I apologize if I am not supposed to use the word "crap" above, just a catch phrase around here, but I waited too long to edit it out.

CAN SOMEONE HELP ME DISTRIBUTE MY TABLE OUT EVENLY? It looks right on the submit page, but goes back otherwise?

 

What would you like them to pay with - they control nearly 0% of the wealth and their net work is probably in the negative as well. Maybe we should indenture that bottom 40% - ooooh wait - they already are. There are slaves to wages

 

Table 1: Distribution of net worth and financial wealth in the United States, 1983-2001

Total Net Worth

Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent

1983 33.8% 47.5% 18.7%

1989 37.4% 46.2% 16.4%

1992 37.2% 46.6% 16.3%

1995 38.5% 45.4% 16.1%

1998 38.1% 45.3% 16.6%

2001 33.4% 51.0% 15.5%

 

2001 top 1% controls 33.4% of net worth, bottom 80% controls 15.5%

 

Financial Wealth

Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent

1983 42.9% 48.4% 8.7%

1989 46.9% 46.5% 6.6%

1992 45.6% 46.7% 7.7%

1995 47.2% 45.9% 7.0%

1998 47.3% 43.6% 9.1%

2001 39.7% 51.5% 8.8%

 

2001 top 1% controls 39.7% of financial wealth, bottom 80% controls 8.8%

 

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

 

DON'T GIVE ME ANY CRAP ABOUT WEALTH RE-DISTRIBUTION, THERE IS NO WEALTH DISTRIBUTION IN THIS COUNTRY NOW - what we should talk about is WEALTH DISTRIBUTION

I prepared a long response, but I think we are straying too far off topic. So, I will l keep my response short and save the long version for a more appropriate thread.

 

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

 

Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage. [Author Unknown]

Then he knows all of those who are going to be aborted? Why does he let them be conceived.

 

He then also knows who all is going to heaven, so much for free will.

 

This is not a quote from Jesus

 

Why does he let them be conceived? Not sure, God has not chosen LBBC to be the person that he reveals all of his plans to.

 

Rick Warren in his book Purpose Driven Life has a great quote.

 

"While there are illegitimate parents, there are no illegitimate children. Many children are unplanned by their parents but they are not unplanned by God. God's purpose took into account human error, and even sin.....He has a reason for everything he creates.

 

 

ON the other subject you brought up.

No, not so much for free will. It is our will to freely chose what we want to do. It's just God knows what we will choose before we choose it. That will make your mind hurt.:lol:

I apologize if I am not supposed to use the word "crap" above, just a catch phrase around here, but I waited too long to edit it out.

 

You can thank TonyDanza for the rights to use that word. She went on a campaign that crap was acceptable a couple years back. It was banned and like Booger on WKRP in Cincinnati and Johnny Fever, it was brought back to be used.:thumb:

I consider myself a moderate liberal ...

 

I'm very stridently pro-choice, but only in the first trimester ... I'm against partial-birth abortion.

 

I'm for civil unions between consenting adults, allowing life partners the same authority as a spouse when it comes to insurance and medical decisions.

 

I'm for federal assistance for poor families (welfare) with certain conditions, including a community service requirement.

I consider myself a moderate liberal ...

 

I'm very stridently pro-choice, but only in the first trimester ... I'm against partial-birth abortion.

 

I'm for civil unions between consenting adults, allowing life partners the same authority as a spouse when it comes to insurance and medical decisions.

 

I'm for federal assistance for poor families (welfare) with certain conditions, including a community service requirement.

 

Maybe we were separated at birth?

Maybe we were separated at birth?

I'm guessing Siamese twins conjoined at the head. It's only fair that each of you got half a brain and became liberals.

 

If you had been joined at the derriere, you'd have been conservatives. Its obvious that all our ideas are half-butted.

Food for thought: (keep in mind the bolded items are meant to be tongue in cheek for those that might be easily offended;))

 

 

1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.

 

2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and

governments create prosperity.

 

3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.

 

4. You have to believe that there was no art before Federal funding.

 

5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by

documented cyclical changes in the earth's climate and more affected by Soccer moms driving SUV's.

 

6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial but being homosexual is natural.

 

7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of Federal funding.

 

8. You have to believe that the teacher who can't teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

 

9. You have to believe that hunters don't care about nature, but loony activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.

 

10. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.

 

11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own

money to make "The Passion of the Christ" for financial gain only.

 

12. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.

 

13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.

 

14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison and Alexander Graham Bell.

 

15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and affirmative action are not.

 

16. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person.

 

17. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried is because the right people haven't been in charge.

 

18. You have to believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and a sex offender belonged in the White House.

19. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag queens, transvestites and bestiality should be constitutionally protected, but that manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.

 

20. You have to believe that illegal Democrat Party funding by the Chinese Government is somehow in the best interest to the United States.

 

21. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right wing conspiracy.

 

22. You have to believe that it's okay to give Federal workers the day off on Christmas Day..........but it's not okay to say "Merry Christmas." Ready to vote???

 

 

:lol:

Wow that was a lot of rush limbaugh neo-con bullet points, you must....

1.Be Racial

2.Believe in the Rich getting Richer

3.The working man will always a little less important that the white collar man

4.Science sucks

5.Evolution is all a scam

6.Women should make less than men

7.The earth and nature arent that important

8.False statements that send us to war are much better than false statements about a personal relationship

9.Big oil is awesome for everybody

10.Bill O'rielly is the the second coming of christ.

:lol:

Just wanted to prove that I can do the same with the other side of the ticket.

CAN SOMEONE HELP ME DISTRIBUTE MY TABLE OUT EVENLY? It looks right on the submit page, but goes back otherwise?

 

What would you like them to pay with - they control nearly 0% of the wealth and their net work is probably in the negative as well. Maybe we should indenture that bottom 40% - ooooh wait - they already are. There are slaves to wages

 

Table 1: Distribution of net worth and financial wealth in the United States, 1983-2001

Total Net Worth

Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent

1983 33.8% 47.5% 18.7%

1989 37.4% 46.2% 16.4%

1992 37.2% 46.6% 16.3%

1995 38.5% 45.4% 16.1%

1998 38.1% 45.3% 16.6%

2001 33.4% 51.0% 15.5%

 

2001 top 1% controls 33.4% of net worth, bottom 80% controls 15.5%

 

Financial Wealth

Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent

1983 42.9% 48.4% 8.7%

1989 46.9% 46.5% 6.6%

1992 45.6% 46.7% 7.7%

1995 47.2% 45.9% 7.0%

1998 47.3% 43.6% 9.1%

2001 39.7% 51.5% 8.8%

 

2001 top 1% controls 39.7% of financial wealth, bottom 80% controls 8.8%

 

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

 

DON'T GIVE ME ANY CRAP ABOUT WEALTH RE-DISTRIBUTION, THERE IS NO WEALTH DISTRIBUTION IN THIS COUNTRY NOW - what we should talk about is WEALTH DISTRIBUTION

 

How would you define wealth redistribution?

It seems to me that when it comes to issues of government control and interference in the lives of people, liberals support it for the most part when it is used to help those in need. When it comes to government restrictions that are meant to protect, Liberals seem wary.

 

Conservatives on the other hand are all for government restrictions to protect society (casino gambling, prohibition in the 1920's, marijuana etc...) When it comes to helping the needy it seems that Conservatives are less sympathetic than Liberals (welfare, healthcare etc...)

 

Just from my observation that seems to be one fundamental difference between Liberals and Conservatives.

It seems to me that when it comes to issues of government control and interference in the lives of people, liberals support it for the most part when it is used to help those in need. When it comes to government restrictions that are meant to protect, Liberals seem wary.

 

Conservatives on the other hand are all for government restrictions to protect society (casino gambling, prohibition in the 1920's, marijuana etc...) When it comes to helping the needy it seems that Conservatives are less sympathetic than Liberals (welfare, healthcare etc...)

 

Just from my observation that seems to be one fundamental difference between Liberals and Conservatives.

 

The big question I have is how are you protecting anyone? Who did prohibition protect? How is denying gays their constitutional rights protecting anyone? Leave religious beliefs aside and I don't think you're protecting anyone in those cases.

The big question I have is how are you protecting anyone? Who did prohibition protect? How is denying gays their constitutional rights protecting anyone? Leave religious beliefs aside and I don't think you're protecting anyone in those cases.

 

What constitutional rights are gays being denied?

 

They can own guns, free speech, vote, right to assembly, right to press, so on, so on. Not sure what rights guaranteed by Constitution that they are being denied?

What constitutional rights are gays being denied?

 

They can own guns, free speech, vote, right to assembly, right to press, so on, so on. Not sure what rights guaranteed by Constitution that they are being denied?

 

Their right to openly serve in the military and workplace discrimination legislation has been opposed by conservatives for a while now.

Their right to openly serve in the military and workplace discrimination legislation has been opposed by conservatives for a while now.

There is no right to serve in the military nor is there a right to employment in this country. The military and private employers reject applicants for a multitude of reasons every day in this country. Gay people do not deserve a protected class status any more than left-handed females do.

Their right to openly serve in the military and workplace discrimination legislation has been opposed by conservatives for a while now.

 

What Constitutional amendments give the first?

Not sure that the latter is needed.