Another Joe Biden Buffoon moment

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

There are many more free loaders that don't think they have to play by the rules. Just saying.

Agree, but they don't have the ability to rig the game in their favor...that's the difference and what Biden is talking about.

-spence

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Agree, but they don't have the ability to rig the game in their favor...that's the difference and what Biden is talking about.

-spence

Obviously, SOMEBODY rigged the game in their favor. Probably politicians like Biden in order to get and keep their votes.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Obviously, SOMEBODY rigged the game in their favor. Probably politicians like Biden in order to get and keep their votes.

How unfortunate that starting with FDR and then Johnson with the Great Society welfare has become what it is.
The ones who need it the most don't get enough and the ones that don't get way too much.
There are those who truly can't work because of mental and physical disability and not nearly enough is done for them. The freeloaders rip the system off.
The churches and synaguges do the best job in admistering help for the needy as the
Priests, Rabbis and Ministers know what goes on in their communities and who the real needy are.
Politicians just throw money against the wall for political reasons and it just doesn't work.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Obviously, SOMEBODY rigged the game in their favor. Probably politicians like Biden in order to get and keep their votes.

A politician like Biden wouldn't extend the hand of government for freeloaders but might do it out of a perceived need by a group. Nobody is trying to rig the game so freeloaders can continue to exist.

The elite by contrast do have the ability to rig the game for specific and usually profit motivated interests...be it a company or industry...

I think there is a difference, but also, it's about the line of attack and if it will be successful against Romney.

-spence

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

A politician like Biden wouldn't extend the hand of government for freeloaders but might do it out of a perceived need by a group.

When the government extends its hand full of cash and goodies, takers will gladly empty what becomes a fist to those who must pay. And the demand will outgrow the supply as the "group" (which the federal gvt. is not constitutionally authorized to "help" beyond what it is granted to do for everybody equally) grows as it naturally will. Throwing money out the window will attract a crowd. And politicians like Biden should know about such axiomatic behavior. The Founders were aware that if the citizens were entitled to the public largesse, the republic would be doomed.

Nobody is trying to rig the game so freeloaders can continue to exist.

A constituency is created through unconstitutional means, and that constituency can be maintained and expanded to help sway elections.

The elite by contrast do have the ability to rig the game for specific and usually profit motivated interests...be it a company or industry...

The game can be rigged only with the complicity of the government. It is the government that regulates at the behest of the elite or the "freeloaders". And politicians like Biden are glad to accept the money from the "elite" and the votes from the "freeloaders".

I think there is a difference, but also, it's about the line of attack and if it will be successful against Romney.

-spence

Not "also," but all. That is the whole point. Divide and conquer.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

When the government extends its hand full of cash and goodies, takers will gladly empty what becomes a fist to those who must pay. And the demand will outgrow the supply as the "group" (which the federal gvt. is not constitutionally authorized to "help" beyond what it is granted to do for everybody equally) grows as it naturally will.

You could say the same about manufacturing or power generation. Nobody should have the right to pollute, but if given the opportunity history has proven that they will...and a lot. The people subsidize the business behavior with their health.

The game can be rigged only with the complicity of the government. It is the government that regulates at the behest of the elite or the "freeloaders". And politicians like Biden are glad to accept the money from the "elite" and the votes from the "freeloaders". "also," but all.

I think the difference is that the elite seek to rig for profit while the non-elite seek to maintain a minimum threshold. The freeloaders are a bi-product of both systems...

That is the whole point. Divide and conquer.

It is an election.

-spence

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

You could say the same about manufacturing or power generation. Nobody should have the right to pollute, but if given the opportunity history has proven that they will...and a lot.

What's that got to do with your saying that freeloaders don't have the ability to rig the game? What is their freeloading a product of if not some rigging? And if they don't have that ability, then somebody is rigging for them. And "history has proven" that politicians promise and give goodies for votes, so "groups" of voters have the power to rig by holding their vote as ransome for goodies. Besides, the "right" to pollute, as far as I know, was not considered an unalienable one by the founders, so could only be a right if it was granted by government. Unalienable rights, such as life, liberty and pursuit of happiness were considered unalienable if they did not impinge on others right to the same. Government can giveth or taketh away the "right," to pollute, and it does. Nor is freeloading an unalienable "right." But government can provide legislation that provides it.

The people subsidize the business behavior with their health.

People do not subsidize business with their health. That's the type of "interpretation" of words and language that progressives have used to neutralize constitutional limitations on government and transform rights from being unalienable to being granted by government. People don't directly subsidize business, and only do so (when it's done) indirectly through government which uses their confiscated taxes. Or, more commonly, by lowering taxes on business, either as corrupt crony capitalism, or to motivate business. The people's health can be a benefit to business only if the people are healthy enough to earn an income and spend it on business products ,or if sick, gain a government subsidy (at the expense of business or other tax payers) to spend it on business products. But either is commerce, not a subsidy.

I think the difference is that the elite seek to rig for profit while the non-elite seek to maintain a minimum threshold. The freeloaders are a bi-product of both systems...

Nobody will dispute the obvious. By definition, there is a difference between elite and non-elite. BTW, the non-elite are comprised of the largest segment of our population, and the largest portion of that segment does not merely seek to maintain a minimum threshhold, but strives for and enjoys a much higher standard of comforts. And a difference between elites seeking profit and non-elites seeking to maintain a minimum threshold, is that profit seeking promotes business and the wealth that makes possible assistence to the poor. The poor don't contribute to the formation of wealth, but can only profit from wealth created by others. Which is not to excuse the collusion between powerful businesses and government, but that also doesn't mean that there is not a collusion between non-elites and other special interests and government via distribution and legislation for votes

It is an election.

-spence

Yes, and we know that it is more important to spin character traits that don't exist rather than discuss the character of the nation and what is becoming of it. That's the real ticket to fundamentally transforming this country.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

Nobody is trying to rig the game so freeloaders can continue to exist.



-spence

Spence, ya gotta be kiddin me.Not only do they try to rig the game with freeloaders but also allowing ilegals stay in the country. It's two of the cheapest ways, for them, to buy/get votes, imho.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Spence, ya gotta be kiddin me.Not only do they try to rig the game with freeloaders but also allowing ilegals stay in the country. It's two of the cheapest ways, for them, to buy/get votes, imho.

With any macro scale plan you're going to get waste. There will always be welfare cheats, Medicare fraud etc...while the majority are good people.

Same goes for business. Less regulation and responsible companies will benefit from the flexibility yet still do the right thing...and others will just pollute more or pass risk onto others to make a buck.

I don't see much difference.

-spence

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

...while the majority are good people.

spence

I couldn't disagree more.

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

I couldn't disagree more.

Were you talking about businesses?

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

With any macro scale plan you're going to get waste. There will always be welfare cheats, Medicare fraud etc...while the majority are good people.

Same goes for business. Less regulation and responsible companies will benefit from the flexibility yet still do the right thing...and others will just pollute more or pass risk onto others to make a buck.

I don't see much difference.

-spence

You can do away with most of the freeloading by restricting participants to
show proof every 2 weeks where they have looked for a job by listing the companies and telephone #s of where they looked as they go to pick up their checks at a govenmrnt office, not walk down to their mailboxes and collect a check.
Then there should be proof of citizenship to vote.
Those would be big steps forward, but what politcian would go along with either
of these? Not many, as liberal regulations produce the nanny state and along
with it the votes for free stuff.

Whatever the regulations, business must adhere to them or pay fines.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

You can do away with most of the freeloading by restricting participants to show proof every 2 weeks where they have looked for a job by listing the companies and telephone #s of where they looked as they go to pick up their checks at a govenmrnt office, not walk down to their mailboxes and collect a check. Then there should be proof of citizenship to vote.
Those would be big steps forward, but what politcian would go along with either of these?

I'm not sure either would produce a significant benefit.

Whatever the regulations, business must adhere to them or pay fines.

But that's exactly Biden's point. The elite can use their incredible leverage to trump the public interest.

Take the recent JP Morgan 2 Billion dollar debacle. We have a global credit crisis and the response is regulation to help reign in risky behavior. The elite (in this case JP Morgan who's banking business is insured by taxpayers mind you) use their influence to delay the implementation of new rules so they can continue risky behavior without penalties.

Fortunately it's a big company that can absorb the loss, otherwise the taxpayer could have been held liable...Wait, didn't the taxpayer just loan the banks hundreds of billions of taxpayer money a few years ago because of banks taking massive risks allowed under law because they used their influence to shape regulation?

-spence