer earn money. Think about what hat would mean.

the problem in the USA is not the rich getting richer. its the fact that too many people are not able to cope without the government interfering in their lives. and WAY too many people are having children at rates they cannot properly handle

if you

a) complete HS

b) don't have a felony conviction

c) and don't have children out of marriage

your chances of being in poverty are less than one on 20

And what decade are these stats supposed to be from? Not any I'm familiar with, things are not so peachy these days.

https://confrontingpoverty.org/poverty-risk-calculator/

 

[TurtleDude]

And what decade are these stats supposed to be from? Not any I'm familiar with, things are not so peachy these days.

From that far right propaganda center the Brookings institute

https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/...teens-should-follow-to-join-the-middle-class/

Third, in addition to the education deficit, poor children are more likely to make bad decisions that lead them to drop out of school, become teen parents, join gangs and break the law.

In addition to the thousands of local and national programs that aim to help young people avoid these life-altering problems, we should figure out more ways to convince young people that their decisions will greatly influence whether they avoid poverty and enter the middle class. Let politicians, schoolteachers and administrators, community leaders, ministers and parents drill into children the message that in a free society, they enter adulthood with three major responsibilities: at least finish high school, get a full-time job and wait until age 21 to get married and have children.

 

[Verax]

From that far right propaganda center the Brookings institute

https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/...teens-should-follow-to-join-the-middle-class/

Third, in addition to the education deficit, poor children are more likely to make bad decisions that lead them to drop out of school, become teen parents, join gangs and break the law.

In addition to the thousands of local and national programs that aim to help young people avoid these life-altering problems, we should figure out more ways to convince young people that their decisions will greatly influence whether they avoid poverty and enter the middle class. Let politicians, schoolteachers and administrators, community leaders, ministers and parents drill into children the message that in a free society, they enter adulthood with three major responsibilities: at least finish high school, get a full-time job and wait until age 21 to get married and have children.

Do you not see the problem here? Correlation does not equal causation. They are cherry picking people in the best position and then saying these people have x y and z characteristic and therefore x y and z characteristic are responsible for their position. Finishing high school is not important. Being in a position where you finish high school is. In that the person likely was raised in a decent environment. So right there this little cherry pick has just filtered out a bunch of people who were raised in unfortunate circumstances. "Get a full time job", LoL... So now they're cherry picking people who have a full time job... well no **** a job would obviously help. The reality is most young people have a really, really, hard time getting a full time job. So they've just filtered out everyone who is part time or not full time. "Wait until 21 to get married and have children". Yeah, great advice, I totally agree. However people have been having children at a young age since the dawn of civilization. I think people who do it when they are young and poor are morons but that is just the way it is. Once again an enormous filter to cherry pick the average person out of the line up and what you are left with is a group of people with anything but an average circumstance and it's just not applicable to the real world.

 

[TurtleDude]

Do you not see the problem here? Correlation does not equal causation. They are cherry picking people in the best position and then saying these people have x y and z characteristic and therefore x y and z characteristic are responsible for their position. Finishing high school is not important. Being in a position where you finish high school is. In that the person likely was raised in a decent environment. So right there this little cherry pick has just filtered out a bunch of people who were raised in unfortunate circumstances. "Get a full time job", LoL... So now they're cherry picking people who have a full time job... well no **** a job would obviously help. The reality is most young people have a really, really, hard time getting a full time job. So they've just filtered out everyone who is part time or not full time. "Wait until 21 to get married and have children". Yeah, great advice, I totally agree. However people have been having children at a young age since the dawn of civilization. I think people who do it when they are young and poor are morons but that is just the way it is. Once again an enormous filter to cherry pick the average person out of the line up and what you are left with is a group of people with anything but an average circumstance and it's just not applicable to the real world.

lets cut the crap. those of us who save and invest wisely and increase our wealth are not responsible for those who are in poverty. Pure and simple. and I tire of scumbags like Warren claiming I need to pay more taxes because of people who mainly are in poverty due to what they or their families did.

 

[Verax]

lets cut the crap. those of us who save and invest wisely and increase our wealth are not responsible for those who are in poverty. Pure and simple. and I tire of scumbags like Warren claiming I need to pay more taxes because of people who mainly are in poverty due to what they or their families did.

So your answer is "be exceptional". That's great for those who are exceptional but for average people who would like a life not rooted in misery it's of no use.

 

[TurtleDude]

So your answer is "be exceptional". That's great for those who are exceptional but for average people who would like a life not rooted in misery it's of no use.

no, my answer is those who have worked hard and done well are not to blame, nor should be held responsible for those who are failures-whether their failure is due to their own poor choices or merely though bad luck

 

[Verax]

no, my answer is those who have worked hard and done well are not to blame, nor should be held responsible for those who are failures-whether their failure is due to their own poor choices or merely though bad luck

Interesting that you deem the working class "failures".

 

[TurtleDude]

Interesting that you deem the working class "failures".

where did I say that?

 

[Verax]

where did I say that?

You do realize that most poor people work, right?

 

[TurtleDude]

You do realize that most poor people work, right?

relevance?

 

[Verax]

relevance?

Just thought I'd throw that out there. That the people you want to kick when they are down work full time and if the right got its way these people would be ground into dust. Not to mention a large portion of middle class would then flood the ranks of the poor. That'd be great wouldn't it, if we had 60% in poverty but working full time without any assistance. That's like a libertarian wet dream you only get in 3rd world countries.

 

[TurtleDude]

Just thought I'd throw that out there. That the people you want to kick when they are down work full time and if the right got its way these people would be ground into dust. Not to mention a large portion of middle class would then flood the ranks of the poor. That'd be great wouldn't it, if we had 60% in poverty but working full time without any assistance. That's like a libertarian wet dream you only get in 3rd world countries.

not wanting to be looted and have my taxes constantly increased is hardly "kicking" other people. You labor under the delusion that the only proper way to help people is to take money from others and give it to them. I don't buy that crap and what is really hilarious is that conservatives/RW Libertarians are far more generous to charity than left-wingers. Many LW liberals think that voting for welfare socialists is their civic duty to help the poor. And when they give, its often to leftwing organizations who advocate more socialism or income redistribution rather than actually during a damn thing to help people.

why are so many people who are working in poverty. could it be they are trying to raise children they were not properly equipped to have? could it be they made poor choices that leads to them being compensated at too low a rate?

 

[skq]

I think Elizabeth Warren is more left leaning and Hillary Clinton is more a centrist and that's better, I think.

 

[Verax]

not wanting to be looted and have my taxes constantly increased is hardly "kicking" other people. You labor under the delusion that the only proper way to help people is to take money from others and give it to them. I don't buy that crap and what is really hilarious is that conservatives/RW Libertarians are far more generous to charity than left-wingers. Many LW liberals think that voting for welfare socialists is their civic duty to help the poor. And when they give, its often to leftwing organizations who advocate more socialism or income redistribution rather than actually during a damn thing to help people.

why are so many people who are working in poverty. could it be they are trying to raise children they were not properly equipped to have? could it be they made poor choices that leads to them being compensated at too low a rate?

You'll never get it. Your libertarian pipe dream has already been tried and it doesn't work. Well it does work, really really well for the ultra wealthy, but pretty bad for most everyone else. It's utterly pointless to try and enlighten you to REALITY. Keep pretending the current policies will work for anyone who wants to work hard and the only problem is undeserving "failures". Being that I believe you've said that you grew up wealthy with every advantage, I don't think you grasp what real life is actually like.

 

[TurtleDude]

You'll never get it. Your libertarian pipe dream has already been tried and it doesn't work. Well it does work, really really well for the ultra wealthy, but pretty bad for most everyone else. It's utterly pointless to try and enlighten you to REALITY. Keep pretending the current policies will work for anyone who wants to work hard and the only problem is undeserving "failures". Being that I believe you've said that you grew up wealthy with every advantage, I don't think you grasp what real life is actually like.

you live in an environment where you don't believe in individual freedom or individualism. You think (others) people exist to serve your concept of the greater good whether they like it or not. You try to hide envy and your support for a malignant creeping collectivist government with grand tales of "caring" and "helping others. Combined with your pretending that the only way to help others is to tax those more productive or industrious than you are, more and more. Sorry, I don't buy into your welfare-socialist dreams as the only truth on this planet.

 

[Moderate Right]

Sure it is :roll:

You probably won't like this either:

Everyone is supposed to get richer and richer. It's not the richer's fault that they know how to do it and the poorer don't.

 

[haymarket]

Spoken like someone who is an authority on the subject.

Since the election of Trump, lots of people have become authorities on right wing extremism manifesting itself as mental delusions and illness since we see it every day.

 

[calamity]

Everyone is supposed to get richer and richer. It's not the richer's fault that they know how to do it and the poorer don't.

Lol...yeah, that's the attitude. :roll:

 

[calamity]

not wanting to be looted and have my taxes constantly increased is hardly "kicking" other people. You labor under the delusion that the only proper way to help people is to take money from others and give it to them. I don't buy that crap and what is really hilarious is that conservatives/RW Libertarians are far more generous to charity than left-wingers. Many LW liberals think that voting for welfare socialists is their civic duty to help the poor. And when they give, its often to leftwing organizations who advocate more socialism or income redistribution rather than actually during a damn thing to help people.

why are so many people who are working in poverty. could it be they are trying to raise children they were not properly equipped to have? could it be they made poor choices that leads to them being compensated at too low a rate?

The Left wants to save people from themselves by handing out free birth control and offerring free abortions, education, shelter, healthcare and food. The Right wants to leave them to fend for themselves. The former leads to enabling poor decisions. The latter leads to more poor because only the rich will then be able to afford the tools which lift people out of poverty.

Both sides are fools. Hence, why I am a centrist. "I ain't no fool."