acemona

Do you have a link. Everything I have looked up has Biden way more than that.

Ended up with wrong quote, it was actually you.

I challenge you to show me where I have made a personal attack - ever. Idiot is the strongest word I have ever used on here and I don't believe that I have ever used even lighter words for the same thing. Matter of fact, I will bet you "$10,000.00" that you can't find one.

That 15% was to the church. Not that that makes it any less good, but some donations to the church are beneficial to the individual. But I do agree, that is one of the reasons to look at it.

I don't think I used the term "birther" anywhere, and I didn't call anyone out on this board. The conspiracy theory on the birth has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative. It is about deligitimizing the man and the election. Therefore only idiots believe it.

People want to see the returns this year for several reasons: 1. where are you making your money? 2. Is there anything untoward going on? 3. Are you preaching about keeping your money in the US when you are hiding it (legally) somewhere else? 4. It is important what rate people are paying (Romney is about 13.9% this year I think) 5. Where your money is, often is where your heart is. 6. Who do you OWE?

Really? There is a huge difference. Only idiots believed that BHO granny planted a conspiracy seed in Hawaii over 40 years ago with the birth announcement and that that the governor of hawaii was lying. It is just dumb and it is not the same thing.

your life must really stink

happily married

Your words - The thing is. Socialism, progressivism, utopianism, etc are not new concepts. They date back to Plato and beyond. And as far as I know, every empire, country, government (whatever you want to call it) has colapsed under the weight of utopianism.

The Roman government collapsed under the weight of Utopianism? Really?

1. Form a Union 2. Establish Justice (Fairness, equity - Justice isn't only about restitution in court) 3. Secure the peace within our borders - sometimes very difficult, sometimes means limiting rights, or expanding them 4. Provide for a defense of these freedoms 5. Promote the general welfare 6. Secure the blessing of liberty Don't see where it says it was written to limit the power. It was written to do these things.

Being shrewd is not an economic system . . . how about these scriptures: Guard against the teachers of the Law of Moses! They love to walk around in long robes, and they like to be greeted in the market. They want the front seats in the meeting places and the best seats at banquets. But they cheat widows out of their home and then pray long prayers just to show off. The teachers will be punished most of all. If you would only give what you hve to the poor, everything you do would please God. You pharisees are in for trouble! You give God a tenth of the spices from your gardens, such as mint and rue. But you cheat people and you don't love God. You should befair and kind to others and still give a tenth to God. All the Lord's followers often met together an d they shared everything they had. The would sell their property and possessions and give the money to whoever needed it. None of them claimed that their possessions were their own, and they shared everything they had with each other. Everyone who owned land or houses would sell them and bring the money to the apostles. Then they would give the money to anyone who needed it. Take care of God's needy people and welcome strangers into your home. You know that our Lord Jesus Christ was kind enough to give all his riches and become poor. . . It does not matter how much you have. What matters is how much you are willing to give from what you have. I am not trying to make life easier for others by making life harder for you. But it is only fair for you to share with them whey have so much, and they have so little. Later, when thye have more than enough, and you are in need, they can share with you. Then everyone will have a fair share., just as the scriptures say, "those who gathered too much had nothing left. Those who gathered only a little had all they needed."

I have him on ignore. I wish you guys wouldn't quote him when you reply to his posts, then I read them . . . and want to go poke myself in the eye with a pencil.

No it is giving credit to the rules in place. The referees are there to enforce the rules, they can choose to call a tight game, or they can let them play. However, to attempt to play the game without good rules and regulations in place . . . well there would be no game at all. There are fouls and there are walks and there are 3 seconds, and there most certainly are things that are simply out of bounds. The game is well regulated and that is what makes it good.

It is not a free market that has done it. It has been a mixed market with regulations. Otherwise, wealth gets accumulated in the hands of the few and they then oppress the poor. I am not saying that is what is happening now, but if the market is not regulated that is most certainly what will happen.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/13/american-social-welfare-state-mitt-romney_n_1205357.html FWIW I don't consider people who are wealthy as evil. My issue is with the system, which is amoral. Folks are just playing the game within the prescribed system. Individual make persona sacrifices won't change the system, it takes people putting pressure on the people who set up the system. For all of the Christians on here, what does a Christ Centered economic system look like.

EXTRACTION A.K.A. Rent Seeking

I think the Angel Fund projects are exactly the way we should go because it is targeted investment to create jobs. I am also about tax incentives that allow more jobs to come into the community. It is the financial shenanigans on moving money around that irks me, and CEOs who don't do a great job making millions or billions in bonuses. That is extraction, that is not job creation.

I think I gave a rather lengthy response on why mixing the two was important. The ACCUMULATION of Wealth, not the making of money, pulls income OUT of the economy. Who controls the wealth ultimately controls income.

It is not taxed like other income. It is taxed at a much lower rate.

http://www.brimg.net/images/20111024-agi-floor-percentiles.png AGI to get in top 1% = 343,927 AGI to get in top 5% = 154,643 AGI to get in top 10% = 112,124 AGI to get in top 25% = 66,193 AGI to get in top 50% = 32,396 From the same site: But even with the across-the-board income drops, EPI researchers found that in 2009 the wealthiest 1 percent of U.S. households had net worth that was 225 times greater than the typical median household's net worth.

As many of your so often point out, there is a finite amount of money/wealth in circulation or available at any given time, otherwise there would be no problem with the government simply printing more money and paying off its debt. As more wealth is accumulated money is EXTRACTED (a new dirty word) from the economy and sat on there is then less available to be distributed or even re-distributed. Not only that some wealth is income producing and is NOT TAXED like other income - i.e. Capital Gains. Ergo, controlling wealth has an impact on income. In other words they take home 24% of the TAXABLE INCOME but how much non-taxed income do they have in comparison to the 99%. I would venture to say that 99% of the 99% have no capital gains income. Mixing wealth and income in discussion is not like mixing apples and oranges it is more like grapes and raisins. One of them just has had all of the juice squeezed out of it.

You need to see the whole picture though

But they do swear to uphold the Constitution. Again I am just as wary as you. When money can buy congress people what do we do?