Debates
25 Aug 21
25 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidActually, you seem angry.
I agree with all that you say, the proper use of tax money. Good stuff for another thread. This one has nothing to do with what you are saying, however. Zahlanzi wrote extraneously himself, but he seems angry, I appreciate your post.
Almost half the posts to this thread are from you.
25 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidThank You 🙂
I agree with all that you say, the proper use of tax money. Good stuff for another thread. This one has nothing to do with what you are saying, however. Zahlanzi wrote extraneously himself, but he seems angry, I appreciate your post.
25 Aug 21
@mchill saidWhy am I being chided? Would it not be an interesting conundrum to write about, the grocer hands him money at the back door, he comes thru the front door and spends that same money for groceries owned by the grocer? Have libs no sense of humor, and maybe a bit of quizzicalness about such a funny scenario, which is, for all intents and purposes, true?
Thank You 🙂
They literally extrapolate all kinds of stuff into the simple post, about charity and Amazon, etc, and totally overlook this cute little story and don't even respond to it. Not even a chuckle. Strange indeed.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
26 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidSerious comment: you have no idea what any of the economic terns you use mean in the resl world, at the pit face. Or more likely, you do, but you intentionally twist their meanings so you can preach your libertarian lies to the gullible workers of middle USA.
Any comments, from facetious to serious are welcome.
'Producer' does not mean 'capital-only magnate'.
'Shopkeeper' does not mean 'the kind of rich socialists propose to tax heavily'.
'Poor' does not mean 'useless parasite' and 'rich' does not mean 'virtuous'.
26 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidWe do have a sense of humour Joe with illiberal clowns like you spouting rambling nonsensical garbage we HAVE to have a sense of humour.
Why am I being chided? Would it not be an interesting conundrum to write about, the grocer hands him money at the back door, he comes thru the front door and spends that same money for groceries owned by the grocer? Have libs no sense of humor, and maybe a bit of quizzicalness about such a funny scenario, which is, for all intents and purposes, true?
They literally ...[text shortened]... overlook this cute little story and don't even respond to it. Not even a chuckle. Strange indeed.
Grocers do not pay there taxes to a man at the back door unless they are bribing a city officiial.
What was your question?
26 Aug 21
@kevcvs57 saidThe back door, such as that? It was an analogy. You could say that the govt wouldn't tell the grocer to do what I wrote, either. And splitting hairs about producers and non-producers? Yeah, that part was hard for y'all to get your arms around. Whew. Relax, fellers.
We do have a sense of humour Joe with illiberal clowns like you spouting rambling nonsensical garbage we HAVE to have a sense of humour.
Grocers do not pay there taxes to a man at the back door unless they are bribing a city officiial.
What was your question?
Handy Andy was a mess about analogies, too. "Let's say I bought a rocket..." YOU DIDN'T BUY A ROCKET!" 🤔
26 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidYour neocon vulture capitalist malarkey, is nothing but a racket. STOP SELLING US YOUR RACKET!
The back door, such as that? It was an analogy. You could say that the govt wouldn't tell the grocer to do what I wrote, either. And splitting hairs about producers and non-producers? Yeah, that part was hard for y'all to get your arms around. Whew. Relax, fellers.
Handy Andy was a mess about analogies, too. "Let's say I bought a rocket..." YOU DIDN'T BUY A ROCKET!" 🤔
26 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidBut that is not an analogy joe it’s a hypothetical scenario employed to misrepresent the role of the tax collection and dispersal system within a complex economy.
The back door, such as that? It was an analogy. You could say that the govt wouldn't tell the grocer to do what I wrote, either. And splitting hairs about producers and non-producers? Yeah, that part was hard for y'all to get your arms around. Whew. Relax, fellers.
Handy Andy was a mess about analogies, too. "Let's say I bought a rocket..." YOU DIDN'T BUY A ROCKET!" 🤔
It’s clearly the complexity that’s beyond your arm span.
If some of the grocers tax contribution did not go too support unemployed and low wage earners his business would suffer as a result and consequently he would have less income to tax.
If you really want to cut the amount tax being redistributed to the poor you be supporting minimum wage bills when they are presented to Congress.
26 Aug 21
@kevcvs57 saidA thing which is compared to something else in significant respects.
But that is not an analogy joe it’s a hypothetical scenario employed to misrepresent the role of the tax collection and dispersal system within a complex economy.
It’s clearly the complexity that’s beyond your arm span.
If some of the grocers tax contribution did not go too support unemployed and low wage earners his business would suffer as a result and consequently he w ...[text shortened]... redistributed to the poor you be supporting minimum wage bills when they are presented to Congress.
The scenario at the store is compared to the flow of money in the society as a whole.
And I am sorry that you think I am trying to ‘do’ something. Just a little levity, as you fellows have to deal with Biden, and the people in his care, as he plummets. Didnt mean nuthin by it.Just a little levity,
26 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidDescribing unfortunates as losers ain’t levity it’s bully boy cruel. We’re you the fat spoilt brat in the playground joe.
A thing which is compared to something else in significant respects.
The scenario at the store is compared to the flow of money in the society as a whole.
And I am sorry that you think I am trying to ‘do’ something. Just a little levity, as you fellows have to deal with Biden, and the people in his care, as he plummets. Didnt mean nuthin by it.Just a little levity,
26 Aug 21
@kevcvs57 saidRepublicans have been pushing the "moochers" talking point for decades. Gutted social programs wherever they could, keeping minimum wage the same.
Describing unfortunates as losers ain’t levity it’s bully boy cruel. We’re you the fat spoilt brat in the playground joe.
It's obvious why.
A desperate worker doesn't quit in search of a better job. A desperate worker doesn't risk losing his healthcare insurance even if his employer treats him like crap. A hungry worker will work for pennies because otherwise he will go even more hungry.
It's obvious but not to poor americans who identify as republican. To them, it's more plausible that the reason they are poor is that other poor people are "stealing" tax money. That other poor are lazy and just profiting from the generosity of uncle Sam. It;s the immigrants. The minorities. The godless liberals. THEY are to blame. Someone who receives a few dollars in social welfare, not the corporations who steal billions.
26 Aug 21
@kevcvs57 saidWho described unfortunates as losers? Where did i say that? Maybe you read in a post where the words poor, unfortunate and ‘laid off’ were attributed and added to the facts of my post?? Search out those posters and give them heck for me.
Describing unfortunates as losers ain’t levity it’s bully boy cruel. We’re you the fat spoilt brat in the playground joe.
Dont you hate it when a poster does that?
@zahlanzi saidMinimum wage is for menial jobs. Usually starter jobs. McD's, wherever. Some wages are higher than the minimum wage. So after several months of learning self-reliance, a 'worker' lands a higher paying job. So it goes from there. And govt. has nothing to do with it. He does well, raises a family. I love this country.
Republicans have been pushing the "moochers" talking point for decades. Gutted social programs wherever they could, keeping minimum wage the same.
It's obvious why.
A desperate worker doesn't quit in search of a better job. A desperate worker doesn't risk losing his healthcare insurance even if his employer treats him like crap. A hungry worker will work for pennies bec ...[text shortened]... lame. Someone who receives a few dollars in social welfare, not the corporations who steal billions.
But, alas, there will be people who have heard about liberal welfare programs that give money away, to people who otherwise could be totally self-sufficient. If it were not for these losers, there would be more money for the needy. But they DO get the money. You refer to them as moochers.....at least you recognize their existence, Zahlanzi. So there they are, mooching.
So tell this Republican, where have I gone wrong with this response. Did I leave something out? Did YOU leave something out??
The rest of your post, I dont know what in the World you mean by a worker doesn't quit in search of a better job. Is that a Romanian thing? People here quit to ( take) a better job. Or to be a bum or a loser. This is so obvious.
Next, it is a given that a worker does not risk losing his healthcare, and I don't know what you mean by an employer 'treating him like crap'. Where in the world are you coming from, did you once have a crappy employer?
Next, ,,,,,,A hungry worker works so that he can make money for food, and so that he can establish himself in the work world. He then moves up to a higher paying job. But, I digress.
26 Aug 21
@AverageJoe1
So your bottom line is you would have all those non producers executed so the economy won't have to support their sorry asses.
26 Aug 21
@sonhouse saidI don't quite get you here, but if you speak of Afghans being flown in, let us hope that they will 'produce' and not be a drag on our already-overloaded welfare program. Do you at least agree with that?
@AverageJoe1
So your bottom line is you would have all those non producers executed so the economy won't have to support their sorry asses.