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.

 

Time for a mass redistribution of wealth

page: 26
28
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
I think I read about this ... It was The French Revolution. And you think of yourself as Robespierre.




posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   

poet1b
reply to post by diggindirt
 


I heard a similar story, except the guy who made millions wasn't born so poor, and made his fortune by being a good salesman, conning people into buying stuff for far more than it was worth.

Plenty of criminals work real hard to gain their stolen loot, but a con man is still a con man, no matter how much money is made.

I think you made your story up.


Think whatever you please. This country is full of self-made people who used their wits/talents to become wealthy. They produce a product or service for which people are willing to pay money. "Conning people into buying stuff for far more than it was worth" leads me to believe that you have bought "stuff" and paid "more than it was worth" because you failed to investigate what the "stuff" was worth. You fell for advertising, fell into lust for "stuff" and failed to do due diligence on its worth. That's on you my friend. Let the buyer beware is a common law principle held for centuries. Sorry about your pet rock.

My neighbor never had to "con" anyone into buying his product. It was a useful tool to the people who purchased it as it allowed them to better serve their customers and make more money for their companies, pay their employees more and in turn Uncle Sugar gets more tax revenue. He pays more in taxes each year than our household income I'd venture to say and yet he uses the same roads, bridges and infrastructure that our family uses.

Then there's my example of Pat Sadjak, a fellow that most people in the US would recognize. He's a multi-millionaire because he "conned" old Merv to pay him hundreds of thousands of dollars to stand before a camera and be witty and personable while giving away free stuff. And to think that I never knew....

"reply to post by diggindirt



By the way, that's funny. I hope we're not exes. That would be awkward.

Here's a test... I'm artistic, passionate, generous, idealistic, and I rebel strongly against manipulation... and you're still in love with me. Am I your ex?"

"....I rebel strongly against manipulation..." and yet you lust for the power to manipulate others to the point of causing them pain?

"....and you're still in love with me." LOL, really? Nope, not since he took the kids' college fund to buy a bass boat, showing me that he considered himself entitled to money that he hadn't worked for, money that was designated to give our children an opportunity at getting a college degree. (They did get those degrees---no help from him living in his Mom's spare bedroom.)

You admit freely that you struggle with greed and you suppose that everyone else on the planet has the same issue, projecting motives that you have imagined exist. You say you're only talking about "excess" but you've not told me why you want cause Oprah pain. She is worth billions---and yet you type the words saying you want to see her hurt because she has "excessive" funds.

Have you "given everyone a raise" today as you've gone about your business? Did you give your employees a nice 1st of the month bonus since you believe everyone deserves a raise? How much did that cost you in increased SS taxes? You really need to walk the walk in addition to talking the talk. Give up your excess wealth or sit down and be quiet about others' wealth---if you want to be credible. Otherwise you're like a clanging cymbal---just noise.
So I will close my contributions to this thread with a quote from one of my favorite books: "I've finally recognized that there's a degree of willed ignorance that is beyond correction." (Bolinger in Middle State by Mike Miller.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   

beezzer

spiritualzombie

Leonidas

spiritualzombie

The 1% are the problem.

Time for a massive change. I vote for a mass redistribution of wealth.
edit on 30-1-2014 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)


There have been a few leaders who agree with you. Which Great Leader inspires you? Was it Joseph Stalin? Chairman Mao?

Answer me how much money I am allowed to keep, and how much you will take.

You started this thread, so tell me, how much of my money do I get to keep?


The ideals of truth and justice inspire me. Right and wrong. The idea that we the people decide the direction we go, not those at the very top of a pyramid.

It's surprising that on this site there would be this much support for protecting corruption.




I'm not protecting corruption, I'm just not endorsing theft.


Investigate the Obama administration, investigate the Bush Administration, investigate major players in banking and on wall street.

Is it theft when a judge orders payment as punishment for a crime found guilty by a jury?



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:37 PM
link   

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

Leonidas
So how much money is a person allowed to keep?

Who decides? You?


Decided by a court.


Who populates the court?


That's definitely not for me to decide. Good people, fair people.

Are you going to ask me next who I hire to be the bailiff? What building do the proceedings take place? Familiarize yourself with a court room. Maybe watch the movie a Few Good Men. You'll have a decent visual in your mind of what a court room looks like, how judges are dressed, and who populates a jury.


So we get the 1% who have committed crimes or not. Take their money, scare them, kill them.

Let's solve greed by theft.

Let's investigate all successful people to see if they have passed your version of a litmus test.

(just kill them all, it'll be easier)



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:38 PM
link   

ketsuko
I think I read about this ... It was The French Revolution. And you think of yourself as Robespierre.


I think you guys fight me on this because you cling to visions of Stalin and Hitler and whoever. That's who you want to fight so you put that label on me and don't listen to a word I'm saying. If you read what I'm saying, you'll see I'm talking about corruption and justice.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   
End the fed and all problems will be resolved. We don't need any redistribution of wealth propaganda.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


The best part is we get all this from someone who admitted early on in the thread that he suffers from greed to the point where he can't even play a civilized Monopoly game but has to manipulate it long past the point of the end just to keep enjoying racking up more fake money of the other players.

He's fighting himself. Maybe he should look in the mirror and conquer his own demons before he purports to save the rest of the world.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   

beezzer

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

Leonidas
So how much money is a person allowed to keep?

Who decides? You?


Decided by a court.


Who populates the court?


That's definitely not for me to decide. Good people, fair people.

Are you going to ask me next who I hire to be the bailiff? What building do the proceedings take place? Familiarize yourself with a court room. Maybe watch the movie a Few Good Men. You'll have a decent visual in your mind of what a court room looks like, how judges are dressed, and who populates a jury.


So we get the 1% who have committed crimes or not. Take their money, scare them, kill them.

Let's solve greed by theft.

Let's investigate all successful people to see if they have passed your version of a litmus test.

(just kill them all, it'll be easier)



You're arguing for the sake of argument. You already agree to not support corruption. I assume you are on this site aware of powerful people in control, pulling strings to take power away from the people.

Do you feel there is no legal way to correct it?



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   

beezzer

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

Leonidas
So how much money is a person allowed to keep?

Who decides? You?


Decided by a court.


Who populates the court?


That's definitely not for me to decide. Good people, fair people.

Are you going to ask me next who I hire to be the bailiff? What building do the proceedings take place? Familiarize yourself with a court room. Maybe watch the movie a Few Good Men. You'll have a decent visual in your mind of what a court room looks like, how judges are dressed, and who populates a jury.


So we get the 1% who have committed crimes or not. Take their money, scare them, kill them.

Let's solve greed by theft.

Let's investigate all successful people to see if they have passed your version of a litmus test.

(just kill them all, it'll be easier)



Do we not solve treason by execution?
Do we not solve monetary damages with money?



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   

spiritualzombie

ketsuko
I think I read about this ... It was The French Revolution. And you think of yourself as Robespierre.


I think you guys fight me on this because you cling to visions of Stalin and Hitler and whoever. That's who you want to fight so you put that label on me and don't listen to a word I'm saying. If you read what I'm saying, you'll see I'm talking about corruption and justice.


No, you're not.

You're talking about taking what others have because you have decided that they must have gotten it through greed which you would define as a crime. And, while greed is certainly a sin, it is not a crime and you have no way of knowing how many of those who have more than you are actually greedy or got their money through greed.

You want to subject everyone who has this mythical amount to a trial and put them through pain and suffering in order to determine their innocence in a country whose legal motto is innocent until proven guilty.

You, sir, are the one out of bounds here.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   

ketsuko
reply to post by beezzer
 


The best part is we get all this from someone who admitted early on in the thread that he suffers from greed to the point where he can't even play a civilized Monopoly game but has to manipulate it long past the point of the end just to keep enjoying racking up more fake money of the other players.

He's fighting himself. Maybe he should look in the mirror and conquer his own demons before he purports to save the rest of the world.


Yes, definitely don't put that little boy in control of any governments. He will take your $200! He will encourage you to keep striving, you can do it! And then he will take all your railroads! Hey, but don't worry, GO! is right around the corner and soon, if you don't buy anymore houses you might get out of debt.... Yeah, don't give that little boy a country to run.

Unfortunately that's what we have here.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   

ketsuko

spiritualzombie

ketsuko
I think I read about this ... It was The French Revolution. And you think of yourself as Robespierre.


I think you guys fight me on this because you cling to visions of Stalin and Hitler and whoever. That's who you want to fight so you put that label on me and don't listen to a word I'm saying. If you read what I'm saying, you'll see I'm talking about corruption and justice.


No, you're not.

You're talking about taking what others have because you have decided that they must have gotten it through greed which you would define as a crime. And, while greed is certainly a sin, it is not a crime and you have no way of knowing how many of those who have more than you are actually greedy or got their money through greed.

You want to subject everyone who has this mythical amount to a trial and put them through pain and suffering in order to determine their innocence in a country whose legal motto is innocent until proven guilty.

You, sir, are the one out of bounds here.


I guess you supported the bailout. Just a big 'accident'. No negligence. No corruption. No crimes committed.

Your American dream apparently includes the opportunity for corruption.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
So, if I start a thread that says "All hail the puppet masters" and I rally for those guys at the top pulling strings, pushing the little guy out of the picture, making the country theirs, taking trillions from the people under threat... And suggest even some new laws to make them more immune-- I assume I would have your support then?

edit on 1-2-2014 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

Leonidas
So how much money is a person allowed to keep?

Who decides? You?


Decided by a court.


Who populates the court?


That's definitely not for me to decide. Good people, fair people.

Are you going to ask me next who I hire to be the bailiff? What building do the proceedings take place? Familiarize yourself with a court room. Maybe watch the movie a Few Good Men. You'll have a decent visual in your mind of what a court room looks like, how judges are dressed, and who populates a jury.


So we get the 1% who have committed crimes or not. Take their money, scare them, kill them.

Let's solve greed by theft.

Let's investigate all successful people to see if they have passed your version of a litmus test.

(just kill them all, it'll be easier)



Do we not solve treason by execution?
Do we not solve monetary damages with money?


According to you, it is now treason to have more than you. It's fun to discuss this on a forum board, it's scary when people like you are voted into office or have a following, though.

Because you're not interested in justice or equality.

You are interested in justifying theft.
You have endorsed persecution of everyone successful.
You have even endorsed the killing of successful people.
You want to frighten successful people.
You want to create new laws that would enable you to persecute and prosecute success.
You want to change the definition of success.
You want to determine what people need.
You want to determine what people want.

You are no better than those with whom you disagree with. Your ideology wants to place you at the top. Right where those with whom you despise are now sitting.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   

beezzer

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

Leonidas
So how much money is a person allowed to keep?

Who decides? You?


Decided by a court.


Who populates the court?


That's definitely not for me to decide. Good people, fair people.

Are you going to ask me next who I hire to be the bailiff? What building do the proceedings take place? Familiarize yourself with a court room. Maybe watch the movie a Few Good Men. You'll have a decent visual in your mind of what a court room looks like, how judges are dressed, and who populates a jury.


So we get the 1% who have committed crimes or not. Take their money, scare them, kill them.

Let's solve greed by theft.

Let's investigate all successful people to see if they have passed your version of a litmus test.

(just kill them all, it'll be easier)



Do we not solve treason by execution?
Do we not solve monetary damages with money?


According to you, it is now treason to have more than you. It's fun to discuss this on a forum board, it's scary when people like you are voted into office or have a following, though.

Because you're not interested in justice or equality.

You are interested in justifying theft.
You have endorsed persecution of everyone successful.
You have even endorsed the killing of successful people.
You want to frighten successful people.
You want to create new laws that would enable you to persecute and prosecute success.
You want to change the definition of success.
You want to determine what people need.
You want to determine what people want.

You are no better than those with whom you disagree with. Your ideology wants to place you at the top. Right where those with whom you despise are now sitting.


Beezzer I had respect for you, but I can see you don't really listen. I'm responding to everything your saying, but you can't afford me the same respect. I never said treason is having more money than me. Shame on you. You're not interested in discussion. I'm shocked so many people respect you when you can't even do battle on truthful ground.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

beezzer

spiritualzombie

Leonidas
So how much money is a person allowed to keep?

Who decides? You?


Decided by a court.


Who populates the court?


That's definitely not for me to decide. Good people, fair people.

Are you going to ask me next who I hire to be the bailiff? What building do the proceedings take place? Familiarize yourself with a court room. Maybe watch the movie a Few Good Men. You'll have a decent visual in your mind of what a court room looks like, how judges are dressed, and who populates a jury.


So we get the 1% who have committed crimes or not. Take their money, scare them, kill them.

Let's solve greed by theft.

Let's investigate all successful people to see if they have passed your version of a litmus test.

(just kill them all, it'll be easier)



Do we not solve treason by execution?
Do we not solve monetary damages with money?


According to you, it is now treason to have more than you. It's fun to discuss this on a forum board, it's scary when people like you are voted into office or have a following, though.

Because you're not interested in justice or equality.

You are interested in justifying theft.
You have endorsed persecution of everyone successful.
You have even endorsed the killing of successful people.
You want to frighten successful people.
You want to create new laws that would enable you to persecute and prosecute success.
You want to change the definition of success.
You want to determine what people need.
You want to determine what people want.

You are no better than those with whom you disagree with. Your ideology wants to place you at the top. Right where those with whom you despise are now sitting.


Beezzer I had respect for you, but I can see you don't really listen. I'm responding to everything your saying, but you can't afford me the same respect. I never said treason is having more money than me. Shame on you. You're not interested in discussion. I'm shocked so many people respect you when you can't even do battle on truthful ground.


I'm a simple guy. I like to "cut to the chase". I like to get to the bottom line.

You can flower your discussion however you see fit.

But my BS meter is pegged with your desire to punish those with more than you.

This has gone on since man walked out of the caves. There have always been some who have had more than others. And there are some who have always tried to take what others have had.

Did some wealthy folks get theirs by cheating the system? Sure.

Who cares.

In going after them, you'll just end up harming everyone. Your ideology needs a target. Someone to hate. You can't just look after your own and try to be successful in your own right.

You have to take from others.

And I call it how I see it.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   

beezzer
According to you, it is now treason to have more than you.


beezzer
And I call it how I see it.


No, you re-word it as you see fit. You don't argue with the truth because you can't, so you change the truth to be something you can argue with.

Shame on you.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by diggindirt
 


Diggindirt, it's frustrating because you don't see that I'm talking about people who are actively controlling the government by wealth and power. That they are systematically changing laws to give themselves more power, and make themselves immune.

I'm frustrated because no matter how many times I say this, you're stuck on this concept of me struggling with my own greed?

So, I'm just going to ask you directly, from one human being to another, how do I relay to you that I am referring to a very very top select few who have made themselves untouchable, too big to fail, too big to jail?

My father is lawyer, I have lots of family in law enforcement... I believe in the law. I don't believe in people being above the law. That's not right. It needs to be corrected.

P.S. I'm sorry about the "ex still in love with me" part. I was trying to be playful. I hope it wasn't offensive.



edit on 1-2-2014 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-2-2014 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Antigod

eriktheawful
reply to post by ColeYounger
 


He said there will always be SOME that never have a chance:

Young person or kid, cut down in war, gang fight, senesless other violent means.

Kids who drop from school and decide to run with gangs instead.

Many people in countries like North Korea......some starving to death while still kids.

Genocide in other countries.

Many examples of how SOME literally never had a chance.



So exactly how many people are the successful supposed to provide for? Why are the problems of other countries their responsibility? What makes one person responsible for anothers welfare?

(FYI, actually pro a welfare state, but there have to be limits)

Why is some idiot drop out gang member chanceless? I come from a truly crap background (begging for food bad) didn't get involved with crime and never got into debt.


I don't believe anyone should provide for or support anyone else against their will. If a group wants to provide support for those less fortunate, that's wonderful.

However, I'm a firm believer in the "if you're a responsible adult that can work and provide for yourself, do so."
And yes, I've been on that road of living paycheck to paycheck. Being jobless and not finding work. Wondering how I'm going to feed my family.

And again, SOME "idiot drop out gang members" will be "chanceless" because they either get cut down young in some senseless violence, or are pretty much brainwashed from a very young age that this is what their way of life is going to be, and they can forget doing anything else.

SOME will believe that....and not try for anything else. Those are the "some" that won't have a chance....simply because they really believe that they can't do any better for themselves......



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


This revelation that neocons are liberals or leftists I find extremely interesting, but very confusing, so please help me out.

These neocons (leftist/liberals) have been interviewed countless times on FOX News, which was thought to be right-wing conservative. So are you saying FOX News is actually leftist? Because these neocons are still loved by FOX News. Aren't they? Or have they since been disavowed?

So are conservatives who watch FOX News actually leftist liberals?

When did this happen? Did right wing conservatives know all along that Neocons like Kristol, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc where actually leftists? If so, why did FOX News support them, unless FOX is also leftist? And all it's viewers leftist also?

Please make this make sense. I'm genuinely interested.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join