

hide menu
Anonymous commenting is allowed
User avatar #20 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
Conservatives think people should be responsible for themselves, and liberals think the government need to step in and help the least fortunate.
Liberals don't want to rip your figerative legs, they demand rich people to quit hogging all the money and pay higher taxes.
User avatar #24 to #20 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
"hogging all the money"? don't you mean compiling all the money they earned from hardwork?
User avatar #26 to #24 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
So you're telling me that guy who works two jobs at minimum wage doesn't work as hard as the actor that earns billions for starring in one movie?
#33 to #26 - scilla has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #36 to #33 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
Actually no, it's really all about dumb luck.
You basically live with hundreds of people with your exact skills, and yet only one of you is allowed to get the job while the others stay where they are as they scramble to move up the ladder the moment the first winner or his new equivalents move or fall off the ladder.
User avatar #38 to #36 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
I'm just saying, a genius who works hard will earn more money than an average person who works just as hard. If you could become a millionaire just by working hard at a fast food establishment, no one would try to become anything else. Anyone can work at McDonald's®, but not everyone can be a rocket scientist.
User avatar #42 to #38 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
I already told you about skilless people making billions.
Read that response.
User avatar #51 to #42 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
I know, but that is just a few people. Most rich people actually earned it.
User avatar #59 to #51 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
Yeah, but once you reach the top, all your money comes from others doing all the work for you.
User avatar #61 to #59 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
Yeah, but you have to know how to manage those other people. You have to have management skills to be in that position, which brings us back to your starting point. The Burger King cashier may have 15 years of experience, but he lacks management skills, which is why he will never become the manager of the establishment.
User avatar #65 to #61 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
So what's stopping him from earning these skills?
I repeat, you learn skills from working hard.
If I don't have those skills it must mean I didn't work hard.
Besides, you learn skills from getting the job in the first place.
The cashier didn't learn how to use a cash register until his first day of the job or previous cashier job.
User avatar #27 to #26 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
well the actor clearly worked his ass off to get to where he is now
User avatar #32 to #27 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
So the guy who's been working at a fast food place at minimum wage for 15 years should rightfully be the manager of the place?
You see, in our economy not everyone can make it to the top of the ladder.
Hard work, knowing people, and experience mean nothing because in the end it's all up to dumb luck. That is why the majority can't afford trips to disney world after a trip to hawaii.

"Because they worked hard and earned it" is an awful excuse because it implies everyone who isn't better off is a lazy ******* who'd to blame for not being able to properly get food on their table.
User avatar #104 to #32 - buttgauges (12/28/2012) [-]
If I was working at a fast food place and was earning the same amount of money as a corporate leader I'd think something was wrong with my government.
User avatar #235 to #104 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
It happens dude.
Mostly because not everyone can be promoted to management positions.
There isn't enough room for everyone.
Rich people don't seem to understand that logic.
User avatar #242 to #235 - buttgauges (12/28/2012) [-]
So those people who didn't get those high paying job positions should be compensated with extra money from the rich, right? I think that's your logic at least.
Although you can't just give money to specifically those people, it'd have to go to every poorer person.

In my own opinion giving the money of the rich to poor people leads to zero ambition. No one will WANT to even attempt to climb the ladder if they get to reap the benefits of those who have.
User avatar #251 to #242 - sketchysketchist (12/29/2012) [-]
No, oh god no. I think if you have a decnt job and can make ends meet fairly, then you don't need help from the government. I'm more focused on those people over-working themselves or homeless and unable to get a job. And giving health care to those that can't afford 10,000 in hospital bills for a dead relative.

Not really, it gives them no excuse to be living in the street, showerless and without a suit for a job interview. Climbing the ladder isn't an easy job, and it's always just about dumb luck and if your likable and not crippled in some way that complicates the job.
Of course, I feel the government should do something like demand proof that someone's been actually looking for a job rather than staying home and getting high using gov money.
Even I'm pissed when I see people doing this.
User avatar #252 to #251 - buttgauges (12/29/2012) [-]
The problem is that the government can't really know who actually needs the money and who isn't living off of welfare.
Like you said, people live off of government money for the wrong reasons. And quite frankly, I run across more people abusing the welfare system than anything else. I guess what I am trying to say is that although your idea seems nice, it's kind of difficult to put into action. It would be rather difficult to make sure that the specific expectations for these people receiving the money would be met.

And you bring up health care, but I'm assuming you live in the U.S. so you must have heard of Obamacare. My issue with giving everyone free health care is where that money comes from... taxes.
So.. what happens when all that money going to health care starts to run out? Well, easy solution, you just raise taxes. But eventually funds will get thin to the point that people will begin to get denied health care because they are risk cases. And considering the majority of people cannot afford that $10,000 in hospital bills, a lot of people are going to be grabbing for this free health care.
It may be the answer for now... but not a lot of people are looking into the future.
User avatar #253 to #252 - sketchysketchist (12/29/2012) [-]
Well it can use some of the money to make a group who's purpose is to investigate. This group would be paid workers, meaning more jobs, meaning more people not relying on welfare and maybe more taxpayers. I'm not sure if there's more to it, but I feel this could solve the problem.

Well, I think the more well off won't need to rely on health care, but it could benefit all the financially unstable sick people. I know taxing the rich more isn't going to solve all the country's problems, but it can lighten the weight a bit.

I find how the government works to be very complicated, but I know there are easy solutions to many problems. And when I'm wrong, I'm willing to listen to any logical solutions and reasons why I'd be wrong.
User avatar #254 to #253 - buttgauges (12/29/2012) [-]
If the government wanted to make a group to "investigate" they would have already... I don't think it would happen unfortunately.

And you say taxing the rich.. but everyone will be paying that tax for health care. All tax brackets are affected by it, not just the well off.

Yes... the government is very complicated but it is also very corrupted. :3 I vote for a new one.
User avatar #258 to #254 - sketchysketchist (12/29/2012) [-]
True, I don't get why they haven't bothered.

Well, of course, since everyone's taking advantage of the free health care. But I'm also focused on the idea of drastically increasing the more well off people in the country because I find it messed up that they have enough money for 3 mansions, but don't expect to get taxed.

It's corrupted alright. But a completely new one isn't the best idea. I think we should only change the bad and keep everything that's been working well.
User avatar #37 to #32 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
it's all up to "dumb luck"? is it "dumb luck" that my father's parents both died before he was 20 and him and all 4 of his siblings turned out to be successful people? or is it taking opportunities and working your ass off?
User avatar #46 to #37 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
So just because your family made it means everyone else should be able to?
Because you get to choose to live on the street rather than eat steak for dinner every night, right?
User avatar #53 to #46 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
you clearly missed my point, i was just using my family as a example.. i'm not going to dig any deeper into this argument because a conservative can not change a liberal's outlook on things, nor can a liberal change a conservative's outlook on things
User avatar #57 to #53 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
I get your point, your father and his siblings made it, so can everyone else.
Which basically comes off as, you just want to live poor all your life.

Fine just read this link to this article debunking every rich person's excuses.
If this doesn't make you change your mind, so be it.

You need to login to view this link
You need to login to view this link
User avatar #63 to #57 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
my point was to work your ass off because it will pay off in the long run
User avatar #66 to #63 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
Because if you've been dedicated to working two full-time jobs at minimum wage for 10 years, it's your fault someone else got a promotion.
User avatar #71 to #66 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
you can keep denying valid points, ignorance is bliss
User avatar #74 to #71 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
I don't see any points you've made, let alone valid ones.
So refresh me, what are your points?
User avatar #236 to #234 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
You've already showed signs of being a troll, there's no point in arguing with you because rich people are right and poor people are failling themselves for not getting promoted all the time.
User avatar #237 to #236 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
can't argue with a liberal
User avatar #238 to #237 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
That word doesn't mean what you think it means.
You use it so much, it's so obvious you're one of those ******* conservatives that make real conservatives look bad.
User avatar #239 to #238 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
OK i'm calling this quits now because as previously stated, a conservative can not change a liberal's outlook on things, nor can a liberal change a conservative's outlook on things
User avatar #240 to #239 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
Yeah they can, only an idiot can be too hard headed to accept logic.
User avatar #241 to #240 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
liberal logic= the unfortunate ones should obtain support from the the upper class because they're "rich people [who should] quit hogging all the money and pay higher taxes"
User avatar #250 to #241 - sketchysketchist (12/29/2012) [-]
Maybe I'm wrong.
Perhaps it's not right for governments to raise taxes for rich people, because that money could be spent on there 5th vacation of the year or maybe an down payment on an other summer home.
I'm so sorry to think it's fair for the rich and successful to give up anything they want like a new car or a two-story 8 roomed house with a pool and tennis court just to help a single mother of three get food stamps to last until her children turn 18.
I'm so very sorry that your family can barely make ends meet after spending hundreds in your vacation to celebrate you having all B's in your report card.
User avatar #35 to #32 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
Success isn't determined by how hard you work, it's determined by how much you have to offer. Anyone can work hard, but if you don't have the necessary skills, hard work can never bring you to the top. You can only benefit if the invisible hand needs something you have.
User avatar #40 to #35 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
Kardashians, Paris Hilton, Honey boo boo, the cast of Jersey shore, The cast of teen moms, and many more.
What do they have to offer?
The only reason they make money is because someone takes advantage of the fact that people know them.
Sometimes they're just born into it.
Skills also mean nothing when it comes to wealth.
User avatar #49 to #40 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
But people like them barely make up anything of the upper class. Most of it's members are doctors, or lawyers, or engineers, or bankers. Also, just because you are wealthy doesn't guarantee success for your children. I know a lot of rich kids who are total idiots and will never amount to anything.
User avatar #55 to #49 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
But they still get millions from their parents and don't want to pay higher taxes because it's unfair.
Not true, the richest people around own companies and people who do all the dirty work.
Doctors, lawyers, engineers, and (not really) bankers make up the middle class.
User avatar #58 to #55 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
The doctors and lawyers are the upper class citizens, unless they are lawyers who only do things like traffic court, or a doctor of a low skilled field.
User avatar #56 to #55 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
I told you already, you can't become rich from hard work alone. The factory worker who has worked his ass off for 30 years may have worked harder, but he can't run an entire company. The worker is easily replaceable, while the CEO is a MUCH different story.
User avatar #60 to #56 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
That's why they lay off workers and not ceo's, even though they could be better off with one less ceo who earns enough to support many of the workers families. .
User avatar #64 to #60 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
They would be better laying off the worker because the number of people who are unemployed can easily fill his position.
User avatar #68 to #64 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
Yes, because that ceo who has enough money in the bank to support many others can't be fired so they can hire a large amount of new workers because he's worked so freaking hard. Because he's worked so hard, the government has no right to raise his taxes.
User avatar #70 to #68 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
The government provides him healthcare, they have the most powerful military in the world to protect him from any threat from another country, and the fact that THEY ARE THE GOVERNMENT gives them the right to raise anyone's taxes.
User avatar #73 to #70 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
Then why does it bother you to hear that the government wants to increase their taxes?
Why are you so upset that the money goes to the people living on the streets?
You know, those unsuccessful people who never worked hard to make it to the top?

And even if you're fine with the government increasing your taxes, that makes you a liberal, because that's what true liberals want.
User avatar #75 to #73 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
Actually, I'm a conservative, I don't think you're clear on the distinction.
User avatar #80 to #75 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
I repeat, conservatives think people should be responsible for themselves, and liberals think the government need to step in and help the least fortunate.

Now, answer my questions unless you take back what you said.
User avatar #81 to #80 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
Taxes don't go from the rich to the poor, they go to the government.
User avatar #84 to #81 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
Then the government gives it to where it's needed most.
Unemployment is rising, so money will go there.
So money will go to the poor.

Now, answer my questions unless you accept that rich people don't need so much money.
#85 to #84 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
here is a potato butt
User avatar #47 to #40 - Pikachuuu (12/28/2012) [-]
i agreed with the first statement but you lost me when you said "Skills also mean nothing when it comes to wealth"... what exactly do you mean by that
User avatar #50 to #47 - sketchysketchist (12/28/2012) [-]
A baby is born into a rich family.
All it's parents money will go to it when it grows up.
That baby has no skills, however it now has rich people giving everything they worked for to it.
Hence, skills don't always matter.
#21 to #20 - txsslg **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#28 to #21 - curbed (12/28/2012) [-]
Does anyone know what this guy just said?
User avatar #41 to #28 - scilla (12/28/2012) [-]
I... I'm not sure that it's trying to communicate with us. Perhaps that is it's mating call?
#48 to #41 - curbed (12/28/2012) [-]
Well... what would be attracted to that? Usually mating rituals make some sort of sense.
User avatar #92 to #48 - xpurpledragonx ONLINE (12/28/2012) [-]
Not the song the op. You see, it is hard for it to sing with ***** in its mouth.
#255 to #92 - curbed (12/29/2012) [-]
Ah, fair enough.
 Friends (0)