"Redistribution of Wealth"

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2814375
What is the main difference between socialism and capitalism? Private property. Has anyone said your house was going to become gov't property??...
You may own it in name, but what can you do with it? You have to charge a certain rent. You can't build because your might ruin the cave where the hairy chested nut scratcher lives. The gov't may not "take" my land, but they sure are limiting what I can do with it. Is that liberty?
 

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2815520
You may own it in name, but what can you do with it? You have to charge a certain rent. You can't build because your might ruin the cave where the hairy chested nut scratcher lives. The gov't may not "take" my land, but they sure are limiting what I can do with it. Is that liberty?
This is very true, but Obama has nothing to do with that. We aren't really free either, but it sounds good....
 

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2815509
Granted I'm not to hot on Obama's gun restrictions, I like my guns.
Then you'd better sell them now, Obama will try to overturn the recent Supreme Court decision that the 2nd Amendment refers to an individuals right to bear arms. If you like your guns, then Obama is not your candidate.
 

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2815522
This is very true, but Obama has nothing to do with that. We aren't really free either, but it sounds good....
What do you mean, most of these restrictions are through radical left "environmental"or similar groups.
 

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2815522
This is very true, but Obama has nothing to do with that. We aren't really free either, but it sounds good....
No were are not totally free, but there cannot be total freedom or you have anarchy. If I want your car, I hit you over the head and it's my car until someone hits me over the head and takes my car. we have basic laws governing society along with morality. The opposite is the gov't taking my car to give it to you when you have done nothing to earn it.
 

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2815529
No were are not totally free, but there cannot be total freedom or you have anarchy. If I want your car, I hit you over the head and it's my car until someone hits me over the head and takes my car. we have basic laws governing society along with morality. The opposite is the gov't taking my car to give it to you when you have done nothing to earn it.
Sweet, I bet you got a sweet ride! J/K
Yeah, its one of those things in our country, just like the democracy thing in another thread.
 

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2815532
Destroyed iraq. Come now you can't possibly think that Iraq was actually better under sadaam than bush.
In what regard? Under Saddam they still had their infrastructure. There wasn't sectarian violence b/c he suppressed it. Iran was more stable due to the constant pressure asserted by Iraq. But were they 'free' (if there is such a thing), no. So what are your benchmarks?
 

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2815523
Then you'd better sell them now, Obama will try to overturn the recent Supreme Court decision that the 2nd Amendment refers to an individuals right to bear arms. If you like your guns, then Obama is not your candidate.
So the NRA keeps telling me through their flyers. He can try to take them, isn't gonna happen. I really don't worry about it, just like I know Roe V Wade will never be overturned.
 

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2815546
So the NRA keeps telling me through their flyers. He can try to take them, isn't gonna happen. I really don't worry about it, just like I know Roe V Wade will never be overturned.
Ok, he does not "take" you gun, but he and the democrats pass a huge tax on ammo. This effectively negates your ability to "bear arms". Without ammo, the gun is useless.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2815523
Then you'd better sell them now, Obama will try to overturn the recent Supreme Court decision that the 2nd Amendment refers to an individuals right to bear arms. If you like your guns, then Obama is not your candidate.
If you think ANY President could overturn the 2nd Amendment and change gun laws, then you obviously don't know the power of the NRA. Besides, not enough of the Supreme Court Justices will kick off or retire while he's in office to make any drastic changes in the Court...
 

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2815549
Ok, he does not "take" you gun, but he and the democrats pass a huge tax on ammo. This effectively negates your ability to "bear arms". Without ammo, the gun is useless.
True, unless you have a ton of ammo or reload yourself.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Beth
http:///forum/post/2815006
I really wonder what the big deal is. Now, the lowest income earner in this country who pays taxes is paying 10%. Those who make the most money, now pay 35%. That is already inequitable, and a redistribution of wealth. So what is different with what Obama is saying??

Two things Beth that strike me in this interview.
First, race. Obama equates redistribution of wealth with the Civi Rights movement.
Second, and even more importantly, Obama is talkign about redistributing wealth....
Wealth is what you own. Not your income. This is not just another "tax the rich and give to the poor" speech.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Scotts
http:///forum/post/2815129
Holy Moly there is so much that could be said about this....
First of all, by definition, anything the govt. spends money on is a redistribution of wealth. As Beth said, They are taking 35% of my wife's paycheck and using it for something, including your paycheck.
If by your definition a public service is NOT a redistribution of wealth, then how can you not call health insurance for every american a public service, and therefore NOT a redistribution of wealth. So in fact it should be a good thing.
However you have to admit and realize that you are being paid with our tax money.
I am being paid by tax money; mine and yours.
That is not redistribution of wealth. That is spending. Anyone who is qualifiesd for my job could get it. Now, if my job was only hiring a certain gender, race or economic class then you could argue it is redistribution.
Redistribution of wealth is taking from one class (and in this case race as Obama ties the civil rights into it) and giving to another class.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/2815375
Obama spokesman Bill Burton on Monday accused FOX News of pushing a "fake news controversy" to further an agenda.
"This is a fake news controversy drummed up by the all too common alliance of FOX News, the Drudge Report and John McCain, who apparently decided to close out his campaign with the same false, desperate attacks that have failed for months," Burton said in a written statement Monday. "In this seven-year-old interview, Senator Obama did not say that the courts should get into the business of redistributing wealth at all."
Bill Burton is either ignorant or a liar.
I clearly quoted what Obama said...
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2815509
-Bush used cocaine
-IMO Bush has destroyed a couple nations, US and Iraq
-Where have you been on the Birth Certificate thing? Already been shown.
-Bush idiot
-McCain ranked in the bottom 5 of his naval class= idiot
-Socialist? How nationalized AIG? Oh yeah, Bush...
Granted I'm not to hot on Obama's gun restrictions, I like my guns.
Destroyed Iraq huh? hmm... I'll tell everyone around here their country has been destroyed... I'm sure they will be as surprised as I am.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2815539
In what regard? Under Saddam they still had their infrastructure. There wasn't sectarian violence b/c he suppressed it. Iran was more stable due to the constant pressure asserted by Iraq. But were they 'free' (if there is such a thing), no. So what are your benchmarks?
I'd say not having to watch while your dad is fed to lions or watching while governemnt forces r ape your wife and daughter a good start to a better life..... then again, that's me. I'd call elections a good benchmark. I'd call the Iraqi army now in control of 13 of the 18 provinces a good benchmark.
No infrastructure huh? What are these roads I drive on? What are these bridges I cross? Where is all of this oil they are producing coming from?
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2815546
So the NRA keeps telling me through their flyers. He can try to take them, isn't gonna happen. I really don't worry about it, just like I know Roe V Wade will never be overturned.
Tell that to the Aussies and Europeans who lost their guns. Tell that to the German people in the 1930's. Tell that to the folks in DC who until recently couldn't own guns...
Sorry; History says it can/does happen. Burying your head in the sand and pretending it can't happen doesn't make it any less of a possibility.
 

1journeyman

Active Member

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2815550
If you think ANY President could overturn the 2nd Amendment and change gun laws, then you obviously don't know the power of the NRA. Besides, not enough of the Supreme Court Justices will kick off or retire while he's in office to make any drastic changes in the Court...
If the NRA can't keep Obama out of office they sure don't have the power you portray them to have.
Bionic, what was the recent Supreme Court decision on the DC gun ban? Do you know how many judges voted each way? Clearly you do not.
The decision was 5 to 4. That takes a grand total of one conservative judge retiring to tip the balance...
 

bionicarm

Active Member

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2815718
If the NRA can't keep Obama out of office they sure don't have the power you portray them to have.
Bionic, what was the recent Supreme Court decision on the DC gun ban? Do you know how many judges voted each way? Clearly you do not.
The decision was 5 to 4. That takes a grand total of one conservative judge retiring to tip the balance...

Journey, you live in a state of paranoia. You think that Big Brother Government is out to get you at every turn in the road. McCain has done nothing but talk in cirlces, promising you the moon, and you believe him. Obama talks straight as to what his plans are, and you call him the AntiChrist of the Second Coming. Now you think he has the power to oveturn one of the most protected Amendments in the Constitution. I personally have not seen Obama's platform on gun control. You seem to be the expert in digging up dirt on the guy, please find his exact stance on what he wants to do in regards to gun legislature and post it here. I'd really like to read it.
As far as "redistribution of wealth" - the problem with you is you read into everything. You take every statement someone says to you as literal. I've been sarcastic with you numerous times, and it's gone completely over your head. Now you take one word and spin it to mean Obama wants to go hit every megarich bank account, pull a percentage out of it, and give it to the poor. I honestly can't believe you think that any president would have that much power and control to pull something like that off. If you do, then you're the most naive person I know.
So now we have the new Robin Hood, let's pick all of his Merry Men:
Maid Marion - I'd say Hillary Clinton, but Sarah Palin is a better fit (she's hot!)
Sheriff of Nottingham - Why John McCain of course
Friar Tuck - John Hagee, Rush Limbaugh, or Carl Rove
Little John - Joe Biden or Colin Powell
Court Jester - too easy, George Bush
 
Top