What Would Thomas Paine Say?

[DeepGreen]

[SilverEagle]

Well, since Thomas Paine was a big supporter of the French Revolution, I would guess that he'd pretty much support an "off with their heads" policy regarding all the greedy bastards at AIG and all the Madoffs of the world.

In fact, every time I read about the growing gap between the haves and have-nots of our society (including all those without jobs, medical coverage, and all the children in America who go to bed hungry every night) I think of the French Revolution.

I wonder if all the CEO's in America ever studied history, and what happens when the poor and down-trodden finally get a belly full of it.

[DeepGreen]

...and what happens when the poor and down-trodden finally get a belly full of it.

Silly, they put the democrats in charge!

[Cerebus]

I wonder if all the CEO's in America ever studied history, and what happens when the poor and down-trodden finally get a belly full of it.

Hopefully, they tell their children the best way for them to make a better life for themselves, is to go to school, work hard, apply your self, over come setbacks, and then tell your own children to do the same. That approach seemed to work for both my immigrant grandparents and my parents.

Or, they could tell them to sit around, get jealous of those that do work hard, apply themselves, and over come setbacks, and then demand the government makes it fair by taxing them into the ground and increasing the amount of free aid they get.

Of course, that second outlook is why my grandparents were immigrants in the first place.

[Cerebus]

Also, from what I have read, the French Revolution was led by the over taxed middle class. The peasants, for the most part, loved the rock stars of the era, the monarchy.

After the ball got rolling, the peasants bought into it, but the crow storming the bastille was middle class, and not the lower class.

[oldguystudent]

I wonder what kind of pie Thomas Paine liked.

[UNT90]

Well, since Thomas Paine was a big supporter of the French Revolution, I would guess that he'd pretty much support an "off with their heads" policy regarding all the greedy bastards at AIG and all the Madoffs of the world.

In fact, every time I read about the growing gap between the haves and have-nots of our society (including all those without jobs, medical coverage, and all the children in America who go to bed hungry every night) I think of the French Revolution.

I wonder if all the CEO's in America ever studied history, and what happens when the poor and down-trodden finally get a belly full of it.

Ya, lets not get mad at the congressmen who are spending billions upon billions for earmarks dedicated for their district/state, amounts that dwarf what AIG paid in contractual agreements. Sounds like your doing exactly what they want, ignoring their behavior and concentrating on mob mentality hate toward the members of AIG.

It's not a coincidence that all the congressmen are feigning outrage at AIG. They know exactly what they are doing. The old Bait and switch.

This is not a republican or democrat problem, this is a CONGRESSIONAL problem. The sad thing is we (Americans) either don't care or are to ignorant to see it for what it is.

Edited March 23, 2009 by UNT90

[FirefightnRick]

Silly, they put the democrats in charge!

Vote Democrat! It's EASIER than working.

Rick

[bstnsportsfan3]

I wonder what kind of pie Thomas Paine liked.

Probably not pecan.

[oldguystudent]

Probably not pecan.

Hmm...Since he grew up in Britain, I'm guessing he liked minced meat and/or kidney pie.

[KRAM1]

Probably not pecan.

What??? how dare it NOT be pecan? That's just not right!

Edited March 23, 2009 by KRAM1

[Coffee and TV]

Vote Democrat! It's EASIER than working.

Rick

Keep repeating this slogan! It's easier than thinking!

[eulesseagle]

unfortunately, this will never happen. the same congressmen who continually votes to raise our taxes, votes inclussion of illegals and place the federal government in ever increasing control of our lives & liberties will be the same ones, come election time, move to the center and promise just the opposite and get re-elected by the same dumb voters who complained about their congressman's record of taking away our freedoms, liberties & money.

americans would vote for stalin, if he were alive today, if he promised smaller government, freedom of speech and lower taxes.

[Cerebus]

unfortunately, this will never happen. the same congressmen who continually votes to raise our taxes, votes inclussion of illegals and place the federal government in ever increasing control of our lives & liberties will be the same ones, come election time, move to the center and promise just the opposite and get re-elected by the same dumb voters who complained about their congressman's record of taking away our freedoms, liberties & money.

americans would vote for stalin, if he were alive today, if he promised smaller government, freedom of speech and lower taxes.

I am fascinated by "inclussion", what does that mean?

[Cerebus]

Hmm...Since he grew up in Britain, I'm guessing he liked minced meat and/or kidney pie.

It would be suet based, no doubt.

[eulesseagle]

I am fascinated by "inclussion", what does that mean?

inclusion to add illegals to our population.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Vote Democrat! It's EASIER than working.

Rick

--Be a fireman.... and sit around the station playing checkers and dominoes all day... that is what they seemed to do when I was a kid. (true)

--You posted the first insult so I suppose you don't mind.... after all the Christian thing is Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Edited March 27, 2009 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[eulessismore]

--Be a fireman.... and sit around the station playing checkers and dominoes all day... that is what they seemed to do when I was a kid. (true)

--You posted the first insult so I suppose you don't mind.... after all the Christian thing is Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Hey, as a Democrat I find it kind of insulting what is said by some on this board about us, but the way I look at it, we won the last election. There must have been a reason. And honestly, I became a Democrat after being a Republican over 40 years ago. I'd like to say that I quit supporting Republicans when Goldwater wouldn't support the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but it was really when I was working in a call center for the John Tower senatorial campaign. It was 1966, I think; he came into the room, talked to the woman in charge and didn't even look at those of us making the phone calls. I got up, walked out, and have never voted presidentially Republican. So, I always try to be nice to others, even if I perceive them to be insulting to me. I will say that George W. Bush was nice to me when I met him, but I had policy differences that kept me from voting for him. It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

[UNTflyer]

Well, since Thomas Paine was a big supporter of the French Revolution, I would guess that he'd pretty much support an "off with their heads" policy regarding all the greedy bastards at AIG and all the Madoffs of the world.

In fact, every time I read about the growing gap between the haves and have-nots of our society (including all those without jobs, medical coverage, and all the children in America who go to bed hungry every night) I think of the French Revolution.

I wonder if all the CEO's in America ever studied history, and what happens when the poor and down-trodden finally get a belly full of it.

What growing gap?

The biggest jump in income in America during Bush's 2nd term was among the poorest 10%. The gap is not growing, it's shrinking. The biggest increase in income was among the middle class. And the Gini index, which measure income inequality, remained relatively the same.

And this country, the great US of A, leads the world in charitable giving. The top 10% of income earners are responsible for 1/4 of charitable donations, and households that earn more than $1 million are responsible for more than 1/2 of charitable donations.

In short, spare us the tired rhetoric about the greedy and idle rich in America and how the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. It's just plain false.

Edited March 27, 2009 by UNTflyer

[oldguystudent]

It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

Completely agree. I lose respect for people when they begin to blindly follow a platform or candidate without asking any questions as if it were a religion, then begin with personal insults to those who don't agree. It ain't that hard to put a little thought into things no matter which side of aisle you sit on.

[Coffee and TV]

It's just plain false.

o rly?

http://princeton.academia.edu/LarryMBartel...me-Distribution

Census Bureau data reveal large, consistent differences in patterns of real pre-tax income growth under Democratic and Republican presidents in the post-war U.S. Democratic presidents have produced slightly more income growth for poor families than for rich families, resulting in a modest decrease in overall inequality. Republican presidents have produced a great deal more income growth for rich families than for poor families, resulting in a substantial increase in inequality. On average, families at the 95th percentile of the income distribution have experienced identical income growth under Democratic and Republican presidents, while those at the 20th percentile have experienced more than four times as much income growth under Democrats as they have under Republicans.

Edited March 28, 2009 by Coffee and TV

[UNTflyer]

o rly?

http://princeton.academia.edu/LarryMBartel...me-Distribution

Larry Bartels? Really? Not exactly a non-partisan source.

Besides, I don't see anything here that indicates the poor are getting poorer which was my main point. I also notice this paper written in 2004, where the data I posted showing the largest income growth among the poor runs from 2003-2007. And I wonder in reading all of these studies, do they ever consider the impact of people who pull themselves from below the poverty line up to middle class status? Because many do, and are replaced by immigrants and organic population growth. If it were true that the poor were getting poorer, the number of Americans below the poverty line from WWII until now would have exploded at an exponential rate. It hasn't.

The poor in America have it so much better than those who suffer in true poverty and squalor around the world. In America, if someone wants to improve their life, they can. A good read on the condition of the poor in America is here: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg2064.cfm

[oldguystudent]

Larry Bartels? Really? Not exactly a non-partisan source.

A good read on the condition of the poor in America is here: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg2064.cfm

Kind of a response in kind isn't it? Really. I want to see information on the political topics of the day that truly doesn't take sides or push forth an agenda. From the about us section of heritage.org:

Our Mission

To formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.

[UNTflyer]

Kind of a response in kind isn't it? Really.

Yes. Yes it is.

[oldguystudent]

Yes. Yes it is.

So then it is reasonable for me to conclude that the truth lies somewhere on the spectrum between the two extreme points of Bartles and Heritage. Man I tire of both sides. Really I do.