Satanism is the one and only modern and regularly practiced religion that does not teach love to man kind. As far as I'm concerned, Yahweh, Allah, and Krishna are all the same Supreme Personality of Godhead. Where did I get this crazy belief? The Hindu text Bhagavad-gita (the translation by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada), which is 2,000 years older than the Old Testament and is what that text was largely based on...it's just tremendously more informational and lacks the hypocrisy.
Agreed. But each of these religions treats morality differently. They are not vast differences, but they are differences. Once again, my point was not that it is enough to keep someone out of office. Only that it may play a role in their decision making. Then again it may not.
I'm going to take offense to your ignorant and socially biased statements. Oddly enough, I got this analogy from my martials arts instructor, who's a public works engineer for CalTrans and doesn't smoke pot. Your building will always be as strong as its foundation. Always. As far as your ignorant statements about musicians. Trained musicians consistently score higher on tests, including logic, than non-musicians. My
stoned IQ is also 131. I think you know where you can shove your prejudices and what you can eat.
If you will remember back to your drummer = intelligent thread, I recall being one of the ONLY people, arguing WITH YOU that musicians, especially drummers due to the complex nature of drumming, would and do have higher IQs. It was tongue in cheek. I figured you would remember that.
As far as the analogy, yes, a building will only be as strong as it's foundation, but you argued that we are trying to build it from the top down by "supporting the rich". If the rich are the top, then who is the bottom? I believe it is the middle class, but the physical bottom are the poor. The middle class are in the middle, and the poor are not the foundation of our economy. Therefore, we either build the foundation incorrectly by starting with the poor, who have very little purchasing power, or we start building in the middle, which makes great economic sense, but not so much in terms of constructing a skyscraper.
The building analogy is nice and makes you feel good until you recognize the absurdity of it. The economy is not a building. There are positive implications for middle class people as a result of the rich getting richer. Very few if any rich people store hordes of cash. It is invested in businesses where middle class people work.
At the same time, there are benefits for everyone as a result of supporting or aiding the middle and even the lower class. Call it trickle up. It is a two way street. And there are positive and negative events associated with every economic action.
The blatantly obvious point you failed to see is that the working class is the foundation of our society. I didn't, at any time, even imply that those on welfare and the unemployed were the foundation of society. You didn't just jump to a conclusion, you poll vaulted the conclusion gap.
Well, you said none of this. It may have seemed obvious to you because you were thinking it, but reading it, well, you never know when you are debating a liberal
You should look at the map of how California voted. You'll be surprised at just how "red" the state actually is. The county I live in is almost 3/4 republican, going off of the voting stats. You pay attention. I live here and currently own not one, but two businesses.
How many businesses have you actually owned? I've owned eight and the first one was when I had a door-to-door sales business at six years old. I'm pretty familiar with how business works, thanks. You know what my businesses see? Working class consumers who can no longer afford to spend their money with me. That's the same thing thousands of other small businesses are seeing. The vast majority of those businesses are owned by middle and/or working class Americans and they don't see $250k a year. Belts have tightened and very few non-necessities are being purchased. People who were once gainfully self employed are now working two or three jobs to make ends meet. How, by the logic of the terrified right, would more of this help anything improve?
First, owning a business does not necessarily mean that you know anything about business, other than how to maintain day to day operations and make a modest profit. This is the extent of most small business owners' knowledge. And that's fine. That's all they need.
Anyway, Bush already threw a bunch of cash at everyone. What more can government do? Prevent economic downturn entirely? That's a pipe dream. A capitalist economy is cyclical and far more powerful than any government entity. Success and prosperity comes and goes. Every 5, 10, 20 years someone is impoverished. My father is a land surveyor and was shit out of luck in the late 80's. he is SOL again because no one is building or buying homes. he has enough work to survive, but not enough to be prosperous. He understands that it is not Bush's fault or the tax system's fault. We spend a while in a recession, weed out the non-performers, and come back stronger. Does it sound like I'm terrified? I'm much less worried about all this than you seem to be.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results. Something has to change and maybe that means a little tightening of the designer belts for a short time. One less impromtu trip to Italy, maybe having to "settle" for the $150k sports car instead of the $250k sports car? Boo. Freaking. Hoo. Suck it up and do your part to improve America instead of only being concerned about your own situation. And no, I'm not saying that everyone should make the same amount of money. I'm not even implying that. I'm saying that the people who've gotten rich off of the working class should pay their fair share instead of continuing to get richer while everyone else continues to get poorer. That takes us back farther than 1929 to the time of robber barons. There were only two classes in America during those times, the rich and the poor. This is where the economy is currently headed, under Bush's tax plans.
Of course the rich get richer. That's the beauty of compound interest. Who doesn't get that? Rich get richer while the poor get poorer = the battle cry of those who don't understand financial BASICS...
As far as the wealthy paying their fair share, I believe you are about to demonstrate, within the next two paragraphs that the wealthy DO indeed pay their fair share. They have a capital gains tax and pay often more than 50% of their income in taxes. The poor and middle class, if they have kids and no investments, often pay 0% or receive MORE money! How much more fair can it be? Do you want the wealthy to pay 75% or 90% and give everyone under the poverty level a $30,000 gift?
Speaking of which, what happened to the labor force under Bush's watch? The fact that people such as yourself who take criticism of Bush personally (which just confounds me to no ends) don't see Bush's track record for destroying businesses is astounding. How can someone who's ruined every business he's ever ran possibly handle the nation's money? Seriously. The man sucks with money and he's been a huge factor in the current condition of the economy by consistently playing to the nation's top earners. Hell, California's current financial situation still harkens back to Enron...the CEO of which is one of G.W.'s close personal friends. Bush even stood up for the man in the face of overwhelming evidence that his company was one of a few that severely price gouged California energy. And you actually think this is all hate and fear mongering?
A capitalist economy is like an old growth forest. Sometimes it needs to burn in order to remain healthy and grow.
Since when is it the job of government to ensure that no one ever loses their job? Job loss and cyclical churning of the labor force is seen as a positive thing.
I don't know anything about Bush's personal business track record, but, considering that he doesn't operate within a vacuum and personally thought up very little to none of the legislation passed while he was in office, I'm not so sure that it matters. People forget that the president operates within the confines of a still very legitimate checks and balances system. It's not all his fault because it can't be.
And when did I say anything about fear or hate mongering? I hate those cliche terms. I would never use them...
Here's something I said on another forum. Someone grosses $1m/yr. and through all of the various taxes end up with 50% of that. Then they actually cry about only making $500,000. For the average person making around $20k/yr., being taxed like that would put them below the poverty line. That's what this is about. Giving the working class a little breathing room because quite honestly, wealthy people who shop like middle class people don't do anywhere near as much as people seem to think.
I'm glad I took the time to read all of this.
