Originally posted by sageofmonticello
May I ask, then what of those who are not in that greater majority? What if the benefit of the greater majority is at the expense of a minority?
Why ask "what if"? The benefit of the minority is already at the expense of the majority. The United States of America accounts for 4.67% of the
total population of the planet (minority), yet the US owns more than 25% of the total globe's net worth.
Should it not be a presidents job to create conditions that can benefit everyone at nobodies expense?
Those conditions already exist, but it would seem the human experience is not engineered in a way that makes it easily noticeable to them. But, no, I
don't think it is in the president's job description, nor should it be. I'm a proponent of personal responsibilty while maintaining a system of
nurturing help for those who may be less fortunate. I also personally believe those who are less fortunate may be making choices that make things
more difficult than they have to be. Again, this is only my personal belief, though.
Every action government makes to benefit one person creates a consequence for somebody else.
Sure would be nice if it were possible for people to live long enough to learn all the laws and manditory expectations, wouldn't it? How many laws
are there? Google doesn't even know. Solution about having more laws than anyone can learn in a lifetime? Vote for more lawmakers to make even more
laws. Seems logical to some, obviously. Too bad society's manditory expectations (laws) are not required learning in schools.
This must bother you right? Shouldn't the government have a more hands off approach so as to not negatively affect anybody with unintended
Interesting wording that I really like: "unintended consequences". nice sageofmonticello
It is not as if government takes from the rich and gives to the poor exclusively.
The government takes from everybody and gives it to who they decide gets it. How do you justify the government taxing poor people and giving the
money to rich people? They do this as well. Shouldn't the government not be playing favorites?
Preacing to the choir brother. In the state of Illinois we get less than 75 cents back in federal assistance for every dollar we pay in taxes. So:
1/4 of our taxes are going somewhere else. In contrast some of the richer states where the senators and legislators live get $6 or $7 dollars in
federal assistance for every $1 they pay in federal taxes. If you don't want to google those figures for yourself let me know, I'm sure I can find
the reference where I got those figures from. Either wikipedia or the IRS page probably have them. But my time is budgetted today.
Sorry Jesus, you cannot be President.
I didn't realize he was in the race? This thread of yours seems to just be an attack on the religious right. How does you attacking them make you any
better then them?
*than them. -- No, not an attack on the religious right, rather an observation in what I construde as flawed or opposing logic created by some of
the "religious rights" minds.
I don't like how some people like to legislate their religious beliefs but arrogantly making fun of them while trying to appear more intelligent is a
but ironic, don't you think?
There is plenty I am ignorant of. You can find an example of my ignorance on page 2 or 3, maybe 4 of this thread with and exchange I was having with
the member BehindTheMask late last night. I was corrected. I learned something. I accepted that my arguement on an issue was based upon my own
misinterpretation of the facts, and I owed up to being wrong publicly here in this thread. I wouldn't consider myself arrogant. I wasn't making fun
of anyone, but was interjecting (or attempting to) humor into this thread.
edit on 1-3-2012 by ILikeStars because: typing too fast. had to
correct bb code for link.
edit on 1-3-2012 by ILikeStars because: same ^