User Tag List

First 67891018 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 260

  1. #71
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    The inderlying intent of all the constitutional mumbo jumbo is to give each member a relatively equal opportunity under the law, to acquire resources which will theoretically make them happy. Otherwise, why would anyone buy into it?
    "Under the law" is the key phrase. That means "to whatever degree it's affected by legal status." In other words, a rich man has the same legal rights as a poor one. That's not the same as having equal opportunity across the board.

    The Founders knew that with increased weath comes increased financial opportunity. That's part of being wealthy. They were okay with that.

    If you believe to the contrary, post some quotes from some primary sources. No doubt James Madison or Alexander Hamilton had something to say on the subject.

  2. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    As determined by whom? If person X has a business agreement with person Y to pay wages A in exchange for labor B, what business is it of you, or government, or anyone else to limit that free exchange?
    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Who are you to determine that? The only people involved in those decisions should be the employer and the employee.
    You're assuming that the two parties always have equal bargaining power. In reality, a corporate entity usually have much more power than an individual. The individual can level the playing field by using the power of the legislative process.

    As an example, a high tech company can insist that their engineers work for $20K per year or they will move overseas.

  3. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    "Equality before the law" is not the same as "equal shot at success."
    What good is "equality" if it does not apply to the opportunity to acquiring stuff which will (theoretically) make you happy?

  4. #74
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    What good is "equality" if it does not apply to the opportunity to acquiring stuff which will (theoretically) make you happy?

    It's good in that no one is royalty or nobility, and that the rules are the same for everyone.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  5. #75
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    You're assuming that the two parties always have equal bargaining power. In reality, a corporate entity usually have much more power than an individual. The individual can level the playing field by using the power of the legislative process.

    As an example, a high tech company can insist that their engineers work for $20K per year or they will move overseas.

    I'm not assuming any such thing. It's rare that both parties have the same bargaining power. That's why Alex Rodriguez makes $25 million a year, and I make less than $25,000 (for now).
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  6. #76
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    You're assuming that the two parties always have equal bargaining power.
    I'm assuming nothing of the kind.

  7. #77
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    "Under the law" is the key phrase. That means "to whatever degree it's affected by legal status." In other words, a rich man has the same legal rights as a poor one. That's not the same as having equal opportunity across the board.

    The Founders knew that with increased weath comes increased financial opportunity. That's part of being wealthy. They were okay with that.

    If you believe to the contrary, post some quotes from some primary sources. No doubt James Madison or Alexander Hamilton had something to say on the subject.
    I'm not well studied in history. The opinions of dead people are of less importance to me than the principles of a "just society".

  8. #78
    Welcome to Sunnyside Mondo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    1,996

    Default

    I don't think Obama is going to get as far as wealth redistribution.
    Those who are making over $250,000 a year aren't going to be paying much more in taxes than they are now.
    I just hope that he doesn't have middle-class families, like my own, pay more taxes. It is something we can't afford at all.
    I'd probably have to transfer to a state university if taxes go up for us significantly but Obama promised to help the middle class, so I don't think he will.

    I just hope he gives the taxpayer money back to the community in positive ways and just doesn't spend it all on personal endeavors.
    I trust Obama. I believe in Obama. He will do great things!

    However, there is one thing the Democratic Party must remember, money is a powerful incentive in our economy for people to work.
    He should only raise the taxes of those at the top as much as he has to.
    Obama is a very smart man- he will know what he needs to do.
    The goal is to be in less debt, not to create a socialist society.
    MBTI Type: iNTj
    Enneagram Type: 3w4 sp/sx

  9. #79
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    I'm not well studied in history. The opinions of dead people are of less importance to me than the principles of a "just society".
    Perhaps, but you don't seem to understand that your sense of what constitutes a "just society" was largely inherited from dead people.

  10. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    I'm not assuming any such thing. It's rare that both parties have the same bargaining power. That's why Alex Rodriguez makes $25 million a year, and I make less than $25,000 (for now).
    If you have no problems with corporations wielding their power to extract concessions from individuals, then why do you object when individuals use the government to level the playing field?

Similar Threads

  1. Barack Obama. Discuss.
    By Cindyrella in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 09-08-2008, 10:36 PM
  2. McCain vs. Obama
    By pure_mercury in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 07-28-2008, 07:55 AM
  3. Bush n' Obama Kinfolk
    By heart in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-02-2008, 03:53 PM
  4. Did anyone catch Obama's speech on race?
    By JuilinThiefTaker in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 03-24-2008, 09:23 AM
  5. Sudden Wealth
    By Natrushka in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 07-31-2007, 09:31 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO