Opinion of the hard lefty laborites who are upper middle class or better
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:21:57 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Opinion of the hard lefty laborites who are upper middle class or better
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
Poll
Question: ?
#1
FF
 
#2
HP
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 58

Author Topic: Opinion of the hard lefty laborites who are upper middle class or better  (Read 15302 times)
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: July 02, 2013, 07:15:49 AM »

"Basic human law?"

ROFLMAO
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: July 02, 2013, 02:10:26 PM »

It’s a concept called "justice." Perhaps you have heard of it? Justice is getting what you put in for. But then again, it's not unlike you to just respond with LOL ROFL DERP DE DERP.

whilst legitimising their privilege

Not all wealth is privilege. A large minority of it is, certainly, but honestly earned wealth coming from productivity or inventiveness is deserved and in my view wholly legitimate.

Wealth is privilege, regardless of how 'deservingly' you obtained it - neither productivity nor inventiveness should afford you ludicrous multiples of what the average worker gains, and is usually built off the back off other's work anyway.
Ugh, no. If I earn money, it is MY money. That is basic human law. The government is entitled only to a small percentage of my earnings to cover the roads that I use to get to work each day, etc. I look at the tax argument as a business transaction. I pay taxes to use the roads, just like customers pay my company for a Pita Gyro or Super Burger.


lol money is an invented construct, and what 'human law' is this? What you earn is dictated by the market - or rather the state, that's enforcing the economic system. As such, just to get to there you're already dependent on the state to give you your wealth (they also have the power to make that money you've earned utterly worthless) and so what they give, they can take away.
Of course what I am paid is dictated by the market; if I don’t like what I am paid, I don’t have to work there for starters. If the company DID NOT pay me, or better yet, just flat out denied pay for a whole week, the employees would walk out and bring the business to a standstill. In an ideal society, money would be pegged to a commodity like gold and would be free from human interference with the value (unless the Fed/some other private entity undermined it by flooding the market, etc, which would be illegal through reasonable regulations, much in the same way that reasonable regulations are applied to mines, quarries, etc.)


 
whilst legitimising their privilege

Not all wealth is privilege. A large minority of it is, certainly, but honestly earned wealth coming from productivity or inventiveness is deserved and in my view wholly legitimate.

Wealth is privilege, regardless of how 'deservingly' you obtained it - neither productivity nor inventiveness should afford you ludicrous multiples of what the average worker gains, and is usually built off the back off other's work anyway.
Ugh, no. If I earn money, it is MY money. That is basic human law. The government is entitled only to a small percentage of my earnings to cover the roads that I use to get to work each day, etc. I look at the tax argument as a business transaction. I pay taxes to use the roads, just like customers pay my company for a Pita Gyro or Super Burger.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/21/books/you-can-t-take-it-with-you.html

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
No sane libertarian wants anarchy/free for all. That is a strawman argument and you know it. The point of having a state is to provide for a common defense, and keep basic civil order. Libertarians don’t believe in randomly killing people for personal greed, you know. In fact, Libertarianism strongly values human life after birth (and in my case, before birth) as a right.

If I responded with the level of intelligence that Averroes, Leftbehind, and Antonio used in their arguments, I would just post “SOCIALISM IS THEFT LOL.” That is the same strawman arguments they are making.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: July 02, 2013, 03:45:52 PM »

It’s a concept called "justice." Perhaps you have heard of it? Justice is getting what you put in for. But then again, it's not unlike you to just respond with LOL ROFL DERP DE DERP.

Keep it up, it's hilarious.
Logged
Torie
Moderator
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: July 02, 2013, 04:47:29 PM »

ChairmanSanchez, are you against having any social safety net or transfer payments whatsoever?
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: July 02, 2013, 06:10:58 PM »
« Edited: July 02, 2013, 06:13:32 PM by Leftbehind »

It’s a concept called "justice." Perhaps you have heard of it? Justice is getting what you put in for.

So you think capitalism has proven itself to be meritocratic system, where the impoverished working class around the world are there because of laziness? Either you believe that, or you can see your justice is non-existent.

Of course what I am paid is dictated by the market; if I don’t like what I am paid, I don’t have to work there for starters.

And if wages are stagnant across the economy, and jobs are scarce? What then?

If the company DID NOT pay me, or better yet, just flat out denied pay for a whole week, the employees would walk out and bring the business to a standstill.

They won't stop paying you because laws drafted by government have made it so. If that weren't the case, they could just not recognise unions and then choose to stop paying you alone. Are you confident all the other workers, terrified of losing their jobs, will come out to support you - or leave you to deal with it on your own?

No sane libertarian wants anarchy/free for all. That is a strawman argument and you know it. The point of having a state is to provide for a common defense, and keep basic civil order. Libertarians don’t believe in randomly killing people for personal greed, you know. In fact, Libertarianism strongly values human life after birth (and in my case, before birth) as a right.

Says who? Again, we're back to the picking and choosing what the state is there for/entitled to do - which is general politics, but not befitting an ideology which claims to be morally against a state? Libertarians don't believe in redistribution, so we'll have more deaths caused by greed than we have now (but because they're not directly-linked, won't fall foul of libertarian morality).  

If I responded with the level of intelligence that Averroes, Leftbehind, and Antonio used in their arguments, I would just post “SOCIALISM IS THEFT LOL.” That is the same strawman arguments they are making.

What strawman arguments had I been making up to that point?
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: July 02, 2013, 06:17:17 PM »

ChairmanSanchez, are you against having any social safety net or transfer payments whatsoever?
If the recipiants of such benefits pay taxes, I see no reason why we should not have such a system. I am not against Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. If I pay payroll taxes, I should receive social security. That seems like a basic business transaction between the people and the government.

Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: July 02, 2013, 06:34:45 PM »

Treating something that is fundamentally not a 'business transaction' as if it is is fundamentally moronic, as well as dangerous. But don't be disheartened. Attitudes like that may well be criminally stupid, but they will serve you well in your future career as a loathsome middle manager-cum-petty tyrant in a company that provides useless services to the service sector in Septic Swamp, FL.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: July 02, 2013, 06:53:16 PM »

So you think capitalism has proven itself to be meritocratic system, where the impoverished working class around the world are there because of laziness? Either you believe that, or you can see your justice is non-existent.
When I worked at Miami Subs, I was told what my pay was going to be before I was hired. I could take it or leave it. If it is a ridiculously unfair amount, I would not have taken the job to begin with. If I felt I was entitled to more pay from the manager or the owner, I would ask for it. They own the business, and they decide how much I am worth. If I don’t agree to the decision, I can leave. Nobody is forcing me or anyone else to work there.

And if wages are stagnant across the economy, and jobs are scarce? What then?
What then? First of all, anyone should be thankful to have a job right now. I was lucky to have mine for three weeks before I was laid off due to the fact that the business could not support an additional employee as they originally thought. I got the job because I was the best man for it as long as it was going to exist, and I was and still am the only seventeen year old I know who had a job. Jobs are scarce among youth around the world, and I still got a job.  Jobs are scare for everybody right now. So everyone, whether it be the CEO of Miami Subs, or the line cook at store #8 in Boynton should be thankful to be working right now.

They won't stop paying you because laws drafted by government have made it so. If that weren't the case, they could just not recognize unions and then choose to stop paying you alone. Are you confident all the other workers, terrified of losing their jobs, will come out to support you - or leave you to deal with it on your own?
For a business to just flat out not pay its workers when it promised them it would is a violation of the contract between employer and employee, and a violation of justice. So state intervention would be required, and would be deserved, in this situation. This function is one of the most important and crucial functions of justice.
Says who? Again, we're back to the picking and choosing what the state is there for/entitled to do - which is general politics, but not befitting an ideology which claims to be morally against a state? Libertarians don't believe in redistribution, so we'll have more deaths caused by greed than we have now (but because they're not directly-linked, won't fall foul of libertarian morality).
If anyone is picking and choosing what the state can and cannot do, it is you. The American Constitution lays a pretty basic argument about the intentions and purpose of government.  “Provide for the Common Defense”, “Secure the blessings of liberty”, etc. These are not buzzwords. These are the government’s functions. I don’t see anything that remotely suggests that government should guarantee that every man is paid a living wage for working as a cashier six hours a day three days a week (my average weekly schedule).

What strawman arguments had I been making up to that point?
What strawman arguments have you made? Well, let’s see…..

So you think capitalism has proven itself to be meritocratic system, where the impoverished working class around the world are there because of laziness?
No, most people work hard, and are just unfortunate enough to be in a position that only produces enough to generate small amounts of return profit. If the position was more productive, it could cover a higher wage.

Are you confident all the other workers, terrified of losing their jobs, will come out to support you - or leave you to deal with it on your own?
If every single worker in the restaurant I work had been told they were no longer being paid, do you think some of them would continue to work? Or would all of them just walk out? My hypothetical situation did not just mean myself, but the entire collective staff.

Again, we're back to the picking and choosing what the state is there for/entitled to do - which is general politics, but not befitting an ideology which claims to be morally against a state?
There is a HUGE difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism, and you know it.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: July 02, 2013, 06:56:21 PM »

Treating something that is fundamentally not a 'business transaction' as if it is is fundamentally moronic, as well as dangerous. But don't be disheartened. Attitudes like that may well be criminally stupid, but they will serve you well in your future career as a loathsome middle manager-cum-petty tyrant in a company that provides useless services to the service sector in Septic Swamp, FL.
Cool, I'll remember that when I take the funds I earn through my work and the scholarships I earn by outcompeting others to go to school to work as a political campaign staffer. And I will think of pathetic parasites like you stuck in the bleak, industrial wasteland that is your country. And I really won't pity you.

And I loled at the least respected moderator calling me a petty tyrant.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: July 02, 2013, 07:03:18 PM »

The case for the prosecution is proven, alas.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: July 02, 2013, 07:13:33 PM »

The case for the prosecution is proven, alas.
A surprisingly mundane way to call me an idiot without any substance. You usually unload all of your ammo with an outrageous, over-the-top, sneering response.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #86 on: July 02, 2013, 07:20:31 PM »

I'm not really calling you an idiot as such. It is more that your attitudes are stupid. And not just stupid but also callous, thuggish and generally quite dangerous. The question is whether you have the capacity to change or whether you are some form of moral reprobate. A question that I can't answer - as amusing as it would be to heavily imply the latter - because I don't know you.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #87 on: July 02, 2013, 07:33:44 PM »

I'm not really calling you an idiot as such. It is more that your attitudes are stupid. And not just stupid but also callous, thuggish and generally quite dangerous. The question is whether you have the capacity to change or whether you are some form of moral reprobate. A question that I can't answer - as amusing as it would be to heavily imply the latter - because I don't know you.
You are just failing to see my logic. I am among the same people that are being called "victims" in this thread. You seem to have some preconceived notion that I am the cruel manager, or the factory owner, when in fact I was just another dispensable employee. And I was and am fine with that. I provide labor, and I get paid for it. You seem to think that I am some sort of Randian protagonist, like Francisco D’Acconia, who views poor people as lazy scum. I am not against poor people-as I have stated before, I favor Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security and would be willing to look at a universal healthcare system paid collectively through sales tax. What I find fundamentally wrong is the belief that "wealth is privilege" and that the very concept of private property is under attack. What I find disgusting is that some here in this thread seem to think that a businessman is responsible for the quality of his employee’s lives outside of the workplace.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,284
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #88 on: July 02, 2013, 07:56:00 PM »

"Money" is not an invention so much as a construct or symbol. It is representative of what our income allows us to afford, a number value if you will. It is the worth of your labor--at least as determined by one's employers or the law. The claim the money is an invention is needless mis-direction.

And one might view a tax on the rich to pay for a social safety net as sort of a way to keep the rest of their money. If the poor are kept content enough not to foment insurrection when things go South, then the rich can rest comfortably on their states without fear of bands of roving peasants breaking down their gates and demanding food. As well, a tax on the middle class might be a transaction as Mr. Sanchez described briefly as their own "social insurance" or somesuch.

I'm really just rambling in response to these various statements. Didn't make it all the way down the page, so I'm sure there's more for me to refer to.
Logged
freefair
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 759
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #89 on: July 03, 2013, 06:28:39 AM »

At the core, I don't judge people on their backgrounds, but on their abilities and the content of their character, so I don't mind if those from moneyed backgrounds take a leftist view, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with it, but it does irritate me if they're hypocrites  in areas like conspicuous consumption, or claim to speak for working class people on issues where their views are different from the average proletarian. Fighting for workers rights is usually commendable- For all Psuedo Tories like me are supposed to hate the approve of them, as long as they're not overly petty, as they often were in the 1970s, or too partisan, they're free associations of people.
Regarding the recent thread of discussion, It's intresting to note many libertarians would repeal union restrictions as authoritarian or corporatist
Logged
Torie
Moderator
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #90 on: July 03, 2013, 09:50:54 AM »

ChairmanSanchez, are you against having any social safety net or transfer payments whatsoever?
If the recipiants of such benefits pay taxes, I see no reason why we should not have such a system. I am not against Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. If I pay payroll taxes, I should receive social security. That seems like a basic business transaction between the people and the government.



Well the in one pocket and out the other thing sounds inefficient, but sometimes it is administratively necessary as a practical matter. SS may be a "business transaction," to wit forced savings, but that system itself involves transfer payments, with low income folks getting far more "return" for their forced savings than higher income people.

I assume you did not mean to imply that Medicare and Medicaid are "business transactions" did you? How are they anything other than transfer payments, particularly medicaid? Anyway, if you favor transfer payments in these areas, then suddenly the grand unified theory of total self reliance kind of falls by the wayside does it not, and you then need to go through the heavy lifting of evaluating government transfer payment programs one by one, based on their individual merits do you not?
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #91 on: July 03, 2013, 03:04:01 PM »

If I responded with the level of intelligence that Averroes, Leftbehind, and Antonio used in their arguments, I would just post “SOCIALISM IS THEFT LOL.” That is the same strawman arguments they are making.

This accusation is particularly amusing because that is almost literally an accurate characterization of what you posted.
No, I posted why I as a low level worker do not deserve the same salary as a manager. I never attacked socialism as an ideology as much as I was attacking the theory that wealth is privilege.

ChairmanSanchez, are you against having any social safety net or transfer payments whatsoever?
If the recipiants of such benefits pay taxes, I see no reason why we should not have such a system. I am not against Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. If I pay payroll taxes, I should receive social security. That seems like a basic business transaction between the people and the government.



Well the in one pocket and out the other thing sounds inefficient, but sometimes it is administratively necessary as a practical matter. SS may be a "business transaction," to wit forced savings, but that system itself involves transfer payments, with low income folks getting far more "return" for their forced savings than higher income people.

I assume you did not mean to imply that Medicare and Medicaid are "business transactions" did you? How are they anything other than transfer payments, particularly medicaid? Anyway, if you favor transfer payments in these areas, then suddenly the grand unified theory of total self reliance kind of falls by the wayside does it not, and you then need to go through the heavy lifting of evaluating government transfer payment programs one by one, based on their individual merits do you not?
Are people on Medicaid exempt from the income tax? They may be getting much more in return then they put in, but they pay for the privilege of Medicaid (or any other type of transfer payments) in the form of their taxes. I also don't quite understand where you are bringing up total self reliance. While I worship the concept, it can only occur in an ideal world, and I don’t look down at the idea of government relief. What I fundamentally oppose is the concept that those with deeper pockets are somehow reliable for those who do not have deeper pockets, and that their wealth is undeserved.
Logged
Torie
Moderator
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #92 on: July 03, 2013, 03:13:27 PM »
« Edited: July 03, 2013, 03:15:40 PM by Torie »

Are people on Medicaid exempt from the income tax? Yes, they don't pay any income tax because they don't make enough money. Even if they pay a tiny bit, that is that in one pocket and out the other issue that I mentioned above.


I also don't quite understand where you are bringing up total self reliance. While I worship the concept, it can only occur in an ideal world, and I don’t look down at the idea of government relief. What I fundamentally oppose is the concept that those with deeper pockets are somehow reliable for those who do not have deeper pockets, and that their wealth is undeserved.

That is a subjective values judgment, and that is fine, but I am not sure how it is relevant to public policy formulation (putting aside those on the Left who want to soak the rich out of spite and dislike, as opposed to figuring out how much revenue needs to be raised, and then who should be taxed to raise it, balancing off all the competing considerations, such as ability to pay, the impact on economic growth, and so forth).

Is the repertoire of your comments on this thread more about attitudes than actual public policy prescriptions?  Again, that is fine, but not very helpful in formulating public policy.
Logged
The Simpsons Cinematic Universe
MustCrushCapitalism
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 737
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.23, S: -2.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #93 on: July 03, 2013, 04:19:15 PM »

Hypocritical at times? Possibly. Their background doesn't delegitimatize their views.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #94 on: July 03, 2013, 09:44:38 PM »
« Edited: July 03, 2013, 09:47:24 PM by asexual trans victimologist »

I'm not really calling you an idiot as such. It is more that your attitudes are stupid. And not just stupid but also callous, thuggish and generally quite dangerous. The question is whether you have the capacity to change or whether you are some form of moral reprobate. A question that I can't answer - as amusing as it would be to heavily imply the latter - because I don't know you.
You are just failing to see my logic. I am among the same people that are being called "victims" in this thread. You seem to have some preconceived notion that I am the cruel manager, or the factory owner, when in fact I was just another dispensable employee. And I was and am fine with that. I provide labor, and I get paid for it. You seem to think that I am some sort of Randian protagonist, like Francisco D’Acconia, who views poor people as lazy scum. I am not against poor people-as I have stated before, I favor Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security and would be willing to look at a universal healthcare system paid collectively through sales tax. What I find fundamentally wrong is the belief that "wealth is privilege" and that the very concept of private property is under attack. What I find disgusting is that some here in this thread seem to think that a businessman is responsible for the quality of his employee’s lives outside of the workplace.

ChairmanSanchez, I like you. So. Real talk:

1. You're still young--as, indeed, am I. You're clearly smart and manifestly capable of evolving your views in positive directions, as I remember you having 'white nationalist' leanings a couple of years ago.
2. That being the case, I sincerely hope you continue to do so.
3. If you don't want to be taken for less than you're worth, I'd highly recommend removing the Rand-themed signature, especially with that un-Christian and implicitly anti-Christian quote.
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #95 on: July 03, 2013, 10:56:01 PM »

There's a lot of them out there. If you went person to person in each party, you'd find that it's the Democrats who are actually run by the wealthy. Look at Hollywood and George Soros. Oh wait George Soros represents the common man lol.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,417
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #96 on: July 04, 2013, 04:11:00 PM »

There's a lot of them out there. If you went person to person in each party, you'd find that it's the Democrats who are actually run by the wealthy. Look at Hollywood and George Soros. Oh wait George Soros represents the common man lol.

Your party is no better on that score. Both parties are run by the wealthy, but the Republicans more so.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #97 on: July 05, 2013, 09:07:01 PM »

I'm not really calling you an idiot as such. It is more that your attitudes are stupid. And not just stupid but also callous, thuggish and generally quite dangerous. The question is whether you have the capacity to change or whether you are some form of moral reprobate. A question that I can't answer - as amusing as it would be to heavily imply the latter - because I don't know you.
You are just failing to see my logic. I am among the same people that are being called "victims" in this thread. You seem to have some preconceived notion that I am the cruel manager, or the factory owner, when in fact I was just another dispensable employee. And I was and am fine with that. I provide labor, and I get paid for it. You seem to think that I am some sort of Randian protagonist, like Francisco D’Acconia, who views poor people as lazy scum. I am not against poor people-as I have stated before, I favor Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security and would be willing to look at a universal healthcare system paid collectively through sales tax. What I find fundamentally wrong is the belief that "wealth is privilege" and that the very concept of private property is under attack. What I find disgusting is that some here in this thread seem to think that a businessman is responsible for the quality of his employee’s lives outside of the workplace.

ChairmanSanchez, I like you. So. Real talk:

1. You're still young--as, indeed, am I. You're clearly smart and manifestly capable of evolving your views in positive directions, as I remember you having 'white nationalist' leanings a couple of years ago.
2. That being the case, I sincerely hope you continue to do so.
3. If you don't want to be taken for less than you're worth, I'd highly recommend removing the Rand-themed signature, especially with that un-Christian and implicitly anti-Christian quote.
As for the Rand quote, that was a temporary pick inspired by a comment in another thread. As a Christian, I reject Rand's atheism and blatant hatred for Christians. I was not using it in it's original religious context as much as the political context that it can represent.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #98 on: July 05, 2013, 09:29:17 PM »

I'm not really calling you an idiot as such. It is more that your attitudes are stupid. And not just stupid but also callous, thuggish and generally quite dangerous. The question is whether you have the capacity to change or whether you are some form of moral reprobate. A question that I can't answer - as amusing as it would be to heavily imply the latter - because I don't know you.
You are just failing to see my logic. I am among the same people that are being called "victims" in this thread. You seem to have some preconceived notion that I am the cruel manager, or the factory owner, when in fact I was just another dispensable employee. And I was and am fine with that. I provide labor, and I get paid for it. You seem to think that I am some sort of Randian protagonist, like Francisco D’Acconia, who views poor people as lazy scum. I am not against poor people-as I have stated before, I favor Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security and would be willing to look at a universal healthcare system paid collectively through sales tax. What I find fundamentally wrong is the belief that "wealth is privilege" and that the very concept of private property is under attack. What I find disgusting is that some here in this thread seem to think that a businessman is responsible for the quality of his employee’s lives outside of the workplace.

ChairmanSanchez, I like you. So. Real talk:

1. You're still young--as, indeed, am I. You're clearly smart and manifestly capable of evolving your views in positive directions, as I remember you having 'white nationalist' leanings a couple of years ago.
2. That being the case, I sincerely hope you continue to do so.
3. If you don't want to be taken for less than you're worth, I'd highly recommend removing the Rand-themed signature, especially with that un-Christian and implicitly anti-Christian quote.
As for the Rand quote, that was a temporary pick inspired by a comment in another thread. As a Christian, I reject Rand's atheism and blatant hatred for Christians. I was not using it in it's original religious context as much as the political context that it can represent.

Oh, I understand the context in which it was meant and that Rand can be quoted in ways that don't directly involve her religious views, I just find the transactional understanding of guilt and implied transactional understanding of responsibility and sacrifice to be a profoundly worrisome denial of sin, which I think is a lot more directly morally and socially dangerous than denial of God.
Logged
cheesepizza
Rookie
**
Posts: 82
Political Matrix
E: 4.33, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #99 on: July 06, 2013, 11:47:01 AM »

HP.  Especially those who think the war on coal is good for miners.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.074 seconds with 14 queries.