Re: Evangelical professor tackles 'religious right'

suds mcduff wrote:
----IN 2026, DOUCHEBAG !!???

YES, DOUCHEBAG.

Please, LEARN to post properly. It is virtually IMPOSSIBLE for me to
sift through all of the repeated reply quotes. Quote ONLY what you
wish to reply to; I do not NEED your previous statement to me to
remember what the quotation is in reference to.

---You're right. We should take more from the extremely wealthy.

"we"? Who is this "we"? WHY should we take more from the "extremely
wealthy"? This ersatz populism ignores the fact that the "extremely
wealthy" possess NOTHING compared to even yearly SS and Medicare
outlays. You even VAGUELY aware that these programs consume $1T a
year? SS alone will do so in 2011. Bill Gates, the world's "richest"
man, has a FRACTION of that amount as his entire net worth.

There is no amount of extremely wealthy who CAN pay for this.

And the notion that the GOVERNMENT will take this money and spend it
wisely is ASININE. Do you NOT LEARN? CAN YOU NOT SEE? What we have
NOW is a gigantic tax system agglomerating money and the fucking
government is SPENDING IT ON PORK. You want to give them MORE?

Really, idiot, we'd be better off if unions uncorrupted themselves and
got back to helping workers take that money and spread it around.

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/funds.html

Good lord, you are not going to cite me the SSA's ownership of UNITED
STATES TREASURY BONDS as a "fund" are you? Do you understand who PAYS
those bonds? The same fucking institutions as OWES on them. It's an
IOU from you to yourself, moron.

Seriously? You are in WAY over your head on this topic.

----Have you ever been outside your air conditioned office? When I
propose means testing for SS payment, you flatly refuse. The poor to
the rich bull*** for ending the program doesn't fly.

I propose returning the taxes collected to the PEOPLE and keep them the
fk away from the spendthrift socialist government you love so much.

----Taxbreaks for the rich will cost the Fed govt 11.6 trillion over the
next 75 yrs. If you don't consider the Fed govt "us" you'd be correct.

Tax cuts are NOT A COST. SPENDING is a cost! A program entitling
people to a check, a navy ship, a prescription drug - THOSE are costs.
NOT collecting taxes is a loss of revenue, NOT A COST.


The government and its spending are OUT OF CONTROL.

----See--Iraq, Afghan, and soon, Iran.

Afghanistan is not out of control. Iraq clearly is and I've SAID SO
REPEATEDLY.

However, Iraq, all told, at $300B, is a FRACTION of one YEAR's worth of
SS.

Do you even COMPREHEND how large the annual Federal budget is?

----Your solution is....?

A return to sound fiscal policies not involving Keynesian Ponzi
schemes. A return to production-based currency, an elimination of the
Federal Reserve, and a massive curtailment of the scope of government.
We cannot FUNCTION as a nation with 1 in 6 people working for
government and the average Federal worker earning 2x that of the
average private-sector worker. This is unsustainable.

The government has PROVEN itself a failure, so we must look to other
institutions. I am a populist. Unions and organized units of PEOPLE
must do these things, with strict legislative oversight to prevent
corruption.

Government is a COST to everyone now...it is massive bureaucracy and
overhead on every transaction. We became the most wealthy nation on
the planet on a metals standard when you could drive up and talk to the
President.

Now, we have an imperial Presidency that you ROUNDLY deride, but you
cannot see the link between fiat currency, tax-based entitlement
Ponzis, and the sucking sound coming out of Washington as they vacuum
up ever more wealth. The removal of limits on the creation of money is
what caused this. It gave us programs which present future obligations
that can NEVER be satisfied, and the WORST tax on the working people in
existence - INFLATION.

---Just to point out the hypocrisy of Repub toadying fundies, dope.

Why don't you go to one of those political NGs you so enamored of and
TALK TO THEM THEN? I really don't give a *** about the Repug
hypocrisy, which is no greater than the Democrap hypocrisy.

----It's yes, then. You haven't provided a solution, *except* cut their
funding. Show me where you suggested otherwise.

You will not listen nor do you even UNDERSTAND the issues. Positing a
solution to you falls on deaf ears. You simply do not want to accept
that there is anything at all WRONG with the programs, so you
idiotically believe that we can just levy more taxes and everything'll
work out.

Yeah...Clitton already published his numbers on this during his
term...85% life's wages in taxes to support current entitlements
schemes. This was a FACT, Spuds; you can look it up. What I say is
not incorrect. This fact was so gloomy that Clitton redacted it from
the publication.

-----We can afford 11 trillion in tax cuts from the most wealthy?

Huh? Everyone got a tax cut. If the bottom 50% was actually PAYING
any taxes, they could have received one too.

As a matter of fact, go and look at the tax breakdown. The top 50%
pays 96% of the taxes. Top FIFTY percent. THAT is your "ultra rich"
payor group. Everyone got a 1% break.

----Representative democracy? Do tell.

Moron. You are a fucking moron. Executive orders? A central bank?
These people fought against that. This government, which is a
leviathan, imperial, warmongering, expeditionary, socialist
wastemachine, would have been repugnant to them. They revolted AGAINST
this. This is what the King of England was...all these things.

---Perhaps that's because the pre-industrial US had no precedent for it,
but to foamers like you, 18th century america is the same as 20th
century america.

Why don't you go look up the Industrial Revolution for me, and see when
it started? The IR was in full swing by the 1850s, you stupid ass.

There was nothing materially DIFFERENT about 20th Century
America...nevermind that we are now in the 21st. What is so different
about it? There is STILL supply and demand. What has changed is that
the institution of payroll taxes and massive entitlements have led to a
spiral of fiat money creation, inflation, and boom and bust economic
cycles...because the FUNDAMENTAL theories upon which these programs
operate are FLAWED.


----FDR *tried* to "pack the court" (GW Bush is attempting to "pack the
court" as well, but with ultra-conservatives) because the SC was
composed of elderly conservatives, some of whom who couldn't seem to
grasp that the world had changed drastically since the 19th century.

How has the world changed? Does 1+1 no longer equal 2?

He didn't succeed, but you didn't mention that little fact did you,
you dishonest ***.

He damned sure succeeded in ramming through executive orders and
actually SEIZING private assets. What do you have to say about the
gold seizure that FDR put through to force everyone into Treasury
certificates subject to monetary inflation?

Yes, I know, Spuds, you haven't the faintest idea what any of this ***
even MEANS.


----We'll see. The elderly will soon have a formidable voting block,
making SS even more of a political third rail.

Wonderful. And, when the program goes bankrupt, what are they gonna
VOTE FOR? They're gonna vote to steal everyone else's money to spend
on their prescription drugs for their stupid high blood pressure from
eating shitty their whole lives?

Deuterium, tritium.

Do you have even MORE stupid *** to say??!

Good lord, I asked if you had more stupid *** and you gave me some
right there, right in time. Um...we don't have sustainable fusion,
dude.

----If you haven't noticed, you started out by blaming Dems, liberals,
and FDR exclusively, dishonest douche, and only modified your tune when
I called you on it.

Those are the parties to BLAME for the instigation of these schemes.
You haven't called me on anything because you are incompetent and
thoroughly ignorant. Anyone reading can very plainly see that you do
not belong in this discussion with me. My knowledge of the facts
exceeds yours by about a billion times. I would refer you to documents
on Keynesian economic theory, monetarism a la Milton Friendman, or even
Austrian School, or supply-side, but I know that you wouldn't GET THEM.
Your brain is incapable of understanding just WTF any of this ***
even means. What you are good at is reducing arguments to pathetic
strawmen so that you can launch emotional attacks.

-----Maybe, maybe not, but your views in this case are squarely in line
with the repub far right wing.

Who? I am also for drug legalization which puts my views in line w/
the far LEFT wing...so fucking WHAT, moron? I cannot account for the
WRONGNESS and insanity of the policies of whatever political parties
you like to cheer for.

-----Hurling epithets??!! What a fucking hypocrite you are,
Travisdouche. I only respond in kind, *you're* the "*** persona"
that insults everybody, remember? That's *your* thing, remember?

Listen. I am not insulting you by calling you an ignoramus, Spuds. It
is the plain truth that I am stating.

----Next time, don't cloak your bull*** in absolutes, then cry that
you're misunderstood, you dishonest ***.

I didn't, you dishonest ***. You haven't even a CLUE what "rich"
MEANS from a statistical sense. The young are poor compared to the
old, who are rich compared to the young. You DO get that these are
comparative terms, yes?

----Ah ha ha ha....Cluck, cluck, bKAWWW

Spuds, I don't have TIME to talk to people even more ignorant than you
are. Really, I don't.

---Name one you've posted to in the past year, hell, tell us the thread
so we can see your genius in action.

Have you not noted crossposts to here from some of them? There are a
million chat rooms and UBB threads on issues such as these. NONE of
them have any merit. AOL has tons of chats on political issues.

Now, I know YOU are bedazzled by the fact that some person is in a
"political" NG talking about politics...does that actually imply to you
that they have a fucking CLUE? ALL people like them and you want to do
is political cheerleading.

-------Good riddance. Move on, play "genius ***" on RMA, afraid to
debate on forums specifically created for these types of debates.
Cluck, cluck, bKAWWW.....Ah hahahaha !

Do you call this a DEBATE? This isn't a debate, Spuds, this is you
embarrassing yourself trying to match wits with me. You cannot even
accept the fundamental argument that Social Security is a
Ponzi...others will tell you the SAME THINGS.

And, true to political NG form, you start IMMEDIATELY in with the class
warfare and "ultra-right wing" demagoguery. YOU are the one pulling
out NAMES to drop...comparing me to Rush, Bush...that's ALL you have.
You want to argue against PEOPLE and to associate your opponent with
some unpopular person and accuse them of being a devotee of that
person. That way, you can devolve the discussion into an us-vs-them
cheerleading session. That is how people like you are; you are
DIVISIVE.

Me? I just call you a fucking idiot - which you ARE - and expect to
move forward. Instead of referring me to another NG, why don't YOU
have a substantive discussion with ANYONE here? YOU are the one who is
fucking scared, otherwise, you would not be trying to get me to let you
off the hook and go argue with someone else.

There is no point in calmly discussing anything with you because you
really do not want to listen. That is the fact. It is you who are
closed-minded and ignorant. That is because it is you who are afraid,
afraid of the truth and afraid to learn something new and to let go of
your cherished conceits. What we call this is "cognitive dissonance,"
Spuds. That's another phrase for you to look up and try to understand.

Trav

.