It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Friendly reminder Sanders loves breadlines

page: 11
23
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:16 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




I'm a socialist


I'm so startled!




posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:17 PM
link   


Some things should be Governed by the public interest as a whole body not the individual. Not everything but some things.


So much for SELF determination.

So much for the 14th amendment.

I hate to break it to you, but the public has NO rights over the individual.

To hone that point in.

Socialists need to stop acting like the homophobic 'right' to 'rich' people.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: introvert




I'm a socialist


I'm so startled!


I've been quite open about that for some time. Old news.

Any opinions on the other things I said in the post?
edit on 13-5-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

The consitution itself imposes it's own right over the individual.


The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




I'm a socialist and I do not believe in what you described.


Bull and crap.

Cause if you did you would support abolishing the income tax altogether.

You would support abolishing the MEDICARE capital gains sur tax.

And would support ABOLISHING the capital gains tax altogether.

That destroys middle class wealth from the IRA's,pensions, Keoghs,and 401's.

We know Sander doesn't support such a thing.

Hell we know ALL Socialists don't support such a thing.

The only money people are suppose to 'make' comes from 'gubberment'.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96



Cause if you did you would support abolishing the income tax altogether.

You would support abolishing the MEDICARE capital gains sur tax.

And would support ABOLISHING the capital gains tax altogether.


But taxes are in the constitution. Have to pay for the military and such..



We know Sander doesn't support such a thing.


I don't care what Sanders supports.

By the way, you don't get to define what a socialist like myself believes. You are only entitled to define what you believe. To do so is oppressive and authoritarian.
edit on 13-5-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:24 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


Quote til the Mahdi comes home.

Does little good if one DOESN'T understand it.

And CLEARLY socialists DON'T.

45% of Americans pay no federal income tax



An estimated 45.3% of American households — roughly 77.5 million — will pay no federal individual income tax, according to data for the 2015 tax year from the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington-based research group. (Note that this does not necessarily mean they won’t owe their states income tax.)


So here we have the 45% percent that doesn't pay any taxes whining about the one percent that IS.

Very interesting.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




But taxes are in the constitution. Have to pay for the military and such..


Still don't understand what you quoted.

Defense spending is something EVERY single person in this country benefits from.

As in providing for the COMMON defense.

Not as creating a bunch of half assed programs that have become a detriment to the people of this state creating never ending DEBT.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

No Neo, you're totally over thinking it.

Self determine your life all you want. But that doesn't mean you're free to own the entire world for yourself and just say F*ck Everyone else.

Are you saying the individual has rights over the public???

You sound like you advocate for anarchy??

Do you think it should be allowed for One Rich Individual to own all fresh water??? Or all forests???
edit on 13-5-2016 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Agreed, but I have still shown that your comment was incorrect.



I hate to break it to you, but the public has NO rights over the individual.


Yes it does. Address the fact that you are wrong on that issue and we can move forward.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96



Not as creating a bunch of half assed programs that have become a detriment to the people of this state creating never ending DEBT.


Again, agreed. But your initial statement that I referred to was incorrect.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm




Self determine your life all you want. But that doesn't mean you're free to own the entire world for yourself and just say F*ck Everyone else. Are you saying the individual has rights over the public???


That is specifically WHY the US constitution. The Bill of RIGHTS, and the 14th amendment clearly states.

EFF the public.

Eff the mob.



Amendment XIV Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


www.law.cornell.edu...

It's the LAW.

The highest LAW in the country.

THAT means even RICH people.
edit on 13-5-2016 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Wait so since it is a communal goal with defense it is ok?

Are you sure that is the stance you want to take?



EFF the public. Eff the mob.


Funny how you then turn around and say this...



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

Funny how this country is a constitutional republic.

If the founders wanted this country ruled by the mob they never would have written the GD piece of paper.

That specifically PROTECT's the individual rights from the mob.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

It doesn't say f*ck the public. Saying that the State can't infringe on a persons rights or make laws against federal protections doesn't mean screw the public.

The public is a collection of Individuals. If you think it's saying screw the public then that means it's saying screw the individual too.

Again, you sound like you're promoting total lawless anarchy. Each individual to do whatever they want. Is that what you're saying?



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:42 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Why you no respond to me, Neo?

Are you willing to admit the constitution, which you seem to love as much as the rest of us, does place the public good ahead of the individual in certain circumstances?



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:43 PM
link   
wtf. if youre lining up for food its BECAUSE the rich got the food.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Yeah well when they wrote the GD piece of paper they also didn't consider certain classes of people at all. Nor did they consider Women to be individuals. They considered Wealthy Land holding White Men to be the People with Rights and Liberties and Protections. They and they alone were the Mob ruling over everyone else.


edit on 13-5-2016 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: neo96

Yeah well when they wrote the GD piece of paper they also didn't consider certain classes of people at all. Nor did they consider Women to be individuals. They considered Wealthy Land holding White Men to be the People with Rights and Liberties and Protections. They and they alone were the Mob ruling over everyone else.



So rich is the new black ?

So rich is the new women?

So rich is the 'new' native Americans ?

My how things never change from the people saying how 'better' modern society has become.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 11:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
So rich is the new black ?

So rich is the new women?

So rich is the 'new' native Americans ?

My how things never change from the people saying how 'better' modern society has become.


No. Rich is just rich. Wealth means power, education, mobility, opportunity, status. Poor means your ability to survive is based on serving the wealthy. Or maybe banding together with other poor individuals to create power and opportunity as a collective.

When the Rich created the Rules for America they created them with themselves as being the ones in charge. Which it's a fact, Women weren't included and neither were Poor People or Slaves or Natives. They created a society where only the rich and well educated made the decisions and they made them based on their own small collective of other rich people. That's just a fact.

I don't know what you're trying to imply with your twisting of my words.




top topics



 
23
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join