Jump to content

Romney, The Inevitable Nominee


Recommended Posts

Oh honestly, what kind moron would go back to the middle ages to defend behavior which is exhibited TODAY?

Hey, nobody forced you to type that bigoted nonsense. Spout that crap about Muslim candidates and I bet you would get an HRC hearing.

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hey, nobody forced you to type that bigoted nonsense. Spout that crap about Muslim candidates and I bet you would get an HRC hearing.

That you keep using the word only reinforces my belief you don't know what it even means, and don't recognize it in yourself.

True or false. 100% of the Ku Klux Klan supports Republicans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To anyone smart enough to understand the consequences of severe inequality.

What consequences? Incentive to get your lazy ass out of poverty?

This isn't 1700s France no matter how much you want it to be. Rich people actually improve the lives of everyone by existing in the economy. In 1700s France they sat on their wealth. Big difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rich people actually improve the lives of everyone by existing in the economy. In 1700s France they sat on their wealth. Big difference.

Business Week - Overseas Cash Fuels Spending Spree

US Corporations Awash In Cash

They're not sitting on their wealth, but they're not trickling it down either, it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Business Week - Overseas Cash Fuels Spending Spree

US Corporations Awash In Cash

They're not sitting on their wealth, but they're not trickling it down either, it seems.

Why would they in times of uncertainty. We have an unpredictable situation in Washington that is resulting in all these burdensome regulations. It's increasing the cost of production, so business has to adjust to those realities. Then there is the uncertainty, those businesses are worried that if they sink their money into something and there is an economic shock, they will lose their money.

At least in these days we know that the wealthy will be back doing normal economic activity. In 1700s France, it was aristocrats sitting on their wealth, they did nothing with it except blow it on consumption and actively tried to keep people poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, I think Ron Paul will do better then most people think. With his success in the primary and caucus', I predict Ron Paul will team up with judge Andrew Napolitano as his running mate and together they will run as independents.

No matter what happens on the real GOP ticket, I agree that Ron Paul will do exactly as Ron Paul has done before. He will take his supporters money and buy ad time in a losing cause. If it makes him feel any better, he can point to partial Tea Party successes and winning candidates in Congress. But Rep. Ron Paul aint'a gonna beeya no US president.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter what happens on the real GOP ticket, I agree that Ron Paul will do exactly as Ron Paul has done before. He will take his supporters money and buy ad time in a losing cause. If it makes him feel any better, he can point to partial Tea Party successes and winning candidates in Congress. But Rep. Ron Paul aint'a gonna beeya no US president.

The big difference seems that Ron Paul gets his money through the people who want to support him. Others are nothing more than corporate paid mouthpieces to do their bidding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter what happens on the real GOP ticket, I agree that Ron Paul will do exactly as Ron Paul has done before. He will take his supporters money and buy ad time in a losing cause. If it makes him feel any better, he can point to partial Tea Party successes and winning candidates in Congress. But Rep. Ron Paul aint'a gonna beeya no US president.
On this point, we can agree.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What consequences? Incentive to get your lazy ass out of poverty?

This isn't 1700s France no matter how much you want it to be. Rich people actually improve the lives of everyone by existing in the economy. In 1700s France they sat on their wealth. Big difference.

The consequences? Violence. Social disorder. Riots. Terrorism. The rise of radical political groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least in these days we know that the wealthy will be back doing normal economic activity. In 1700s France, it was aristocrats sitting on their wealth, they did nothing with it except blow it on consumption and actively tried to keep people poor.

And this is different from 2011 how exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this is different from 2011 how exactly?

Because we have our wealth in this thing called a bank. You see people save their money in a bank and other people borrow the money and pay interest back on it to do various things with it.

Also we invest our money in firms doing various projects. No money invested means no growth.

Also we spend our money on things we want otherwise I am working for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's been a wealth gap in north america for hundreds of years, yet nothing too major has happened.

It's never been this wide. The last time it approached this level, in the forties, I believe, the government got very worried and instituted a number of policies to narrow it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because we have our wealth in this thing called a bank. You see people save their money in a bank and other people borrow the money and pay interest back on it to do various things with it.

What if bank loans are only available to rich people? Tried to get a mortgage in the U.S. lately?

Also we invest our money in firms doing various projects. No money invested means no growth.

How is investing money in Asia and Latin America helping Americans?

How is investing money in shorting stocks helping employ people?

Also we spend our money on things we want otherwise I am working for nothing.

Isn't that what Louis XVI said?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's never been this wide. The last time it approached this level, in the forties, I believe, the government got very worried and instituted a number of policies to narrow it.

Complete nonsense. And which policies were those?

Anyways, people work for their wealth. As long as somebody isn't breaking the law, it's none of your business what somebody earns with their labour. And you don't deserve the fruits of other people's work. This income inequality nonsense has to stop. People work in different industries, doing diffent jobs, that require different skills, that produce different revenues. There's no such thing as income equality and income inequality. However, Karl Marx would certainly be proud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if bank loans are only available to rich people? Tried to get a mortgage in the U.S. lately?

How is investing money in Asia and Latin America helping Americans?

How is investing money in shorting stocks helping employ people?

Isn't that what Louis XVI said?

When interest rates shoot up, the banks fill up with cash and need to loan or otherwise they won't be able to pay the depositors, so rates drop and more loans are availible.

People who retire and have investments benefit from investments abroad by getting returns on investments. Investing in stocks provides jobs to stock brokers and shorting sends signals to other parts of the economy and the market can adjust accordingly.

So I should work and give all my money to the govt? Da comrade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if bank loans are only available to rich people? Tried to get a mortgage in the U.S. lately?

Loans are available to people who meet risk criteria. Loans are not a human right, not even in Canada.

How is investing money in Asia and Latin America helping Americans?

It provides capital for businesses in huge developing markets, that's how.

How is investing money in shorting stocks helping employ people?

Shorting stocks is like any other form of gambling, only far more organized. Do you want to ban gambling too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...