When is enough money enough Mr. President?

[Accountable]

You need to find a better way to say it. There is faith/religion/morality and there is morality without religion and it's possible for them to get all mixed together, but they don't have to be. Logical reasoning, no matter how anti-religious you are does not preclude morality. For example some conservatives believe if they are smart enough, then it's just fine if they live on the top of the heap and screw everyone not as smart as them. That is a moral basis having nothing to do with the standards religion is supposed to promote.

The US law system has worked tirelessly for over a century to scour legislation and other legal documents of everything except the word itself, even to the point of erasing the spirit or original intent of a given law. Morality is allowed for political convenience, not because it's the moral thing to do. Is it right? Well, we defend the criminal as vehemently as the righteous, so I guess the best way to do that is to separate morality from the law (church from state) and deal with things with a surgical detachment.

 

[Dana]

We really have a National Prayer Day? The true atheists must have a field day with that. I'd be going to hell if I didn't believe I was already there.

 

[itsmeJonB]

We really have a National Prayer Day? The true atheists must have a field day with that. I'd be going to hell if I didn't believe I was already there.

Actually us Atheists rejoice and laugh at all the people that participate

 

[Accountable]

We really have a National Prayer Day? The true atheists must have a field day with that. I'd be going to hell if I didn't believe I was already there.

Wrong thread.
http://www.offtopicz.net/showthread.php?t=62234

 

[Minor Axis]

And now you're putting words in my mouth and introducing even more strawmen and red herrings into the argument. My issue is exactly how it sounds, what right does the President of the United States to tell people he thinks they've made enough money. It's pretty simple really, with none of the hidden meanings you've decided to imply.

You and your straw men. You were the one who emphasized the President's salary in your post as if it had something to do with your complaint.

 

[retro]

You and your straw men. You were the one who emphasized the President's salary in your post as if it had something to do with your complaint.

His salary doesn't have a thing to do with it, the fact that he made $5.5 million last year has everything to do with it. Tim brought up how much he paid in taxes, which has exactly nothing to do with the subject at hand. If you can't understand that money earned and taxes paid aren't mutually exclusive in the terms of this discussion, then you're kinda clueless, or just looking to be purposefully obtuse.

 

[Minor Axis]

His salary doesn't have a thing to do with it, the fact that he made $5.5 million last year has everything to do with it. Tim brought up how much he paid in taxes, which has exactly nothing to do with the subject at hand. If you can't understand that money earned and taxes paid aren't mutually exclusive in the terms of this discussion, then you're kinda clueless, or just looking to be purposefully obtuse.

Now you are talking in circles.

 

[retro]

Now you are talking in circles.

Money made and taxes paid aren't mutually exclusive... is that really such a difficult concept to comprehend? Taxes paid have exactly nothing to do the declaration of someone having made "too much money". I swear, I think you're deliberately trying to be dense.

 

[Minor Axis]

Money made and taxes paid aren't mutually exclusive... is that really such a difficult concept to comprehend? Taxes paid have exactly nothing to do the declaration of someone having made "too much money". I swear, I think you're deliberately trying to be dense.

You brought up his statement then threw in your own observation (which can be intrepreted) that somehow it was hypocritical for someone making 5 mil a year to say this. Obviously you thought it was relevant to reinforce your point. But then you said it did not matter and then later you said it did. If it was not important then you should have left his salary out of your criticism. But since you didn't I was prompted to ask, how much do you think is too much to make in a year? I'm not trying to be dense, how about u?

 

[retro]

You brought up his statement then threw in your own observation (which can be intrepreted) that somehow it was hypocritical for someone making 5 mil a year to say this. Obviously you thought it was relevant to reinforce your point. But then you said it did not matter and then later you said it did. If it was not important then you should have left his salary out of your criticism. But since you didn't I was prompted to ask, how much do you think is too much to make in a year? I'm not trying to be dense, how about u?

Salary earned is relevant, taxes paid is not. It's a red herring, or a straw man meant to distract from the actual argument. Obama states that one can make "too much" money, yet he made $5.5m last year alone. So, I raised the question of how much money is enough, it obviously isn't $5.5m, or he would've included himself. Therefore the question is how much money (more than $5.5m per year) is "enough". In addition, what right does the President of the United States have to tell people that they've made too much money. It may be his own personal opinion, but he's making that opinion in the capacity of the President. That statement is contradictory to the freedom that this country was founded on. You can't make "enough" money in a system with economic freedom.

Now stop being obtuse and/or dense and actual argue the point, and not my accurate accusation of Tim using a straw man.

 

[Minor Axis]

Salary earned is relevant, taxes paid is not. It's a red herring, or a straw man meant to distract from the actual argument. Obama states that one can make "too much" money, yet he made $5.5m last year alone. So, I raised the question of how much money is enough, it obviously isn't $5.5m, or he would've included himself. Therefore the question is how much money (more than $5.5m per year) is "enough". In addition, what right does the President of the United States have to tell people that they've made too much money. It may be his own personal opinion, but he's making that opinion in the capacity of the President. That statement is contradictory to the freedom that this country was founded on. You can't make "enough" money in a system with economic freedom.

Now stop being obtuse and/or dense and actual argue the point, and not my accurate accusation of Tim using a straw man.

Your strawman is that you don't care how much he makes, he deserves it, yet you raise it as a means of criticizing Obama. For someone who believes the sky is the limit, it's a distraction from the basic premise of your thread that Obama should not say "anyone makes enough". Maybe he thinks 10m a year is enough? Would you be ok with that? Nope, so his measly 5m a year is not really an issue to your primary point, that he said "some people make too much", which they do. My point is that you utilize your own strawmen when you feel like it.

Sounds like you advocating raw unregulated capitalism. While you may think so, the country was not founded on bountiful greed. There is no such thing as total economic freedom and I see no problem with capping excessive success. 5m a year is more than plenty for the average human being to "survive" on.

 

[Alien Allen]

You can not have it both ways Minor

The left rightfully bashes the right when one of the holier than thou reps get caught having sex with the nanny as the reps preach that family value bullshit

Same can be applied to a president who preaches against the rich making too much. When he himself is rich.

Being a politician is a very lucrative job. One reason they all sell there soul to get a piece of the action

 

[retro]

Your strawman is that you don't care how much he makes, he deserves it, yet you raise it as a means of criticizing Obama. For someone who believes the sky is the limit, it's a distraction from the basic premise of your thread that Obama should not say "anyone makes enough". Maybe he thinks 10m a year is enough? Would you be ok with that? Nope, so his measly 5m a year is not really an issue to your primary point, that he said "some people make too much", which they do. My point is that you utilize your own strawmen when you feel like it.

Sounds like you advocating raw unregulated capitalism. While you may think so, the country was not founded on bountiful greed. There is no such thing as total economic freedom and I see no problem with capping excessive success. 5m a year is more than plenty for the average human being to "survive" on.

Nowhere did I mention unregulated capitalism, but it's par for the course for you to put words in my mouth. You're being purposefully obtuse and unwilling to have an actual discussion because you're reading things the way that you want to read them. In regards to the unregulated capitalism comment though, not having a cap on personal income does not mean one is a proponent of unregulated capitalism, those two are not mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, when these types of things are brought up around here, you Democrats are incapable of realizing that fact.

 

[Minor Axis]

Nowhere did I mention unregulated capitalism, but it's par for the course for you to put words in my mouth. You're being purposefully obtuse and unwilling to have an actual discussion because you're reading things the way that you want to read them. In regards to the unregulated capitalism comment though, not having a cap on personal income does not mean one is a proponent of unregulated capitalism, those two are not mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, when these types of things are brought up around here, you Democrats are incapable of realizing that fact.

Thanks for acknowledging my point in your own obtuse way. Btw, I'm not a Democrat.

 

[retro]

Thanks for acknowledging my point in your own obtuse way.

I acknowledged your point and refuted it.

Btw, I'm not a Democrat.

if it walks like a duck...

 

[Minor Axis]

I acknowledged your point and refuted it.

Maybe in retro-world, but not here.

 

[retro]

Maybe in retro-world, but not here.

I hate to break it to you, but you're the one living in a fantasy world

 

[Minor Axis]

At least we concluded on a cordial note.

 

[Alien Allen]

At least we concluded on a cordial note.

I can fix that if you like