Political Discussion in Daily Texan

[tigol 2396]

I was hoping you’d grab the low hanging fruit.   It really doesn’t have to be bootstraps.  Being born in America puts you ahead of about 90% of the world in guaranteeing you success.  Want to get knocked up in 10th grade or addicted to drugs, well, yeah you might have blown it.  Who’s fault is that?  

You left out white and male.

[hobbes2702 13033]

I’m super surprised that this well informed “conservative” has zero solutions for any issues and zero reasons for supporting his party other than “I got mine so anyone can”

[fattyflattie 4639]

2 minutes ago, Hmbre97 said:

You've made it clear in your last few posts that your stance is "I've got mine, too bad for everyone else" and that thinking is going to sink this country. You're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

This is the goal in a capitalist society. There are places you can move if you feel compelled to share all your shit with your countrymen.   What’s going to sink this country is the lazy, entitled, and stupid people. 

[TriStone 1724]

13 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Bullshit. “Sticks and stones” was taught to school age children.  Gramps didn’t need a safe space. Gramps didn’t whine about name calling.  Gramps wouldn’t have allowed himself to adopt the victimhood mentality that Trump sold to too many weak minded pussies.

jenniferlawrenceyeahokthumbsup.gif

[Hmbre97 6308]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

This is the goal in a capitalist society. There are places you can move if you feel compelled to share all your shit with your countrymen.   What’s going to sink this country is the lazy, entitled, and stupid people. 

[immamac 42847]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

O&G

O&G is one of the highest base paying industries on earth - this probably skews your view on the world. You also live in the US and work in O&G, which further skews your economic perspective of what the real economy is, since O&G is actually driven much more substantially by governments than actual supply/demand from end users. Basically O&G is artificially propped up/inflated/bullshitted by market forces that don't exist in any other industry - in part due to regulation much farther reaching than domestic policy/subsidy.

There is some truth in this. But I’ve been blessed to spend a lot of time around the c-suites and boards of several of the companies I’ve worked for, and there are some absolutely brilliant people in them. And these are 500 types. Small publics to massive private orgs.  There’s plenty of politics to be sure, but you don’t get there with an A/B scorecard.  You have to be in the room long before the politics even come into play. There is also brilliant people who’s  mind just doesn’t work in that capacity.  To act like they are some regular person who just got lucky and faked it till they make it is disingenuous af. 

It's a near absolute truth. I didn't say that there weren't brilliant CEO's, I was saying that a non-brilliant CEO would likely be just as effective and broadly speaking the brilliant CEO doesn't actually have as drastic of an affect as you believe - again because these companies are publicly held and decisions aren't just made by a single person, but a very complex heirarchy of board members, shareholders and executives. Most of these people are actually just regular people who either had the right connections or were extremely lucky in their careers to be put on projects that led to higher visibility etc etc. You can't will your way to being a CEO of a Fortune 500 company unless you start the company yourself and that brings up a whole host of other "has nothing to do with brilliance" criteria.

Define excessive?  You don’t think someone can spend 1B?  Personally, I’d have a few hundred thousand acres which would take care of a chunk of it, and enough boats to take care of the rest.  Seriously though, where is the line? That can be talked about, but all it is going to do is drive America’s billionaires away.  And did they steal it?  Do every motherfucker on this site not use Amazon as a service?  

No, no one person can actually spend 1B real dollars on things that don't add value to their wealth. It's nearly impossible to spend 1B. Not "buy things that possibly appreciate and require maintenance" I mean just straight up spending. Sure, you can do things like buy materials to build something only to set it on fire and watch it burn, but no reasonable human would do that. You are making an obtuse argument about what the word "spend" means. I mean it in the most common "disposable" sense. It's 1000 1M homes, or 999 1M homes and 10 100k cars or 998 1M homes and 10 100k cars and 100 rolex. I could continue, but each one of those is an item that the general population can't "just buy". 1B is such an astounding amount of money that simply having that amount of money makes it worth more money because of this "spending" problem. 

I agree. My portion of the last project I managed was a bit over 300M so yeah, it’s funny money at some point to most.  I could sell my house and get back with you on the liquid portion, but 1M isn’t even a decent retirement for the middle class.  I don’t think that’s a crazy number for the top 15% of the country.   Then again, the vast vast majority of the country doesn’t contribute to that level, so wtf are they owed Bezos’ money?  Because they exist? 

Your view of the top 15% of the country is out of touch, maybe from what you are exposed to, maybe because of your economic background and upbringing, but substantially more than 15% of the country will never have close to 1M liquid at any point in their lives. In fact the median lifetime earnings of an American is 1.7M - the average is under 1M and people who do not have a HS diploma or GED rarely exceed the average, meaning that those without a HS Diploma or GED never in their entire life of income producing years combined will ever have 1M if they saved every penny they've ever had. That's not poor people, that's AVERAGE.  

 

Alright so a few things answered in line.

Your answer isn't stupid like a lot of the suspects that people are throwing darts at, it's just really naive for someone who hasn't really thought much about what happens outside of their sphere of influence. It's a strange effect of personal economic wellbeing - you tend to not see how truly "lucky" you are, and are led to believe that "your own hard work got you there", when in reality - the opportunities that you have and the position you hold definitely wouldn't have happened had you not worked hard, but that's only about 40% of what got you where you are. The other 60% you have absolutely no control over and once you realize it, the more you want to "be that 60% for as many people as you can".

What we are seeing now with the wealth disparity gap particularly with the GOP agenda is that those who do have the ability to have a massive positive economic impact  on people's lives who are working their ass off and trying as hard as they can (the 40%), instead of helping are saying LOL MINE FUCKER WORK HARDER. It's a paradox between the people who have enough and the people where the entire worlds worth of wealth still wouldn't be enough. 

[immamac 42847]

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/business/01scene.html

Cool article from 2007. 

[immamac 42847]

Lets use a really easy example - Me.

So I worked really hard, for years and have dedicated thousands maybe even 10s of thousands of hours into the several iterations of this community. I had absolutely nothing to do with blacklab's business deals before I even knew him and even further to that the only reason I met blacklab was because of texdude2006 introducing us. Basically sheer dumb luck that we got to know each other and get close enough for me to be a big part of the site. I also met blacklab at a time where he was trying to grow shaggy into a lifestyle business bla bla bla - I fit into what he was looking for as help in many aspects. Fast forward years - some shit went sideways (again not in my control), but through the entire time I was involved, sometimes for no pay or significantly less pay than market would have dictated (my 40% contribution to not say fuck it). Blacklab gets sued - loses a lawsuit and then chooses to say fuck it I'm not going to help with this site anymore. Boom I was in a unique position to have Surly. 

Surly alone makes me more fortunate than 70% of the country. It's like winning the lottery, where the only thing to be eligible is your 40% working your dick off.

[fattyflattie 4639]

Don’t want to longcat @immamac but good reply.   There are definitely bias we pull from our personal experiences.  But I really think too much credit is given to luck. I got the in the field I did by only applying to that industry.  I went in underpaid (because of my school and degree) and worked my balls off all over the world to move up.  I’d wager I have a fuckload more community college credits than most on this board.  That’s attainable to even the poorest non whitest males in the country.   

[synoptic 138]

Well my grand pappy fought in world war 1 and world war 2 and he killed nazis in both.  He got his hands blown off by a panzer tank in the 2nd, so when he got back to the US he killed a grizzly and he built his own bear hands with his own bare hands.  Long before the internet was invented he died from a broken heart when he realized he had no more nazis left to kill.  But it follows that everyone who disagrees with me on the internet is a gaping pussy.

Edited June 7, 2021 by synoptic

[Dahobbs 17534]

9 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Don’t want to longcat @immamac but good reply.   There are definitely bias we pull from our personal experiences.  But I really think too much credit is given to luck. I got the in the field I did by only applying to that industry.  I went in underpaid (because of my school and degree) and worked my balls off all over the world to move up.  I’d wager I have a fuckload more community college credits than most on this board.  That’s attainable to even the poorest non whitest males in the country.   

Survivorship bias:

 

[workswithseed 2103]

There were Nazis in WW1

 

[Js1 85325]

2 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

This is kind of ironic coming from a party that encourages paying people to sit at home because “pay is not enough for bartenders!”   UBI for everyone because it’s just impossible to be middle class these days.   Let’s cap and redistribute the wealth of the most intelligent and hard working of our society because it’s just not fair they were smarter and worked harder.   Victimhood and giant gaping pussies indeed.  

I bet you or people you know took a shit ton of PPP loans and sit around bitching about "welfare." 

[atomheartbevo 89659]

3 hours ago, TriStone said:

Please.  You know damn well your gramps would have been steaming mad about it and, being unable to lay hands on the person who called him that, would most likely have even vented about it to others via available communication mediums of the day.  What he most definitely would NOT have done is go look in a mirror and tell himself, "Oh my god! I am a giant pussy!"

He'd know what we all know: The giant pussy is the person calling people names simply because they know they can do it without getting popped in the mouth.

I'm picturing gramps driving around the country with a printout of everybody who ever said anything bad about him on the internet and beating their asses, no matter the age.

 

[fattyflattie 4639]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

I bet you or people you know took a shit ton of PPP loans and sit around bitching about "welfare." 

Maybe. Of course most of them will pay more taxes in a decade than most welfare recipients will ever provide.   

[Dahobbs 17534]

13 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Maybe. Of course most of them will pay more taxes in a decade than most welfare recipients will ever provide.   

And they received far more money than most welfare recipients will ever get from the government. It seems weird to be all up in arms about a less than $9,000 per year for the average federal welfare recipient. 

Edited June 7, 2021 by Dahobbs

[hobbes2702 13033]

22 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Maybe. Of course most of them will pay more taxes in a decade than most welfare recipients will ever provide.   

Dude do you just not understand anything 

[fattyflattie 4639]

22 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Dude do you just not understand anything 

Explain it to me, then.  

[hobbes2702 13033]

38 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

And they received far more money than most welfare recipients will ever get from the government. It seems weird to be all up in arms about a less than $9,000 per year for the average federal welfare recipient. 

It’s right here for you. 

[hobbes2702 13033]

2 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

This is the goal in a capitalist society. There are places you can move if you feel compelled to share all your shit with your countrymen.   What’s going to sink this country is the lazy, entitled, and stupid people. 

I also love the “move if you don’t like it”. Or what we could do is begin to change this country into the kind of society that the majority of its citizens want it to be. You know that whole American thing where people choose their government.

[fattyflattie 4639]

4 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

It’s right here for you. 

Imagine if that went to paying teachers more?  Or rising tides lifting all boats, into the middle class to lessen their tax burden. 

[fattyflattie 4639]

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

I also love the “move if you don’t like it”. Or what we could do is begin to change this country into the kind of society that the majority of its citizens want it to be. You know that whole American thing where people choose their government.

So in ‘22, if things flip back, you still going to go with that?   Because 4 years ago the majority of the country wanted Trump.  Were you cool with that? 

Edited June 7, 2021 by fattyflattie

[hobbes2702 13033]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

Imagine if that went to paying teachers more?  Or rising tides lifting all boats, into the middle class to lessen their tax burden. 

Cool. So how do we do that? Anyone on welfare is thrown off it? 

You want to pay teachers more but continue to support a party that defunds public schools.

You want to lessen the middle class tax burden but support a party that literally increased the middle class tax burden in favor of reducing that “burden” on the rich.

What other ideas would you like to see implemented while voting exactly the opposite of?

[hobbes2702 13033]

9 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

So in ‘22, if things flip back, you still going to go with that?   Because 4 years ago the majority of the country wanted Trump.  Were you cool with that? 

The majority of the country did not want trump. Math is hard.

That said, yea, that’s how democracy works. The people choose their government 

Edited June 7, 2021 by hobbes2702

[Captainant 27661]

14 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

That said, yea, that’s how democracy works. The people choose their government 

In theory at least. Voter suppression bills and extreme gerrymandering not withstanding.

[fattyflattie 4639]

1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

The majority of the country did not want trump. Math is hard

Yeah brain fart on that one.

[fattyflattie 4639]

1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

What other ideas would you like to see implemented while voting exactly the opposite of?

Flat tax.  I dgaf if you make $10 or 100m/yr. You pay xx% like every single one of your fellow Americans.  We strive for fairness in every other aspect of America, except when it’s time to pay.  Then the corps pay less, the poor pay less, the rich pay less, the middle pay more.  It makes no sense.  Everyone pays property taxes (renters too!) so why tf not income taxes?  Close every loophole, pay xx.   It must be an issue somewhere with both parties, but it won’t happen. 

[hobbes2702 13033]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Flat tax.  I dgaf if you make $10 or 100m/yr. You pay xx% like every single one of your fellow Americans.  We strive for fairness in every other aspect of America, except when it’s time to pay.  Then the corps pay less, the poor pay less, the rich pay less, the middle pay more.  It makes no sense.  Everyone pays property taxes (renters too!) so why tf not income taxes?  Close every loophole, pay xx.   It must be an issue somewhere with both parties, but it won’t happen. 

Then why do you vote for a party that continually thinks one group should pay less than other groups? You keep telling us about how you vote against all these things you want

You also should maybe do Some research into a flat tax. It clearly is not the even playing field you seem to think it is. It’s a fairytale policy idea supported by people who don’t understand the tax code.

Edited June 7, 2021 by hobbes2702

[fattyflattie 4639]

22 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Then why do you vote for a party that continually thinks one group should pay less than other groups?

Ahem. I’m pretty sure that’s a staple tenant for #bothsides. Opposite ends of the spectrum, of course. 

Tax code doesn’t have to be difficult. Pay your 15, 20, 25% whatever like literally every other person. Fin.  

We literally demand equal treatment in every other facet of American life.

[hobbes2702 13033]

7 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Ahem. I’m pretty sure that’s a staple tenant for #bothsides. Opposite ends of the spectrum, of course. 

Tax code doesn’t have to be difficult. Pay your 15, 20, 25% whatever like literally every other person. Fin.  

We literally demand equal treatment in every other facet of American life.

Right but you support one of those ends of the spectrum. Continually and with fervor.

More specifically how does any of this help this country achieve the goals you laid out up thread? How does the Republican Party help teachers get paid more? How does the Republican Party get the flat tax you want? How does the Republican Party ease the tax burden on the middle class? These are the things you say you want, so why do you vote against your own interests?

Again, do some research rather than just going off of something you heard.

 

Edited June 7, 2021 by hobbes2702

[Celery Man 20946]

A totally and completely average person is not exceptionally hardworking or smart or motivated or lucky. That person should have a totally and completely average life, which should mean they can have a family and put a roof over their head and maybe every now and then they'll do something stupid that will fuck things up but they should be able to put a little bit away, not be financially ruined by a car accident or a weird medical thing, and not spend their entire life on the razor's edge of poverty. There is probably always some kernel of truth or goodness to constructive "life yourself up by your bootstraps" advice to an individual person (which differs from that advice shouted at someone holding a wic card and a box of fish sticks). "Lift yourself up by your bootstraps" is always, 100% of the time a dumb fucking stupid position on how society writ large should ensure that people *gestures across the hills* are mostly out there living nice little lives, experiencing the broad gamut of human emotions and experiences, and being productive members of society. Having all those people live those lives, of course with lots of variance and the fortunate and unfortunate, is good for everyone. It makes your 401k fat, you're less likely to get your car broken into, dudes who have the dignity of good work and occasional sex probably commit fewer mass shootings, all sorts of societal ills ameliorated by a productive and somewhat fulfilled middle class.

The American dream should be a beautiful middle class aspiration, but we get it twisted up worshipping at the altar of the mythical Great American Success Story. It's a religion for many, and for most of us *gestures towards the great surly upper middle class* the closest we can get to being Levi Strauss is pointing out the miserable poor and marveling at how smart we are and how hard we have worked. Be better.

 

Edited June 7, 2021 by Celery Man

[JimmyJames 12271]

7 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

My contention is the CEO running to F500 company is more intelligent and has a more difficult job than 99.999999% of the population.  The fact they make 100000000 times the guy cleaning the shit off the toilet bothers me 0%.   
 

I mean if you’re gonna announce to the board you’re a piece of shit why not hold back? Just let it all out.

You’ve apparently never met many of the numerous narcissistic raging asshole CEOs but that’s not surprising. Enjoy your scraps.

[JimmyJames 12271]

4 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Maybe. Of course most of them will pay more taxes in a decade than most welfare recipients will ever provide.   

Oh sorry I missed this post. Yes you are trying to be the biggest piece of shit possible. My bad. Don’t hold back!

[workswithseed 2103]

2 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Yeah brain fart on that one.

Kinda not, since the most populated states would most likely vote one way than the least. Hence representative democracy, and not full democracy.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

Guys...

[aggie08 21504]

8 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Kinda not, since the most populated states would most likely vote one way than the least. Hence representative democracy, and not full democracy.

Yep, this system where Georgia, Ohio, Florida, and Wisconsin pick who runs the country every 4 years is just working great.

[workswithseed 2103]

Just now, aggie08 said:

Yep, this system where Georgia, Ohio, Florida, and Wisconsin pick who runs the country every 4 years is just working great.

Sorry we can't have Texas, New York, California, and Florida take the reign.

[fattyflattie 4639]

25 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Oh sorry I missed this post. Yes you are trying to be the biggest piece of shit possible. My bad. Don’t hold back!

Before you know it I’ll be a middle aged white guy who thinks he’s woke enough to drop n-bombs all over the board.  Then, and only then, will I be the biggest piece of shit to grace the board. 

[Nicole44 22059]

There is data out there (look it up in the search engine of your choice) to suggest that strong Welfare States have lower income growth, no less domestic inequality and lower immigration of the poor than one economically liberal State, the US.

The more the welfare State attempts to redistribute wealth through redistributionist taxation, the more the poor will cost the State, and the less the State will be willing (or even prepared) to take in poor immigrants. And the US takes in/absorbs about 500,000 immigrants per year. Which IMO we wouldn’t be able to do with the “redistribute wealth thru redistributionist taxation.” 

Again, there is plenty of information out there that would SUGGEST that High social security arguably disincentives poor and high taxation arguably leads to less income growth, and no less domestic inequality – both of these defining features of welfare model. Domestic equality, total wealth, average wealth, and world equality all seem to be better promoted by liberal capitalism.

Thats what I happen to subscribe to and I don’t think it makes me less compassionate or an asshole for believing this. And I don’t think if you disagree with me that makes you more compassionate or an asshole. But I fear your view on this and disagree and I fear your vote BUT I will support to the death your right to believe it and piss away your vote. 

[Brisketexan 105123]

There is data out there (look it up in the search engine of your choice) to suggest that strong Welfare States have lower income growth, no less domestic inequality and lower immigration of the poor than one economically liberal State, the US.

The more the welfare State attempts to redistribute wealth through redistributionist taxation, the more the poor will cost the State, and the less the State will be willing (or even prepared) to take in poor immigrants. And the US takes in/absorbs about 500,000 immigrants per year. Which IMO we wouldn’t be able to do with the “redistribute wealth thru redistributionist taxation.” 
Again, there is plenty of information out there that would SUGGEST that High social security arguably disincentives poor and high taxation arguably leads to less income growth, and no less domestic inequality – both of these defining features of welfare model. Domestic equality, total wealth, average wealth, and world equality all seem to be better promoted by liberal capitalism.
Thats what I happen to subscribe to and I don’t think it makes me less compassionate or an asshole for believing this. And I don’t think if you disagree with me that makes you more compassionate or an asshole. But I fear your view on this and disagree and I fear your vote BUT I will support to the death your right to believe it and piss away your vote. 

How about this….how about we all agree that we should “make America great again?” Seems like a noble goal, right? We all know what the golden age was - 1945-1975. Let’s shoot for that.

Of course, when you see that the working class shared in the wealth they helped create at a MUCH higher proportion….which made the middle class American dream achievable for them, that sort of thing…you can see that we can’t make America great again until we do at least a COUPLE of things that make our economy, oh, I dunno, more like it was when we were “great.”

And then…maybe we can look at what tax rates were then. And how much we spent on infrastructure. And how much better states funded their universities.

[Neonmoon 38129]

We're not even arguing over "welfare state", which I would love for you to define what constitutes a welfare state, which countries are you referencing in your data?

We're arguing over taxing BILLIONAIRES more. Fatty the Landman thinks all BILLIONARES are the hardest and smartest around because he went to a 5 person company c-suite meeting once. The Trump example I provided which he clearly did not understand, chose to pivot and accuse me of attacking people who succeed like Trump's father, or rich athletes, which he thinks makes his argument better. It does not. It proves my point. These children are not the smartest and hardest working fucking people. They are gifted million and millions of dollars. All these BILLIONARE kids aren't crushing it business wise. For example, an oil and gas example. Parsley owner got an oil and gas company from Daddy. He hit some tough times when big old oil went south. Daddy bought the company from him. He's a smart hard working billionaire isn't he?

[Neonmoon 38129]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

How about this….how about we all agree that we should “make America great again?” Seems like a noble goal, right? We all know what the golden age was - 1945-1975. Let’s shoot for that.

Of course, when you see that the working class shared in the wealth they helped create at a MUCH higher proportion….which made the middle class American dream achievable for them, that sort of thing…you can see that we can’t make America great again until we do at least a COUPLE of things that make our economy, oh, I dunno, more like it was when we were “great.”

And then…maybe we can look at what tax rates were then. And how much we spent on infrastructure. And how much better states funded their universities.

Hmm, wonder what the tax rate was from 1945-1975? 

[Fondren & Main 6715]

1 hour ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Guys...

Paging @maninblack

[Nicole44 22059]

5 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

We're not even arguing over "welfare state", which I would love for you to define what constitutes a welfare state, which countries are you referencing in your data?

We're arguing over taxing BILLIONAIRES more. Fatty the Landman thinks all BILLIONARES are the hardest and smartest around because he went to a 5 person company c-suite meeting once. The Trump example I provided which he clearly did not understand, chose to pivot and accuse me of attacking people who succeed like Trump's father, or rich athletes, which he thinks makes his argument better. It does not. It proves my point. These children are not the smartest and hardest working fucking people. They are gifted million and millions of dollars. All these BILLIONARE kids aren't crushing it business wise. For example, an oil and gas example. Parsley owner got an oil and gas company from Daddy. He hit some tough times when big old oil went south. Daddy bought the company from him. He's a smart hard working billionaire isn't he?

Data? My new job work training tripped a circuit in my pea sized brain. I’m effectively Kelly Bundy preparing for a game show—and we know how that fucking turned out. The above is my opinion alone. You can look at data from Germany, France, the UK etc…and compare it to the US. I’m on the lazy river tonite so I’m not doing it lulz. 
 

But as you said this was more about excessive and obscene wealth and I’ve not seen evidence that those with it all deserved and earned it and those without any real wealth all deserved their situation.

to that I would say:

“The lives of millionaires and billionaires are not significantly more unfair because their wealth now differs by some dozens or hundreds of millions, let alone are our lives worst because of it. If a billionaire gets another billion, the Gini coefficient will indicate a greater increase in inequality than if several families go from poverty to extreme poverty; its capacity to track morally significant inequality is limited.“

“More than 56% of taxpayers (100% – 43.7%) in the lowest income quintile in 1996 had moved to a higher quintile by 2005 (see arrow in top row of the top chart above), with about half of those upwardly mobile low-quintile taxpayers (28.8%) moving up to the second quintile, while nearly as many (27.4%) moved up two or more quintiles, and 4.5% of the low-income quintile taxpayers in 1996 moved to the highest quintile within a decade.“

While the 5th percentile of real disposable household income distribution has been almost identical from 1994 to 2007 in the US, the UK, Germany and France, all other percentiles have seen their income increase more in the US than in any of the other countries like Germany, France or the UK. This would suggest the change in US inequality is a product of the US rich being richer than before (and being richer than the rich in Welfare States) and the poorer remaining mostly the same as before (and about the same as the poor in Welfare States).

 

 

What the fuck ever. It’s just what I believe to be true. 

 

[Fondren & Main 6715]

It is the time of POWERFUL DELUSIONS!!!

[maninblack 7974]

21 minutes ago, Fondren & Main said:

Paging @maninblack

Indian gets it

[Brew 3049]

3 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Flat tax.  I dgaf if you make $10 or 100m/yr. You pay xx% like every single one of your fellow Americans.  We strive for fairness in every other aspect of America, except when it’s time to pay.  Then the corps pay less, the poor pay less, the rich pay less, the middle pay more.  It makes no sense.  Everyone pays property taxes (renters too!) so why tf not income taxes?  Close every loophole, pay xx.   It must be an issue somewhere with both parties, but it won’t happen. 

Hey now, don’t get carried away. I’ve got a new boat to pay for.

 

[Brew 3049]

1 hour ago, JimmyJames said:

Oh sorry I missed this post. Yes you are trying to be the biggest piece of shit possible. My bad. Don’t hold back!

Do you ever add anything useful to a discussion, because I’m pretty sure I’ve only seen you being a douchebag for the most part in threads?

This thread is more cloakroom than most cloakroom threads at this point. The art of discussion and disagreement is pretty well gone at the moment which hurts discussion in the CR. Throw out a viewpoint that JJ doesn’t agree with and you’re a Nazi. It’s fucking stupid and lazy, but it’s where we are at even though I’m sure he’s the first one on the bus to deride Trump for his name calling. The R party is in a world of shit at their own making, but there are plenty of R’s that realize that. There are also plenty of shitty ones, but those two groups aren’t necessarily the same.

There are a lot of opinions I do and don’t agree with in this thread, but for the most part does anyone really fall 100% on one side of the fence at this point? For me the need to try and end the Trump cycle outweighed my other viewpoints on things so I voted D. I expect that to continue for some period, but I wouldn’t say I identify as a D at this point nor will I going forward. However, people I know have marked with me with the scarlet D because of my vote and there are several I don’t have to worry about talking to any further. When you live in a state that goes 80% R, it is what it is.

[Brew 3049]

9 hours ago, immamac said:

What do you do for a living? I can assure you that there is 0 truth to the first statement. Being the CEO of a F500 or a G3000 for that matter is not about being intelligent or the job being difficult, especially in comparison to 99.999999% of the population like you have stated. It's more about who you know and someone else who used to be in that position no longer wanting to (retirement) or dying. There are people far more qualified to be the CEO's of these companies, sometimes within the companies themselves who just "don't get the nod" and it has way more to do with organizational/board politics than it does with capability, skillset or anything else that would play out like some meritocracy like you are claiming.

Your whole premise of not wanting to solve problems by "limiting other wealth" is fucking hilarious to me. There isn't a limit on wealth, there's proposal for limiting excessive wealth. There is no way in a human lifetime you could even begin to fathom spending 1B, even with 3 living generations, that is every single person alive living a 1% life.

People in general don't have the actual capacity to understand how drastic the difference between 1M and 1B is or 1M and 100M. Do you have 1M liquid cash? Do you know how insane that is for 99% of the population to even fathom?

I can’t speak for F500 companies because I don’t do any work for them, I can speak on what I see in the 7 - low 9 figure valuation companies as they are where I spend most of my time. I don’t know that I would say the people that run those companies are necessarily smarter than 99.99999% of the population, but I would say they are smarter/more astute than a large percentage of the population. Most have made bets and taken risks that most “average” people can’t fathom and that is worth something substantial. I don’t know what that number is, but I see the high side on companies I deal with in the 100:1 to 300:1 range top to bottom salaries in the larger operations. Honestly, most I see are 10:1 to 50:1 until they get well into the 8 figures in revenue. I don’t know where the magic line in the sand is where it becomes excessive, but I don’t think that is it. Others would probably say that no one is worth that much though.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that the number of people that work for me that could do what I do, put in the hours I do, oversee the growth we have had in the last 5 years, etc. is pretty fucking slim. They don’t have the drive, the interest in giving up their family time, the wherewithal to deal with client issues, etc. to ever be able to do it. They are excellent at what they do, but I’m better at what I do and that’s not a knock on them at all. We couldn’t do what we do without them, but this doesn’t exist without a few of us. What’s that worth? I don’t have an answer, but there are definitely people out there that operate under a different mindset than the average person and are financially successful because of it. I’ve read things on Jeff Bezos and that dude is in that .0000001% of smartest guys out there doing things no one else could think of, but I’m still not buying shit from his companies because I think it’s bad for the people I do business with and the country at large. I also don’t eat at anything other than local owned restaurants, shop local as much as i can, etc., so everyone has some version of some weird ass principles they live by.

[DDD Dad 14339]

Boy, it's interesting to see oneself become the topic of a thread.

You’re a legend!