@wildgrass saidBut I am a conservative, and your post becomes meaningless with the words. 'buy me a yacht'. I assume the request is to the government. The government has already given you so much stuff that they cannot 'buy' you a yacht. Secondly, I see a pitiful person asking for just one more free thing from the government. So my mind, my attention to the post, shuts down. The Post starts with a communistic idea and a person such as myself, a non-loser, cannot fathom reading the rest of it. I just hate it, I'm sorry.
Dear Uncle Sam.
I work hard. I work harder than the guy working next to me. I have a proposal to create jobs.
Buy me a yacht. There will be tons of jobs created by the construction project alone. Boatsmen and plumbers and electricians. I need a big one, like Jeff Bezos got. I know his company only benefits from many billions of dollars in federal subsidies, and all I' ...[text shortened]... d.
Please, the taxpayers will understand. It will create jobs.
Sincerely,
A "conservative?"
EVERYBODY!! RHP just wrote me a PM saying I have the record for the most posts on a forum subject (Student Loan Forgiveness). Even the Science and Culture and Sports forums can't say that.
As Mike the MyPillow guy says, thanks for your support! (Can you believe him, he calls your giving him money 'support". I bet YOU fellers dont see it that way. But I digress.
@averagejoe1 saidIt was you who claimed that farmers needed $60 billion.
But I am a conservative, and your post becomes meaningless with the words. 'buy me a yacht'. I assume the request is to the government. The government has already given you so much stuff that they cannot 'buy' you a yacht. Secondly, I see a pitiful person asking for just one more free thing from the government. So my mind, my attention to the post, shuts down. The Po ...[text shortened]... erson such as myself, a non-loser, cannot fathom reading the rest of it. I just hate it, I'm sorry.
This thread is pointing out the absurdity of the distinction you've drawn between the needs of people and the "needs" of a business. The needs of a business are of course non-existent because healthy capitalism depends on the death of bad business models. The CEO of Lockheed pulls in millions of dollars a year in personal income from taxpayers. I'm just wondering where my yacht is.
An economy works for the people not the other way around. Spending public money in the name of job creation is a massive red flag.
@metal-brain saidIt's a great point. I will add it to my proposal. Pretty sure if I make it seem like its important for "safety" then it has a higher likelihood of getting approved.
I want a tractor. I should get one instead of you getting a yacht. I can farm my land with it and feed people. Then someone can drop a bomb on it and destroy it so Lockheed-Martin can create jobs. Or better, not bomb and destroy it so I can feed people. Destroying wealth to create wealth elsewhere is over rated, isn't it?
I have an original idea. Let's not spend so much money on weapons that destroy wealth. I'm glad somebody else thought of it.
"My yacht will come equipped with a pair of F-35 jets and anti-aircraft missiles in case that kind of thing is ever needed."
@wildgrass said"Spending public money (taxes) in the name of job creation is a massive red flag".
It was you who claimed that farmers needed $60 billion.
This thread is pointing out the absurdity of the distinction you've drawn between the needs of people and the "needs" of a business. The needs of a business are of course non-existent because healthy capitalism depends on the death of bad business models. The CEO of Lockheed pulls in millions of dollars a yea ...[text shortened]... e not the other way around. Spending public money in the name of job creation is a massive red flag.
Please write a sentence of the same length telling us all what spending money to pay of debts of citizens is.
Everyone gather around.
@wildgrass saidLike a fish needs a bicycle . 😛
Dear Uncle Sam.
I work hard. I work harder than the guy working next to me. I have a proposal to create jobs.
Buy me a yacht. There will be tons of jobs created by the construction project alone. Boatsmen and plumbers and electricians. I need a big one, like Jeff Bezos got. I know his company only benefits from many billions of dollars in federal subsidies, and all I' ...[text shortened]... d.
Please, the taxpayers will understand. It will create jobs.
Sincerely,
A "conservative?"
@averagejoe1 saidRephrased, if spending public money in the name of job creation is a massive red flag , what is spending public money in the name of paying off personal debts?
"Spending public money (taxes) in the name of job creation is a massive red flag".
Please write a sentence of the same length telling us all what spending money to pay of debts of citizens is.
Everyone gather around.
@AverageJoe1
Like I said, you and the rest of the zombie Trumpite crowd HATES giving ANYTHING to people who need it. For you, if you need it you are not worthy of getting it.
Like banks lend money mostly to those who don't really need it, just to shore up some business proposition.
@averagejoe1 saidThat’s the point if you are building it for profit then you put the capital in not the state you limp wristed commie.
The stadium. Then who builds it. And if I build it I would expect to make a profit. Or, are you saying we don't need a stadium.
I am serious here, and I hope you don't respond with 'government'. My taxes are parked at the government. I never go to stadiums. Certainly tax money is only for 'The Common Good" (brrrrr) as marauder says. The stadium does not qualify.
So, what is your thought on all that?
@wildgrass
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz?
My friends all drive Porsches, I must make amends
Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends
So, oh, Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz?
-----------------------
@metal-brain saidTrickle Down. It will just work. It must just work. Never mind that it has been tried for forty years and has never even come close to working, the theory says it must work and the rich people say it must work, therefore it will work and create jobs and make people rich.
It would work too. It would help create jobs.
Also, the Loch Ness Monster has to exist.
@averagejoe1 saidNo.
Such a discussion would require a doctorate in political negotiations
All we need is: how rich were the very rich before; how rich are they now? How poor are the very poor before; how poor are they now?
The rich have been getting richer under neoconservatism, and the poor have been getting poorer. This is not opinion; this is simple observation. It doesn't require an academic degree to notice that only a handful of people have prospered under your beloved Reaganism, and the common folk have suffered under you.
@sonhouse saidI am sure all you say is perfectly true as usual, but.....
@AverageJoe1
Like I said, you and the rest of the zombie Trumpite crowd HATES giving ANYTHING to people who need it. For you, if you need it you are not worthy of getting it.
Like banks lend money mostly to those who don't really need it, just to shore up some business proposition.
Could you answer my question. Please don't ask me to retype it or to present links.
Standing by.
@shallow-blue saidA great subject for a thread.
Trickle Down. It will just work. It must just work. Never mind that it has been tried for forty years and has never even come close to working, the theory says it must work and the rich people say it must work, therefore it will work and create jobs and make people rich.
Also, the Loch Ness Monster has to exist.
But will any one answer my question?
@averagejoe1 saidNo honest man will answer a dishonest question.
But will any one answer my question?
So, no.