Upper class people more likely to cheat: study

Feb 27, 2012
People from wealthy, upper classes are more likely than poorer folks to break laws while driving, take candy from children and lie for financial gain, said a US study.

The upper class has a higher propensity for unethical behavior, being more likely to believe – as did Gordon Gekko in the movie "Wall Street" – that "greed is good," according to a new study from the University of California, Berkeley.

"The increased unethical tendencies of upper-class individuals are driven, in part, by their more favorable attitudes toward greed," said Paul Piff, a doctoral student in psychology at UC Berkeley and lead author of the paper published today (Monday, Feb. 27) in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Piff's study is the latest in a series of UC Berkeley scholarly investigations into the relationship between socio-economic class and prosocial and antisocial emotions and behaviors, revealing new information about class differences during a time of rising economic tension.

"As these issues come to the fore, our research – and that by others – helps shed light on the role of inequality in shaping patterns of ethical conduct and selfish behavior, and points to certain ways in which these patterns might also be changed," Piff said.

To investigate how class relates to ethical conduct, the researchers surveyed the ethical tendencies of more than 1,000 individuals of lower-, middle- and upper-class backgrounds. Volunteers reported their social class using the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Socioeconomic Status and filled out surveys revealing their attitudes about unprincipled behaviors and greed. They also took part in tasks designed to measure their actual unethical behavior.

In two field studies on driving behavior, upper-class motorists were found to be four times more likely than the other drivers to cut off other vehicles at a busy four-way intersection and three times more likely to cut off a pedestrian waiting to enter a crosswalk. Another study found that upper-class participants presented with scenarios of unscrupulous behavior were more likely than the individuals in the other socio-economic classes to report replicating this type of behavior themselves.

Participants in the fourth study were assigned tasks in a laboratory where a jar of candy, reserved for visiting children, was on hand, and were invited to take a candy or two. Upper-class participants helped themselves to twice as much candy as did their counterparts in other classes.

In the fifth study, participants each were assigned the role of an employer negotiating a salary with a job candidate seeking long-term employment. Among other things, they were told that the job would soon be eliminated, and that they were free to convey that information to the candidate. Upper-class participants were more likely to deceive job candidates by withholding this information, the study found.

In the sixth study, participants played a computerized dice game, with each player getting five rolls of the dice and then reporting his or her scores. The player with the highest score would receive a cash prize. The players did not know that the game was rigged so that each player would receive no more than 12 points for the five rolls. Upper-class participants were more likely to report higher scores than would be possible, indicating a higher rate of cheating, according to the study.

The last study found attitudes about greed to be the most significant predictor of unethical behavior. Participants were primed to think about the advantages of greed and then presented with bad behavior-in-the-workplace scenarios, such as stealing cash, accepting bribes and overcharging customers. It turned out that even those participants not in the upper class were just as likely to report a willingness to engage in unethical behavior as the upper-class cohort once they had been primed to see the benefits of greed, researchers said.

"These findings have very clear implications for how increased wealth and status in society shapes patterns of ethical behavior, and suggest that the different social values among the haves and the have-nots help drive these tendencies," Piff said of the cumulative findings.

Explore further: Young people in detention being held for longer without trial

More information: “High social class predicts increased unethical behavior,” by Paul K. Piff, Daniel M. Stancato, Stéphane Côté, Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton, and Dacher Keltner, PNAS (2012).

Related Stories

Upper-class people have trouble recognizing others' emotions

Nov 22, 2010

Upper-class people have more educational opportunities, greater financial security, and better job prospects than people from lower social classes, but that doesn't mean they're more skilled at everything. A new study published ...

Social class as culture

Aug 08, 2011

Social class is more than just how much money you have. It's also the clothes you wear, the music you like, the school you go to—and has a strong influence on how you interact with others, according to the authors of ...

Our own status affects the way our brains respond to others

Apr 28, 2011

Our own social status influences the way our brains respond to others of higher or lower rank, according to a new study reported online on April 28 in Current Biology. People of higher subjective socioeconomic status show g ...

Trusting people make better lie detectors

Aug 13, 2010

Trusting others may not make you a fool or a Pollyanna, according to a study in the current Social Psychological and Personality Science. Instead it can be a sign that you're smart.

Could learning self-control be enjoyable?

Sep 20, 2010

When it comes to self-control, consumers in the United States are in trouble. But a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research says there's hope; we just need a little help to see self-regulation as fun.

Recommended for you

Power can corrupt even the honest

Oct 01, 2014

When appointing a new leader, selectors base their choice on several factors and typically look for leaders with desirable characteristics such as honesty and trustworthiness. However once leaders are in power, can we trust ...

Learning at 10 degrees north

Oct 01, 2014

Secluded beaches, calypso music and the entertaining carnival are often what come to mind when thinking of the islands of Trinidad and Tobago. But Dal Earth Sciences students might first consider Trinidad's ...

User comments : 239

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

mbrmark
Feb 27, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Lurker2358
2.8 / 5 (30) Feb 27, 2012
Might I direct attention to the story of the "Rich Young Ruler" in the Bible. Jesus was right.

Something is wrong with a civilization which gives the majority of profits of collective work to one person, who then pats himself on the back and thinks they've "earned" it.

Bad enough that the rich now make 10 times more money relative to the poor than was the case a few decades ago, but now they hypocritically believe they are "entitled" to two or three times as much.

While there is nothing wrong with accepting a gift or freebie, a person who already has more than enough should be more likely to turn down such excesses, or take less than normal people.

This is the pharisee arrogance, greed, power, "entitlement," and hypocrisy.

It's like a police officer who runs a red light, because they know they can get away with it, since nobody else has the "power" to stop them and write a ticket.
Lurker2358
2.6 / 5 (20) Feb 27, 2012
Reminds me of an incident years ago, back in high school, when two girls who were what I'd call "upper-middle class" were arrested for shop-lifting at Dillards.

I don't remember all the details, but they probably had the money in their purses for whatever they stole, or could have got it from parents at any time.

There was another case in which the male seniors had a scavenger hunt which involved stealing several items of progressive value, and if I remember right, one of the guys involved in it is now a lawyer! Figures.
pauljpease
3.4 / 5 (16) Feb 27, 2012
Study after study shows the same thing, the 1% are not your friend. I remember this study where they had a box of donuts in an office and people could take donuts and donate whatever they want. Researchers secretly kept track of who took donuts and how much they donated. The CEO/upper management invariably took the most donuts without donating anything, while the lower paid employees donated a fair value for whatever they took. I think part of this effect is due to the high earners knowing that they are overpaid, so they must construct a persona where they are more deserving than other people, so that justifies their excessive compensation. They're entitled to take whatever they want because they're just so darn valuable. Similar to another study that showed that giving bonuses often made people LESS productive, because most people generally feel they aren't doing 100%, so when you get a bonus you are like "oh, expectations are really much lower than I thought, I can slack off."
210
1.3 / 5 (14) Feb 27, 2012
Money, perceived value of material things IN another person's life, is like an enormous magnetic magnifying glass. It is as if someone turned the Hubble Space telescope toward your life and it followed you EVERYWHERE! People who do NOT know you, have never seen you, can tell U R in that magnifiers glare.For the good person, and, or the Loving person, money makes U more able 2 support & care 4 those you so treasure. The price? It also makes U a bigger target for those who would defile that affection and target U for harm and disaster. Love? We ALL need and want it. Money...we ALL need and WANT IT, HENCE we are built with an inherent vulnerability fearing deeply being hurt because a 'thing' has made us the focus of 'the unloving.' You see this in yur parents lives, friends, & relations. The entire human race glorifies your struggle WAITING 4 the day U split your pants or your skirt flies up in public. everyone U know, is so afraid they missed something because of 'money' cheat=rebellion
Sanescience
2.6 / 5 (15) Feb 27, 2012
As a critical thinker I am disappointed this is presented not as a fundamental character of human psychology but as some kind of failing on the parts of individuals.

Human psychology is long known for its study of the egocentric nature of people. Indeed natural selection probably weeds out "successful" individuals that feel undeserving or are less effective leveraging "success" into favoritism for their offspring.

I would also like to see a decent comparison against relative value judgements. if you really wanted to compare apples to apples, the rich and poor need to be tested against penalties of equal *proportionality*. Meaning a $150 dollar ticket doesn't have the same weight between the two.

And maybe even a psychology comparison between consumers of different kinds of cars and their performance. And the age range of who buys what kinds of cars.

*That* would be "science"!
350
1.4 / 5 (18) Feb 27, 2012
Lol what "groundbreaking" research. What new research will they come up with next to tell us things we already know?
210
1.3 / 5 (12) Feb 27, 2012
Is anyone surprised?

You will find, when you make your fortune, and that may have already happened but if not, I pray it will, because it can be very good...and bad...sadly. But, the 'new money people' have/get a case of Amnesia from HELL! They do NOT remember their lonely nights...they forget that one guy or gal who could not 'come-over-to-see-you' because you/they slept in a car! They forget relatives who tried to find them for years not being able to write because your 'car' had no street address - forget those relatives for sure!! They become 'cheaters' like the rest of us, but they rebel against the image of themselves as they were fighting and struggling for the wealth: They HATE THEMSELVES because the price they paid was ignoring all the wonderful little things that they truly admired and loved...and the people, oh God, there WERE people who did NOT give a damn about how much money you made or had and you missed them! Now, you cant tell who 2 trust. Real PAIN!
word-
210
1.3 / 5 (13) Feb 27, 2012
Reminds me of an incident years ago, back in high school, when two girls who were what I'd call "upper-middle class" were arrested for shop-lifting at Dillards.

I know you have seen it in the movies...darn...I cannot think of a movie! But, anyway, too often wealthy parents are M. I. Friggin -A. TRULY! They throw money and tutors at the kid(s) and when crap like what you wrote happens they just throw lawyers at the judges and money at the lawyers. TRUST ME! Parents are human, BUT, try having a money-printing-press for a parent!!!! You will quickly learn to hate money and wish Hitler was your daddy... I am saying... by terse analogy, The young hunger for the approval or rebuke of someone who loves them deeply and truly...I kid you NOT!!!

word-from-ya-muthas
Objectivist
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 27, 2012
I bet if you'd take 100 of the guys driving cheaper cars and have them completely switch lives with 100 of the guys driving more expensive cars, you'd find that the outcome of said experiment would be pretty much the same, i.e. the guys with expensive cars (prev. cheap cars) would cheat.
We cheat because we are given the opportunity to do so. Not because we are "fundamentally" good or bad people. Being wealthy means you can afford getting a ticket, which in turn means you can afford to take the risk (opportunity).

This is how they (at least partially) solve this problem in Scandinavia, though it's not used for speeding as far as I know: http://en.wikiped...Day-fine
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (21) Feb 27, 2012
Anyone read the latest story of the John Kennedy 19 year old intern at the pool?
kochevnik
1.3 / 5 (14) Feb 27, 2012
There is no cheating in the ruling class. Sheep wonder why they're treated like sheep. They go about acquiring THINGS while their masters realized the most valuable thing you can own is another person. To get rich one must acquire people as they have by far the largest return. http://www.youtub...6umQT58A
HealingMindN
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 27, 2012
At the political rallies, they cheer each other on. They praise each other. They succumb to whatever instant gratification including offers from corporate lobbyists. They help each other get away with things as long it benefits them. A better title for this article might be: "Upper class people more likely to cheat - and get away with it."
Dug
2.2 / 5 (19) Feb 27, 2012
Psycho-babble - not science. There's a reason they call sociology a "soft science" - because real scientist don't consider it a science.
bredmond
2.2 / 5 (10) Feb 27, 2012
Hehe, this is a UC Berkeley study. Maybe some bias. Maybe it is true anyway, but there is also maybe some bias.
Mandan
3.5 / 5 (8) Feb 27, 2012
I just watched political scientist Charles Murray this past weekend on CSPAN talking about his new book Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010 http://www.nytime...nted=all

It would seem these findings put the lie to Murray's arguments that it is only a declining morality on the part of the white American underclass that is responsible for the socioeconomic crisis this nation is facing.

Far from being paragons of morality and law-abiding pillars to be imitated, the entitled feel, well, entitled. And leaving no stone unturned in their quest for profits, and letting no rule, regulation-- or certainly no law stand in their way, the entitled class itself is leading this nation on a cultural race to the bottom-- where crass consumerism and celebrity worship go hand in hand to convince people to spend money they don't have on things they don't need.

And the cash register rings.
DDBear
1.5 / 5 (8) Feb 27, 2012
This starts in high schoool. I witnessed mostly honors students cheating during exams. Teachers don't do enough to punish cheating at an early age, and as a result this continues into college and in the corporate world.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (24) Feb 27, 2012
Freeman Dyosn: "As I was about to go back to Princeton, I thought I would have a little talk with her and play the heavy father. So I said, "You know, I am paying tuition for you. And I find it a little bit surprising that you don't seem to do any studying."

She told me, "Oh, no, Daddy, you don't understand. You don't come to Harvard to study. You come to Harvard to get to know the right people.""
http://www.wired....p;topic=
It's not what you know it's who.
Wonder why we haven't seen Obama's Columbia transcript.
enigma13x
3 / 5 (8) Feb 27, 2012
"Then Jesus said to his disciples, 'I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.'" Matthew 19:23-24
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (23) Feb 27, 2012
"Then Jesus said to his disciples, 'I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.'" Matthew 19:23-24

So a socialist govt should take all his money to make the formerly rich moral?
Ever hear of Chuck Feeney? http://www.atlant...-founder
I would submit 'rich' and 'upper class' are not the same. Those who created wealth from nothing are usually not permitted into the upper class club.
Molly Brown is a classic example.
I suggest 'upper class' are those who seek power to control others.
kochevnik
1.6 / 5 (13) Feb 28, 2012
I suggest 'upper class' are those who seek power to control others.
You do realize that by saying everything, you wind up signifying nothing?
Steven_Hales
1.5 / 5 (13) Feb 28, 2012
How did those fair folk at Berkeley round up so easily those ten percenters and above to waste and while away their time so that they themselves might be hoisted by their own petard as an inexpert anarchist in dark suit with bomb in hand might detonate prematurely to startle only the King's horses?
Birger
3 / 5 (6) Feb 28, 2012
Among politicians, businessmen and others who are quite "successful" by most standards you see quite a lot of unethical behaviour even though you would assume they have more to loose if they are exposed.
-Apparently there is a psychological mechanism that encourages people to think "go ahead, you deserve it" if they are successful...
And if their conduct hurt others, so what? Those people don't count anyway. So go ahead and dump toxic waste outside a school, or acquire favourable deals for your campaign donors.
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (26) Feb 28, 2012
First, there are no classes in America, so the study is flawed from the outset.

Secondly, we have rich people saying rich people are less moral than other people. I doubt that is true in general, but it appears to be true for the study designers.
antialias_physorg
3.6 / 5 (18) Feb 28, 2012
Is anyone surprised?

Not really. As a first approximation people think others act like themslves. Those who have, in the past, gamed the system to get rich will assume other's can/will do that, too. So there's no real reason why they should, all of a sudden, become noble people.

It's just good to have it finally as more than a vague feeling.

And maybe even a psychology comparison between consumers of different kinds of cars and their performance. And the age range of who buys what kinds of cars.

You're demanding mulivariate studies. Those require an ENORMOUSLY larger amount of data. A study like the one presented is a first step. Finding an effect there can justify going for a more in depth study. It's just prudent to first use limited resources to see whether using a lot orfresources is evenmerited.

First, there are no classes in America

What planet do you live on?
baudrunner
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 28, 2012
"Then Jesus said to his disciples, 'I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.'" Matthew 19:23-24
That gets misinterpreted in translation and sounds like there is some mystical paradise that you go to when you die. Not so. This was Jesus explaining to the rabble that all the money in the world wasn't going to send them to space because they didn't have the capacity to didn't understand the science and technologies required to get there. It wasn't a moral lesson.
dogbert
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 28, 2012
antialias,
First, there are no classes in America


What planet do you live on?


Earth, Solar System. You live on the same planet.

There is a distribution of wealth in America as there is anywhere else. But there are no classes.

Britain and India are examples of class societies. There are no such boundaries in America.
AWaB
2.4 / 5 (7) Feb 28, 2012
The tests were supposedly for determining greed for a 'class' of people. I just don't see the person who took some extra candy as lusting after the candy. I think what they should call it is a test of one's morals and ethics. The method used to determine the participants class may also be skewed. It allows the participant to decide what class they are in. I have my doubts about the accuracy of the results because of this.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (22) Feb 28, 2012
The 'occupiers' must consider themselves 'upper class' as they believe they are entitled to cheat the system: steal, commit fraud, etc.
antialias_physorg
3.8 / 5 (10) Feb 28, 2012
There is a distribution of wealth in America as there is anywhere else. But there are no classes.

Britain and India are examples of class societies.

The US has about the same social mobility as the UK (47% vs. 50% chance of ending up in the same socioeconomic group that your parents were in)
Whether you call it classes or not doesn't really matter - they're a reality. (and they have found their way into the lingo for a long time: middle class, upper class, working class, class warfare, the 99% .. these aren't concepts that are unheard of in the US)
antonima
2.6 / 5 (5) Feb 28, 2012
I would agree it is a matter of entitlement. One doesn't take extra candy or cut other people off because they are unethical, they just think they are the shit and do as they please. I don't think ethics deal with such petty actions, however, considering cheating has also been studied here and is correlated to the other actions they may be related.
Sigh
2.8 / 5 (6) Feb 28, 2012
I would submit 'rich' and 'upper class' are not the same.

Maybe, maybe not. But the mediating factor turned out to be greed. If the lower class was induced to think about the benefits of greed, the class differences disappeared.

Would you expect the rich to have a generally more positive attitude towards greed?

From dogbert:
First, there are no classes in America, so the study is flawed from the outset.

From what I read, the US has quite low social mobility. Does your definition of class have nothing to do with that?
3432682
2.1 / 5 (22) Feb 28, 2012
I'll bet this study is BS. This is a new discovery in "science" which must be validated by others. Funny how we've never heard of this branch of inquiry and this result previously. Funny how it fits nicely with the Marxist class warfare theme of our socialist president.
kochevnik
1.9 / 5 (14) Feb 28, 2012
First, there are no classes in America...
Wow, that's really the most deluded thing I've read this year.
Ferky
1.9 / 5 (13) Feb 28, 2012
Have the authors showed causation rather than merely correlation? The study is titled "High social class predicts increased unethical behavior", but have the authors considered that unethical behavior may predict high social class? Which causes which?

I'd like to see a study in which kids of the same socio-economic class are tested for ethical behavior and then followed until middle age. Will the unethical kids grow to be more or less wealthy than their ethical mates? That would be an interesting experiment!
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 28, 2012
The above 'study' is idiotic and a fraud from a left wing dolt. Only an imbecile would draw such conclusions from the above study.

More class warfare propaganda designed for left-wing mush-head Obama voters. Obama will be using such tactics soon in the 2012 campaign, and every dolt propagandist is laying the foundation in preparation.

http://www.thebla...be-fake/
Vendicar_Decarian
3.3 / 5 (12) Feb 28, 2012
NoumenTard is the poor man's version of an Uncle Tom.

"Massa would never steal from his slaves. Massa is a good man."
- Uncle Tom

"The above 'study' is idiotic and a fraud from a left wing dolt." - noumenTard
Vendicar_Decarian
2.9 / 5 (10) Feb 28, 2012
NumenTard is going to soil his underpants in hate filled protest when Obama is re-elected.

I already detect the spittle violently ejecting from his mouth at the thought.

"More class warfare propaganda designed for left-wing mush-head Obama voters." - NumenTard
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (10) Feb 28, 2012
"Have the authors showed causation rather than merely correlation?" - Ferky

No. They have shown correlation.

Does unethical behavior produce wealth or wealth produce unethical behavior?

It's probably a two way street.

From my own observations, I see little ethical difference between the wealthy and the poor.

However I do see a lack of ethics in corporate actions.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.4 / 5 (8) Feb 28, 2012
Clearly, you haven't been paying attention Tard Boy.

"Funny how we've never heard of this branch of inquiry and this result previously." - 3432682Tard
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012
Officially by law, there are no classifications of class levels in the U.S. But also officially, government does the classification depending on a person's salary, bank account wealth or country club membership and other material wealth such as yachts and mansions, mainly through the Internal Revenue Service and other agencies whose aim it is is to target both rich, poor and middle class for numerous reasons. Census records being one.
Beyond that, a classification of rich or poor has most often no bearing on whether or not a person is bound to cheat or steal or take more than his share of candy. These vices don't usually come on suddenly because the person has wealth or is penniless. It is most often a LEARNED trait that may come and go or is a consistent part of a person's personality.
The researchers from Berkeley are obviously biased against the rich. Perhaps if they had tested the same group a week later, each individual would have had a different or opposite answer.
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012
"""The increased unethical tendencies of upper-class individuals are driven, in part, by their more favorable attitudes toward greed," said Paul Piff, a doctoral student in psychology at UC Berkeley""

And how many of these upper-class individuals were tested from how many areas of the country? Did they bother to give the same tests in Bel Air or Hollywood to movie stars and rich NBA players or to ghetto dwellers? Could they possibly replicate the same results with a far wider cross-section of wealthy upper-class individuals and blue collar workers?
I believe the results are not representative of ALL rich or ALL middle class and poor people. They are going on the premise that everyone in each class are pretty much the same no matter their upbringing, culture, and environment. For instance, ghetto dwellers are not ALL criminals even though many of them may be burglars and murderers. There are the best of people and the worst of people in all classes and levels of wealth.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012
Does unethical behavior produce welfare cases or does welfare cases produce unethical behavior? The amount of fraud in such government entitlement programs is staggering. Candies in a jar? Even a 3rd grader knows that the vast majority of crime comes from the lower classes.

The subjective term "greed" will play big in the novelty presidents reelection campaign.

99% of every citizen wants more and more for themselves and their families. The upper class are simply used to being less inhibited wrt getting what they want, and the idiotic "study" above is simply gauging that momentum. Meaningless.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (18) Feb 28, 2012
"Have the authors showed causation rather than merely correlation?" - Ferky

No. They have shown correlation.

Does unethical behavior produce wealth or wealth produce unethical behavior?

It's probably a two way street.

From my own observations, I see little ethical difference between the wealthy and the poor.

However I do see a lack of ethics in corporate actions.


For the most part your above post is surprisingly coherent. Except that corporations are not morale beings; they are cold inanimate machines engineered to manufacture wealth,... and so, are not subject to "ethics", just the law.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.5 / 5 (11) Feb 28, 2012
"Except that corporations are not morale beings." - NoumenTard

But legally people. So they are legally immoral people.

Hence the grand failure of America.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (20) Feb 28, 2012
"Except that corporations are not morale beings." - NoumenTard

But legally people. So they are legally immoral people.

Hence the grand failure of America. - F'k-Tard


You didn't make any sense, dingus. Corporations are not people, they're things. It makes as much sense to apply ethics in a corporation as it does to my lawn mower.

The people who operate a corporation are expected to maximize profit, not to do less in order to "do the right thing to impress emotionally driven liberal bed-wetters".

Also, moron; The USA is and remains the greatest economic success in recorded history, and all came about because of a egotistical desire to better ones standard of living,... or as some class baiters on the left would phrase it, "greed".
enigma13x
3.2 / 5 (5) Feb 28, 2012
i wonder how many of the people that disagreed with this study are upper class people living in denial about their own short comings
"i really do deserve more than my fellow man, i really am a better person, really i am... really! and if you wont give me what i deserve im just going to take it!
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012
,... and the reason you're typing your "radical" non-sense on capitalistic developed computer, and not a Russian computer, proves that "greed" is the motive force behind all that is great in terms of improving human condition, and is quite natural in mam and correlates perfectly with freedom.

Envy is weakness.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012
NumenTard is going to soil his underpants in hate filled protest when Obama is re-elected.

I already detect the spittle violently ejecting from his mouth at the thought. - Venereal_Disease

"More class warfare propaganda designed for left-wing mush-head Obama voters." - Noumenon


Unlike your irrational hatred of the right and GW Bush, I have no such hatred toward Obama. I think Obama is intelligent and is a patriot for serving his country, and wants what's best for the country and therefore is a good American. I just fundamentally disagree with his "progressive" liberal mentality, his gov imposed "fairness" mentality, and his envisioned increasing role for the government in everyone's lives.

Didn't you get your self into some trouble with your threats against Bush? Talk about hatred.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.6 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
"You didn't make any sense" - NumenTard

Said the Tard who fails to comprehend.

"Corporations are not people, they're things." - NumenTard

Yet under U.S. law they are considered people. In fact it was just this equality that the U.S. supreme court used to decide that corporations may spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections since, as persons, they have the same free speech rights as U.S. citizens.

You did know that about your own failed nation didn't you Tard Boy?
Vendicar_Decarian
3.6 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
"The people who operate a corporation are expected to maximize profit" - NumenTard

So are Slave owners, Mafia bosses and Drug dealers.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012
You must mean the U.S. is the greatest moral, intellectual, ethical and financial bankruptcy in recorded history.

"The USA is and remains the greatest economic success in recorded history" - NumenTard

As a ConservaTard you are clearly suffering from the first three deficits which explains your delusional denial of the forth.

Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
"the reason you're typing your "radical" non-sense on capitalistic developed computer, and not a Russian computer" - RyggTard

This computer was assembled by me from components largely manufactured in Socialist China, and utilizes a CPU designed mostly outside of the U.S.

What are you jabbering about? Fool.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
Excuse me if I have no love for lying, murderous, war criminals like your former President.

"Unlike your irrational hatred of the right and GW Bush..." NumenTard

"Didn't you get your self into some trouble with your threats against Bush?" - NumenTard

The only thing I threatened Bush with was justice.
Something American conservatives know nothing about apparently.

Vendicar_Decarian
3.9 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012
Fear is the mind killer.

"Envy is weakness." - NumenTard
tyree
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012
"The upper class is more likely to believe as did Gordon Gekko in the movie "Wall Street" that "greed is good," according to a new study from the University of California, Berkeley."

The problem with so much of our popular culture being generated by the left wing is they create lasting images of those that they hate that endure for a long time. Gordon Gekko was a left wing fantasy of the right wing that they pray for. He wasn't real, he never existed and "studies" run by liberals about those they hate are not to be trusted. For every fictitious Gordon Gekko there is a real Andrew Carnegie. I never got a job from a poor man, and almost all of my employers in my long life have been wonderful people.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
"Mergers and Acquisitions: Why Greed is Good" - The Freemen - Libertarian

http://www.thefre...is-good/

Do we need any more examples of the lack of Libertarian/Conservative Morality?

Interesting I posted 5 other references from various Conservative Publications all claiming that Greed was good, and only the first one survived.

Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
Greed is Good: Why You Need to Tap Into Your Inner Gordon Gekko

http://www.pickth...n-gekko/

Greed Is Good

http://online.wsj...229.html
Ferky
1.9 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
Commenters:

Please Google "Scott Nudds" and "Vendicar Decarian" before you engage that person in a discussion.
RitchieGuy
1.7 / 5 (22) Feb 29, 2012
Yes. . .we are aware that Scott Nudds, Vendicar_Decarian and are all the same person. He may also have enigma13x for his sockpuppet. It's not surprising that VendiTard, who talks like a Stalinist Communist would bitch about corporations, the U.S. and Capitalism and yet claim to live in a north American country and reaps all the goodies and benefits that Capitalism provides him. . .other than his computer parts made in Communist China.
VendiTard, the one whose intellectual pursuits depends heavily on Wiki and Google search, (GhostofGirlyman is the other) is completely unaware of his own hypocrisy as to living in the free hemisphere (doesn't include Cuba and Venezuela) where he is able to spout his ugly venom and not be tracked down and shot dead for his disloyalty to the country of his birth and its way of life. VendiTard seems to be unappreciative of what he greedily takes from the Capitalist system while giving the system a resounding punch to the gut verbally in any which way he can
RitchieGuy
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTard is also CardacianNeverid. All his sockpuppets point to the one person who gets joy from seeing bad things happen to Americans and the United States. He bitches about GWBush who has been gone for 3 years, but never a word comes from his lips or fingers about the Socialist/Communist presently in the White House. Is he afraid to be called a racist? Probably not. Liberals and Socialists are all racists in their heart. He may share many ideals with Obamalamadingdong, one of them being the destruction of the United States, its people and its status as a superpower. It is not merely American corporations that he despises, it's also every successful American that he hates and fears. Yes, he fears us because we represent what he can never be and what he can never have. VendiTard is an elitist without being a part of the elite. He would make a good commissar in the Putin administration.
RitchieGuy
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 29, 2012
Greed is as much a part of the human psyche as the need for food. Without a certain amount of greed, there is no motivation to get a job and go to work to earn money to fulfill the need to feed oneself and one's family and to have the money to buy necessities and some extras. What can be called greed is necessary for survival, but there are varying levels of greed as well as the amount of material wealth desired. There is the George Soros and Koch Brothers type of greed which encompasses the financial destruction of countries and corporations. Hostile takeovers of corporations, bankrupting treasuries are but a few of that kind of greed. Then there is the greed of the poor who envy the rich and successful but don't want to be educated or find any kind of job to fulfill their own greed, but prefer to have the taxpayers take care of them from cradle to grave. The lazy and dysfunctional get their greed fulfilled by Liberal/Socialist bleeding hearts who are liberal with other peoples' money
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (21) Feb 29, 2012
Couldn't have said it better RichieGuy.
Ethelred
3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012
True you couldn't.

It was wrong but you believe President Dumbass was competent so you clearly don't have a clue about political reality.

Bush was one of our worst presidents and lying about things won't change that.

Ethelred
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
This computer was assembled by me from components largely manufactured in Socialist China, and utilizes a CPU designed mostly outside of the U.S.


Do you know the difference between product development and assembly?
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
True you couldn't.

It was wrong but you believe President Dumbass was competent so you clearly don't have a clue about political reality.

Bush was one of our worst presidents and lying about things won't change that.

Ethelred


Where did I say Bush was great? He was far from an ideal conservative.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
. What can be called greed is necessary for survival, but there are varying levels of greed as well as the amount of material wealth desired.

Adam Smith called it 'self interest'.
wants what's best for the country and therefore is a good American.

Were Lenin and Stalin good Russians for wanting what was best for the country?
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
Ferky knows that it is best to avoid combat with a vastly superior opponent.

"Please Google "Scott Nudds" and "Vendicar Decarian" before you engage that person in a discussion." - Ferky
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
"Do you know the difference between product development and assembly?" - NumenTard

I do. And virtually nothing in the PC that I use was developed in America.

It is funny to see people like NumenTard who pay lip service to Randism actually turn into ranting Statists at the drop of a hat.

So funny.

Vendicar_Decarian
4.1 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
"Where did I say Bush was great?" - NumenTard

Your continual defense of the Murderous War Criminal and congenital liar gives us a clue.

"Nobody anticipated that the levees would be breached." - George Bush Jr.
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012
. What can be called greed is necessary for survival, but there are varying levels of greed as well as the amount of material wealth desired.

Adam Smith called it 'self interest'.
wants what's best for the country and therefore is a good American.

Were Lenin and Stalin good Russians for wanting what was best for the country?


Not a fair comparison.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
Really? Greed is the motivation for feeding yourself?

And here I thought it was hunger.

"Without a certain amount of greed, there is no motivation to get a job and go to work to earn money to fulfill the need to feed oneself and one's family and to have the money to buy necessities and some extras." - RitchieTard

"What can be called greed is necessary for survival" - RichieTard

Nope.. Wrong again.

Definition of GREED: a selfish an excessive desire for more of something (as money) than is needed

So by definition RichieTard's comments are false.

One wonders about his motivation for equating greed with necessity.

I can only conclude that it is done out of his desire to provide an excuse for social vermin to be greedy.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (20) Feb 29, 2012
"Where did I say Bush was great?" - NumenTard

Your continual defense of the Murderous War Criminal and congenital liar gives us a clue.

"Nobody anticipated that the levees would be breached." - George Bush Jr.


I'm surprised that you are not a 911 truther with your way over the top manner of speaking.

GWBush was no more a "war criminal" than the vast majority of democrats who voted for that legitimate war in Iraq.

No president can possibly micro manage every f'ing levee in the country, you bonehead. Bush was blamed for that hurricane like he was the scal goat for everything. I recall seeing a hundred school buses siting in water while the dolt Nagin ignored Bush's repeated warning.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
Possibly. Libertarians/Randites like yourself will never know until you get to hell and ask them.

You have about 15 years left on this planet before joining them. Isn't that right Tard Boy?

"Were Lenin and Stalin good Russians for wanting what was best for the country?" - RyggTard
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
In the failed American State wasn't George Bush Jr. the Commander and Chief of the Military who ordered the U.S. military to illegally invade Iraq and Afghanistan and commit mass murder?

Why, yes he was.

"GWBush was no more a "war criminal" than the vast majority of democrats who voted for that legitimate war in Iraq." - NumenTard
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
Yes, we noticed that with Conservatives. The buck never stops at the top. Leadership is always blameless. It's always the fault of the people.

But the war crimes were the illegal invasions themselves, and the fact that mass murder for political gain was the order given by your War Criminal President.

"No president can possibly micro manage every f'ing levee in the country, you bonehead." - NumenTard
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (22) Feb 29, 2012
But the war crimes were the illegal invasions themselves, and the fact that mass murder for political gain was the order given by your War Criminal President.


Acording to what body was that war illegal? Iraq? The UN specifically stated it would NOT admonish the USA if it invaded Iraq.

The same will occur with Iran. Everyone suspects they're developing nuclear weapons, but no one knows for absolute certainty outside Iran. What matters is what the majority suspects, because access to certainty is not available.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.4 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012
"Acording to what body was that war illegal?" - NumenTard

The invasion of another nation without cause is illegal under international law.

"The same will occur with Iran." - NumenTard

Excellent. The death of America will only be accelerated by that action.

EverythingsJustATheory
3.3 / 5 (11) Feb 29, 2012
Wow! Some people just have no basis in reality. Obama is the most moderate democrat president since WWII based on voting record.

http://voteview.c...g/?p=317

Obama is really a republican from 20 years ago. The republicans just moved so far to the radical right that now a democrat has to be a moderate republican to get elected.
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 29, 2012
The invasion of another nation without cause is illegal under international law.


Again, did the United Nations declare that action illegal? Answer, No. It was not illegal. There was justified cause, just not in your opinion.

"The same will occur with Iran." - NumenTard

Excellent. The death of America will only be accelerated by that action.


Really, by what force, ... the cavemen rag-heads? Israel can handle several of those countries at once with little direct help from the USA. Again, what country are you from originally? Do you reside in the USA but are middle-eastern? Your wanna-be radicalism and over-the-top-absurdity tells me you're Intellectually immature.

@EverythingsJustATheory,.. the exact opposite of everything you said is the truth. Obama was rated the most liberal senator.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.9 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012
"Really, by what force?" - Numentard

Poor NumenTard. Can't even figure out how his own nation is being destroyed.

"Here in Lake County Florida a long time Republican state the number of homeless students has skyrocketed, from 122 in 2005 to more than 2,600 this school year. It's the largest increase in hard hit Florida and echoes the rising numbers seen nationwide as well. Some of those children are living with their parents in a friend's or relative's house. Others are in shelters or motels like Zach. Some with nowhere else to turn take refuge in the woods."

http://hosted.ap....12-59-14

"the cavemen rag-heads?" - NumenTard

Scratch a Republican - reveal a Racist.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
"Again, what country are you from originally?" - NumenTard

America of course. I escaped when the death of the American State at the hands of Republican Traitors became obvious.

EverythingsJustATheory
3.2 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
No u a Tard,

I have backed up my claim with a study that has actually examined the voting records, whereas you have just stated your opinion. I wonder then, who should be taken more seriously?
EverythingsJustATheory
3.4 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012
What's so hilarious about republicans is that the states that scream the most about federal spending are the ones who receive the most federal aid. Blue states subsidize the red states with federal money, so if anything it should be the democrats complaining.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
"I have backed up my claim with a study that has actually examined the voting records" - Everything

Yes you have done exactly that.

But you must remember that the Republican hasn't lived who wasn't a chronic and congenital liar. NumenTard is just another example of Lying Republican filth.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
states that scream the most about federal spending are the ones who receive the most federal aid.

Which ones?
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
Poor RyggTard. He is going to soil his underpants in indignation.

Markets Start to Anticipate Obama Victory in November

http://www.cnbc.c...46556820
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTard was never an American. He has been anti-America all his miserable life. He only says that he was an American to provoke those who do love the USA. VerndiTard's parents parents were probably Communists just like Obama's parents, grandparents and the Communist company he kept before he was allowed to Occupy the White House. Like Obama, I doubt that VendiTard ever worked a day in his life to earn his paycheck.
LOL. . .if Obama happens to get reelected by a majority or dumbed down idiots, it is HE who will be soiling his underpants when he finds out what Obama's Socialist/Communist agenda is. The Utopian future that people like VendiTard is waiting for will consist of slavery of the mind and body, and he will be cursing Obama and the rest of the Socialist Democrats and Obama's appointees. He will be thanking G-d that he is in Canada until the moderate/Conservative Canadian government is overthrown by the Communists too. . .and he will want to flee possibly to Australia which,
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (21) Feb 29, 2012
according to Obamalamadingdong, is in Asia.
I can always go back to Sicily which is the place of my birth and work to get the radical Muslims out of Europe. Communism is dead in Europe. Nationalism is in and getting more popular as Europeans wake up from their stupor, except for welfare queens in Greece.

Oh, and you must remember that the Liberal/Socialist hasn't lived who wasn't a chronic and congenital liar. VendiTard is just another example of Lying Liberal/Socialist filth.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
I like this Richie guy. He so seamlessly connects Conservatism, ignorance, fantasy, racism, and statism into each message that he leaves me no reason to reply.

He has done all the work for me.
kochevnik
1.8 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012
The same will occur with Iran. Everyone suspects they're developing nuclear weapons, but no one knows for absolute certainty outside Iran. What matters is what the majority suspects, because access to certainty is not available.
What dirt do zionists have on you, Noumenon? In any case, you're full of b.s. as usual: U.S. Intelligence Agencies Agree: No Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program

"Despite the repeated statements made by United States Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta which have clearly indicated that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons and the analysis of the American intelligence community, the heated anti-Iranian rhetoric never seems to let up.

Indeed, it has even been reported by none other than the New York Times that intelligence analysts in America have yet to find any hard evidence indicating that Iran has even decided to construct a nuclear bomb. contd
kochevnik
1.7 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012
contd:
American intelligence assessments have continued to be congruent with the 2007 intelligence report which clearly concluded that Iran had in fact completely abandoned their nuclear program years before (scroll to the bottom of the article to read the embedded report).

According to anonymous U.S. officials, this assessment was reinforced by the 2010 National Intelligence Estimate and it remains the consensus view of Americas 16 intelligence agencies."

@Noumenon... and the reason you're typing your "radical" non-sense on capitalistic developed computer, and not a Russian computer
We develop our own computers in Russia, including the microchips. Are you claiming otherwise?
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012
NumenTard probably believes that Bushie's forged Nigerian documents were real and Iraq really did have a nuclear program, as Bush repeatedly lied about.

To be a Conservative is to be lying filth.

RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012
Everythings says:
What's so hilarious about republicans is that the states that scream the most about federal spending are the ones who receive the most federal aid. Blue states subsidize the red states with federal money, so if anything it should be the democrats complaining.


The blue states have the richest people making the highest salaries and owning and/or running the big corporations while living high on the hog. Red states have the highest amount of poor or working poor. VendiTard should be happy that red states are getting more federal money other than only catering to military bases. When military bases in the northeastern parts of the U.S. were being closed down by the Democrats in the 1960s and 70s, it was the Republicans who insisted that military bases in the South be kept open. Dixiecrats who opposed integration of Blacks in the South agreed with the Republicans over keeping military bases open. For the unaware:
http://en.wikiped...d_States
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTard says:
NumenTard probably believes that Bushie's forged Nigerian documents were real and Iraq really did have a nuclear program, as Bush repeatedly lied about.

To be a Conservative is to be lying filth.



LOL. . .demonize Bush all you want. . .there's another fool in the White House now. Bush made his mistakes and Obamalamadingdong is continuing the tradition but with a retarded Socialist twist. Both Bush and Obama made huge mistakes. Bush sending troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, and Obama leaving troops in Afghanistan while cutting back on their benefits in the interest of saving federal money on their backs. Why hasn't Obamalama abandoned Karzai and his country yet, especially now with Karzai demanding the Koran burners brought to justice? There are no fossil fuels in that country, is there? What is keeping Obama from bringing the troops home NOW? He is reneging on his promises to the Liberal filth to end the war.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
Could it be that there is such high unemployment in the U.S. that Obama is afraid to bring them home to a country where there are not enough jobs available because of Obama's mishandling of taxpayer money and over regulation of job creating private industry? Yes, I believe that's it. . .amongst other equally important gaffes that Obama has deliberately made and will continue to make.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012
"demonize Bush all you want. . .there's another fool in the White House now." - RichieTard

Really? Are you visiting and transmitting via your iPhone?

"Why hasn't Obamalama abandoned Karzai and his country yet"

Probably because he isn't a cut and run Republican.

"There are no fossil fuels in that country, is there?" - RitchieTard

Nope. Just another war that America has lost.

"What is keeping Obama from bringing the troops home NOW? " - RitchieTard

Continuity probably.

Mosques in America nearly double since 9/11

http://campaign20...1/401846
Vendicar_Decarian
4.2 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012
You forget that Ronald Reagan redefined U.S. military personnel as "employed" so that he could artificially reduce unemployment rates.

You know, like Bushie redefined McDonalds hamburger flippers as part of the Manufacturing sector to hide the offshoring of American manufacturing jobs.

"Could it be that there is such high unemployment in the U.S. that Obama is afraid to bring them home to a country where there are not enough jobs available because of Obama's mishandling of taxpayer money and over regulation of job creating private industry?" - RichieTard

"No one ever anticipated that anyone would use plains as weapons." - George - stoned on Oxycontin - Bush.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012
Demoncrats in the southern states, aka Dixiecrats were responsible for all the lynchings of Blacks and preventing Blacks from exercising their voting right. The Ku Klux Klan was composed of Democrats who were steeped in White Supremacy values and believed that Blacks were meant to be enslaved. It was White Republicans who were against segregation and enacted laws favorable to Black voting rights as well as the eventual school desegregation of the 1960s. Liberal Democrats are racists from way back, while accusing Repubs of racism. But the truth is a part of the history books that cannot be expunged easily.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012
"The top 10 list of states with the highest percentage of federally owned land looks like this:

Nevada 84.5%
Alaska 69.1%
Utah 57.4%
Oregon 53.1%
Idaho 50.2%
Arizona 48.1%
California 45.3%
Wyoming 42.3%
New Mexico 41.8%
Colorado 36.6%
"http://bigthink.c...as/21343
Now the claim that 'red' states have more federal funds could be related to the fact the federal govt owns much of the land in western states. In a city like Tucson, the federal govt has several major organizations but pays no property taxes to the local schools. However, the federal govt does reimburse for some of that property tax loss.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTardboy for some strange reason keeps bringing up the failures and foibles of Bush'43 as though he is still working furiously in the Oval Office in the now instead of then. You really need to get over GWBush, VendiTardboyboy. . .he is growing on you like a fungus and it shows.
Obama, boyboy. . .it's Obama. That's Barack Hussein Obama. Try to remember that name as it is HE who is president now, not Bush, not Reagan, not LBJ and not John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Your fascination and Bush daydreaming is overpowering your mental processes, whatever they may be.
For richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, you seem to be married to George W. Bush since you cannot hardly make a sentence without invoking his name.
At this rate, you will require a strait-jacket and he will always be on your mind. Pathetic.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
"VendiTardboy for some strange reason keeps bringing up the failures and foibles of Bush'43 as though he is still working furiously in the Oval Office in the now instead of then." - Richie

Without Bush's criminal invasion of other nations, America wouldn't have suffered the trillion dollar losses due to the wars and woudn't have military expenditures in those nations to this day.

Without Bush's vast economic failures, America wouldn't have been on the brink of a decades long depression when Obama took power.

Bush is the Liar and Chief who's legacy of incompetence keeps shafting the American people.

Thank Gawad Obama was there to put things back on track.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012
When do you intend to execute the murderous war criminal?

"For richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, you seem to be married to George W. Bush" - RichieTard

America will remain a hated nation as long as he breathes.

Modernmystic
1.7 / 5 (11) Feb 29, 2012
Vendicar, I've changed my opinion of you since you started posting here...my opinion of you is, of course, totally irrelevant. You at least stand up for what you believe in and you do it consistently.

Your only "problem" AFAICS is that you're a party man...like Rush, Keith, and a host of others. America's problems are not tied to one man, one policy, or one political party. They are an amalgamation of idiocy by many ideologies.

A wise man once said "The problem is never the problem". This is applicable to us. Our "problem" is that while the "good" decisions and legislation tend to persist, so do the "bad". Unintended consequences rule the day. You can't run a MODERN country from the top down, you can't plan a terribly complex thing like modern economy...basically you can't CONTROL people. Good thing too, otherwise we'd still be living under Egyptian pharaonic rule, the Romans, Persians, or you name it.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
America's problems are not tied to one man, one policy, or one political party. They are an amalgamation of idiocy by many ideologies.

Yes, they are tied to one policy. It is called 'progressivism' or socialism. Or the failure of the state to limit its authority to protecting private property, which leads to intended and unintended consequences.
Bastiat distills this quite well in The Law.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.1 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
"Your only "problem" AFAICS is that you're a party man." - Modern

When you exist in a system that gives you 2 or 3 choices, the choice is to select the lesser of the two or three evils.

I support those who represent the lesser evil.

The fact that that party is principally Democrats is not relevant to my support.

Modernmystic
2.3 / 5 (15) Feb 29, 2012
America's problems are not tied to one man, one policy, or one political party. They are an amalgamation of idiocy by many ideologies.

Yes, they are tied to one policy. It is called 'progressivism' or socialism. Or the failure of the state to limit its authority to protecting private property, which leads to intended and unintended consequences.
Bastiat distills this quite well in The Law.


Wrong. Absolutist theories of private property are easily shown to be flawed. What if an asteroid was heading towards the Earth, and the only thing (let's say a huge laser satellite) that could keep the entire planet from being destroyed was held by a libertarian curmudgeon. He's made it quite clear he want's to die and doesn't care about the rest of the world. He's also made it clear he doesn't approve of anyone using his private property.

You willing to die and let all of humanity die because of an absolutist idiotic theory?
Modernmystic
1.4 / 5 (11) Feb 29, 2012
When you exist in a system that gives you 2 or 3 choices, the choice is to select the lesser of the two or three evils.

I support those who represent the lesser evil.

The fact that that party is principally Democrats is not relevant to my support.



I gave you a 2 for this post when I should have given it a 4. I was rating Ryg not you.

In essence you're correct. However I don't subscribe to the lesser of two evils. If I don't SIGNIFICANTLY agree with who I'm voting for I withhold my vote. If I did not I'd be pointing a gun at my fellow citizens and saying "I'm forcing you to agree with all this bullshit I don't agree with for the sake of some of it that I do"...I simply don't do that...though reasonable people can disagree on this point...

FTR: I agree with legalization of drugs, abortion, civil unions, and a HOST of other things not considered conservative...yet I constantly get the label. It pisses me off. I'm not a "conservative"...I'm not a label.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTardboyboy says:
""You forget that Ronald Reagan redefined U.S. military personnel as "employed" so that he could artificially reduce unemployment rates.

You know, like Bushie redefined McDonalds hamburger flippers as part of the Manufacturing sector to hide the offshoring of American manufacturing jobs.""

Oh there he goes again. .VendiTardboyboy bringing up Presidential mistakes from the past. Presidential hits from the past still only amounts to the same old tune, VendiTardboyboy. Notice that VendiTard never invokes the hallowed name of Barack Hussein Obama regarding Obama's big political crapouts of recent fame. Reagan inherited another Tardboy's crapouts named JJJJJimmy Carter, whose racist mother, Miss Lilly I think her name was, used to say that infamous "N" word when referring to Black people. Funny thing is, Old Jimmy never caught flak from the Democrats for his mama's racist indiscretions. But she WAS from the old South, AND a staunch Democrat Dixiecrat to boot.
Modernmystic
2.1 / 5 (15) Feb 29, 2012
So he can't even be original in his ad hom attacks and uses "tard boy" in his epithets....*sigh*

FTR: Ronald Regan was a mostly good President. Jimmuh wasn't, he was IMVHO the worst President, and the worst Ex-President in modern times. Kennedy saved the world from nuclear annihilation, and were I president during the Cuban Missile Crisis I'd have turned the world into a pile of glowing rocks...not very impressive.

It is wise to consider ALL sides of any situation. Kennedy saved the entire world...Regan simply destroyed the Soviet Union. Regan's accomplishment is dubious considering the current political situation in Russia. Kennedy's is undeniable....
kochevnik
2 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012
@Noumenon Again, what country are you from originally? Do you reside in the USA but are middle-eastern? Your wanna-be radicalism and over-the-top-absurdity tells me you're Intellectually immature.
Sounds like you have a new friend!
Demoncrats in the southern states, aka Dixiecrats were responsible for all the lynchings of Blacks and preventing Blacks from exercising their voting right.
Then voila when the coast was clear they flipped to the repubs, which they were ideologically all along.
ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
Absolutist theories of private property are easily shown to be flawed.

Easily?
The US Constitution has the fifth amendment which limits the authority of the state (which I said should be done) to protect private property.
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. "
'Progressive'/socialist don't like this part of the 5th amendment as the govt would have to compensate property owners when they enact regulations restricting private property rights.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012
"However I don't subscribe to the lesser of two evils." - Modern

Unless you are a single issue voter, then you do. You just don't realize it.

To be clear, I see numerous problems in the Democrat camp. The principle failure is a lack of cohesiveness which leads to some drift in the defense of policies like the opposition to the fiscal madness of Reagan in the 1980's that put America on the path to financial collapse.

Republicans on the other hand are wrong on virtually every issue, as their various campaigns of anti-science illustrate.
Modernmystic
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012
Absolutist theories of private property are easily shown to be flawed.

Easily?
The US Constitution has the fifth amendment which limits the authority of the state (which I said should be done) to protect private property.
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. "
'Progressive'/socialist don't like this part of the 5th amendment as the govt would have to compensate property owners when they enact regulations restricting private property rights.


You didn't answer the point I made...or if you did I missed it...
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012
Bushie'43, if he hadn't been elected in y2K, why. .we would've been saddled with a complete incompetent name AlGore who, in desperate need to be the Prez, insisted on inconveniencing election committees in Florida with counting ballots over and over and over, ad nauseum. So what did AlGore the slumlord do for an encore? Well, he is, of course, most famous for his inconvenient half truths, AND his coercion of a female masseuse to play with his dingdong in his hotel room while his wife was holding down the fort back in the mansion in Tennessee. There was little difference between Gore and BillyBubba Clinton. . .they both wanted their peckers pecked and doing the Lewinsky. LOL. . .them good ol' boys sure do have fun.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012
Absolutist theories of private property are easily shown to be flawed.

Easily?
The US Constitution has the fifth amendment which limits the authority of the state (which I said should be done) to protect private property.
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. "
'Progressive'/socialist don't like this part of the 5th amendment as the govt would have to compensate property owners when they enact regulations restricting private property rights.


You didn't answer the point I made...or if you did I missed it...

You missed it.
Modernmystic
1.4 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012

Republicans on the other hand are wrong on virtually every issue, as their various campaigns of anti-science illustrate.


Oh they're not anti-science on military issues...as ominous as that sounds it is what it is. Martial problems and conflicts have significantly driven science forward historically. I'd like to see a different paradigm. Sad fact is that I don't.

I agree that Regan's defense spending sent us in a downward spiral, but don't discount the "benefits" that came out of it. Not having thousands of Russian nuclear tipped ICBMS pointed at us is significant IMO.

What you have to ask yourself honestly is has the rampant public spending after the housing collapse done us any good under the recent democratic control.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
You mean Obama's crime of lifting America from the clutches of Bushie's decades long Grand Economic Depression?

We are all well aware of the Republican desire to push America into an economic depression through the Republican policy called "Starve the Beast" that has been in the works for decades.

"Notice that VendiTard never invokes the hallowed name of Barack Hussein Obama regarding Obama's big political crapouts of recent fame." - RichieTard

Consider the words of Jeb Bush. "We need to manufacture an (economic) crisis in order to assure that there are no alternatives to a smaller government" - Imprimus magazine 1995.

Modernmystic
2 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012
Absolutist theories of private property are easily shown to be flawed.

Easily?
The US Constitution has the fifth amendment which limits the authority of the state (which I said should be done) to protect private property.
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. "
'Progressive'/socialist don't like this part of the 5th amendment as the govt would have to compensate property owners when they enact regulations restricting private property rights.


You didn't answer the point I made...or if you did I missed it...

You missed it.


Pray enlighten me...would you use the satellite against private property rules or not?
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012
Oh they're not anti-science on military issues

Again, national defense (protecting private property) is a legitimate, limited function of the govt.
Regan's defense spending sent us in a downward spiral,

It sent the USSR and communism into a downward spiral.
Who is 'us' in your downward spiral?
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTardboyboy says:
""Without Bush's criminal invasion of other nations, America wouldn't have suffered the trillion dollar losses due to the wars and woudn't have military expenditures in those nations to this day.""

OK. . .l'll give you an A for effort on that one. Bush'43, as the story goes, was incensed over his daddy Bush being threatened with death by Saddam Hussein and that MAY have had some bearing on his propensity for sending in the warriors to Iraq, then Afghanistan. Iraq because of his daddy, I am able to get that, however a foolish reason. But Afghanistan makes no sense at all. The Russian Army, along with unwilling conscripts from the Soviet bloc were never able to conquer the Afghans, just like the Chechens never surrendered to the Russians. Bushie's bad decision on Afghanistan was and is having bad repercussions, and I fear we will reap the whirlwind on that one.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
You mean the Al Gore who's legislation created the internet as you now know it?

The Al Gore who is a near hero in the scientific community for his film and book "An inconvenient truth".

The Al Gore who's airport security improvements that would have prevented 911 and which were denied by a Repubican Congress that insisted that hijackings were a thing of the past?

"Bushie'43, if he hadn't been elected in y2K, why. .we would've been saddled with a complete incompetent name AlGore" - RichieTard

You mean that Al Gore?
ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
Read what I wrote.
"Yes, they are tied to one policy. It is called 'progressivism' or socialism. Or the failure of the state to limit its authority to protecting private property, which leads to intended and unintended consequences.
Bastiat distills this quite well in The Law."

The US Constitution has the fifth amendment. Read it.
Modernmystic
1.9 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012
You mean Obama's crime of lifting America from the clutches of Bushie's decades long Grand Economic Depression?


I allude to my previous post. I don't think that any leader sits at the white house and twists their black mustache and says "How can I screw the country further"....

I think that the country gets there via their (mostly) honest worldview. The problem is that NO ONE has an infallible worldview, and even if they did they'd have to shift it minute to minute, second to second to accommodate the ACTUAL world...

RE Ryg: I don't want a bunch of idotbabble...a simple yes or no will suffice...

Do you agree the satellite should be used or not? Yes or no. Be honest for once...
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTardboyboy says:
Consider the words of Jeb Bush. "We need to manufacture an (economic) crisis in order to assure that there are no alternatives to a smaller government" - Imprimus magazine 1995.

LOL. . .somehow that sounds like and is in keeping with Obamalama's right hand man, presently mayor of Chicago, ol' raccoon eyes himself, Rahm Emanuel who once or twice said, "Never let a good crisis go to waste"
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012
"Oh they're not anti-science on military issues...as ominous as that sounds it is what it is." - Modern

I view that as a double negative.

"Not having thousands of Russian nuclear tipped ICBMS pointed at us is significant IMO." - Modern

Easily achieved via negotiations. Neither side want's the burden of maintaining them nor the threat of being eradicated by them.

Reagan had little to do with anything in Russia. Gorbachev did.

"What you have to ask yourself honestly is has the rampant public spending after the housing collapse done us any good under the recent democratic control." - Modern

Clearly it has kept America from entering a grand economic depression, with the resulting loss of tens of trillions of dollars in productivity.

I think it has only postponed the inevitable though. As long as Republican Treason continues there is no hope for long term economic recovery.

Libertarian economic policies like those promised by Ron Paul guarantee an immediate depression.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
no no noooo. . .AlGore INVENTED the computer, don't you remember him admitting that? Oh and Bushie'43 did invent Homeland Security after 9/11. However, I did NOT like his invention of NAFTA, a terrible thing for indigenous Mexican Indians and Criollos, but mainly the Mayans. But that's another issue.
http://en.wikiped...conflict

I have always been sympathetic toward the indigenous Mayan population of the Chiapas region of southern Mexico. They have been marginalized due to previous Mexican governmental intervention of their rights to land ownership and social welfare of their communities. Their property rights were stolen by MexicanWhites with the approval of government.
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
Clearly it has kept America from entering a grand economic depression, with the resulting loss of tens of trillions of dollars in productivity.


Clearly? Keeping trillions out of the hands of private industry has done what exaclty?

Did the government invent electricity, flight, internal combustion, assembly lines? The government doesn't and shouldn't drive the economy. It should protect the conditions that allow innovation, it doesn't, shouldn't, and CAN'T be the prime mover of such.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
"I think that the country gets there via their (mostly) honest worldview." - Modern

I agree, and point out that the Republican world view with it's non-existent WMD, and it's anti-science views, and it's strong association with magical thinking (religion), puts it dramatically out of synch with reality.

Consider the economic world view of Libertarian Ron Paul, who has promised to cut 1 trillion in federal spending over his first year in office.

1 trillion represents 20 million jobs as a first order effect, and another 20 million in secondary effects. So while he certainly means well, his ideology will immediately increase America's unemployment rate to 40 percent if not more.

There are consequences to idiocy when idiocy has the power to do stupid things.

I have noticed that Republicans tend to damage or destroy virtually everything they get their hands on.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012
but that's a whole other issue. By the by. . .there is no such thing as Repblican Treason as VendiTard claims. . .there is only VendiTard's treasonous hope for the destruction of the United States and Americans AND the treasonous policies of the Democrat corps of pseudo-intellectuals who brainwash American children grades K-12 and on through college with these Communist professors and teachers spouting hatred of the systems of Capitalism, freedom of religion, a normal education paid for by taxpayers, a limited government and freedom from the tyranny of expanded government, the defense of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, etc.
Modernmystic
2.4 / 5 (15) Feb 29, 2012
I agree, and point out that the Republican world view with it's non-existent WMD, and it's anti-science views, and it's strong association with magical thinking (religion), puts it dramatically out of synch with reality.


First of all we have freedom of religion in this country, it's the reason we have this country. Are you suggesting we jail people for their religious beliefs? I doubt you're suggesting that, but your statement is so strong I have to ask for clarification. We have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM it.

Secondly we KNOW Saddam had WMD...he used them on his own people. It's historical FACT. When he moved them or got rid of them is up for debate, as is the invasion of Iraq.

Moreover do you think that because someone disagrees with your view of reality they should be legislated out of existence or do you think we should allow for a diversity of beliefs, cultures, and creeds in society?
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012
"Keeping trillions out of the hands of private industry has done what exaclty?" - Modern

I'm not sure what you think you are referring to. But the exact opposite is the case of course. The FED printing trillions has provided trillions to corporations.

Has your bank account increased substantially? If not, then where do you think the money resides?

It didn't just vanish.

And we have consistent reports that American Corporations are sitting on 2 trillion in cash reserves.

RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
Speaking of religion, has anyone read up on the latest on Richard Dawkins, whose interview with a clergyman revealed that Dawkins is NOT a dyedinthewool atheist. He is just an old befuddled agnostic who is probably getting a bit jittery as he approaches old age as to whether or not G-d exists and if there is an afterlife. I hate that, don't you? Either shat or get off the potty, but don't decide that you just aren't sure after all. . .while being a socalled leader of the atheist bunch. I mean, what IS that?
Vendicar_Decarian
4.2 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012
"Are you suggesting we jail people for their religious beliefs?" - Modern

Magical thinking (religion) is evidence of mental illness and should serve as a point of disqualification for those seeking political office.

"Secondly we KNOW Saddam had WMD...he used them on his own people." - Modern

I remember Republican Donald Rumsfeld being sent to Iraq by Republican Ronald Reagan to shake Saddam's hand and tell the world that he didn't do it.

Just a few months later Ronnie would explain to the world how the Evil Ruskies were using Chemical Weapons on the Taliban in Afghanistan and how the "Taliban were the moral equivalent of America's founding fathers."

It turned out that those comments about chemical weapons were just more Republican lies, and the deposits claimed to be chemical weapons were in fact bee feces.

Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies. All Republican.
Modernmystic
1.5 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012
I'm not sure what you think you are referring to. But the exact opposite is the case of course. The FED printing trillions has provided trillions to corporations.


Printing money doesn't create wealth. If nothing exists to exchange green paper with only means the green paper is worth less. The Fed produced NOTHING and hence the corporations hold nothing more than they did before unless they produced goods for the notes.

Magical thinking (religion) is evidence of mental illness and should serve as a point of disqualification for those seeking political office.


Mmmmmkay....

I remember Republican Donald Rumsfeld being sent to Iraq by Republican Ronald Reagan to shake Saddam's hand and tell the world that he didn't do it.


So you agree with Rumsfeld? All those Kurds died of natural causes...even the 3 year old kids...
kochevnik
2.1 / 5 (14) Feb 29, 2012
@Modernmystic Secondly we KNOW Saddam had WMD...he used them on his own people. It's historical FACT.
Why yes in fact Bush still has the RECEIPT!
Moreover do you think that because someone disagrees with your view of reality they should be legislated out of existence or do you think we should allow for a diversity of beliefs, cultures, and creeds in society?
Christ psychosis is a disease that belongs in a mental institution. The fact that it persists in politics means that many people are going to die without reason. Simply a matter of WHEN, not if.
ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
Any libertarian that owned a laser satellite that could destroy an asteroid, would likely, if he were a libertarian, certainly accept payment for destroying the asteroid.
After all, it is in his self interest to keep the earth intact.
To continue with this absurd example, a good govt charged with protecting private property, would have already created an asteroid defense system.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
Republicans are NOT anti-science. They couldn't get away from science even if they tried in any case. Science is everywhere you look, so why should Repubs not like science as though you can sweep it under a rug. Whoever decided that Republicans feel that way is a total jerk and coming to that conclusion is very unscientific.
Modernmystic
2.3 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012
Any libertarian that owned a laser satellite that could destroy an asteroid, would likely, if he were a libertarian, certainly accept payment for destroying the asteroid.
After all, it is in his self interest to keep the earth intact.
To continue with this absurd example, a good govt charged with protecting private property, would have already created an asteroid defense system.


Yes or no. I already outlined that he WOULD NOT use the satellite. Shit or get off the pot...

@Modernmystic Secondly we KNOW Saddam had WMD...he used them on his own people. It's historical FACT.
Why yes in fact Bush still has the RECEIPT!


If you have evidence that Saddam didn't use the weapons I'm glad to hear it...otherwise I fail to see your point.

Unless you subscribe to the idiotic idea that killing 5000 people somehow is made because Americans sold them the weapons??
Vendicar_Decarian
4.6 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
"When he (Saddam) moved them or got rid of them is up for debate, as is the invasion of Iraq." - Modern

There is no debate at all. For more than a decade the U.N. had inspectors in Iraq looking for WMD, and in the last half decade, finding nothing.

There simply was none in the country. Neither were there mobile production facilities that the U.S. lied to the world about during Colon Powells laughable U.N. presentation.

And when Bush went on American TV to tell the American People that Saddam wouldn't allow U.N. inspectors in, the U.N. inspectors were in fact in Iraq doing their job.

And finally when U.N. inspectors claimed that the President was a liar, trumped up charges of child molestation were directed at at least one of them. Charges that were of course false.

And then there are the Forged Niger documents.

Republican Lies. Lies. Lies. Lies.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.2 / 5 (5) Feb 29, 2012
"Printing money doesn't create wealth." - Modern

Correct. It transferred wealth from everyone holding American dollars to the U.S. treasury which then used that value to stimulate the U.S. economy to keep it out of a grand economic depression.

That value is not reflected in a gain in your bank account, and it hasn't yet gone away. So it reflects in large part the gain in the bank accounts of corporations who are sitting on the cash rather than spending it to create jobs.

ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
Any libertarian that owned a laser satellite that could destroy an asteroid, would likely, if he were a libertarian, certainly accept payment for destroying the asteroid.
After all, it is in his self interest to keep the earth intact.
To continue with this absurd example, a good govt charged with protecting private property, would have already created an asteroid defense system.


Yes or no. I already outlined that he WOULD NOT use the satellite. Shit or get off the pot...

Your example is logically inconsistent and absurd.
Modernmystic
2.1 / 5 (14) Feb 29, 2012
There is no debate at all. For more than a decade the U.N. had inspectors in Iraq looking for WMD, and in the last half decade, finding nothing.


I'm sure they didn't. They were only allowed to search the places he didn't have them. All he had to do was open the entire country up for inspection, but he didn't...hence the invasion. Read a history book...

Your example is logically inconsistent and absurd.


You still don't answer...coward. I take that as you concede the point. People ARE NOT always logical or consistent. HENCE MY POINT...idiot.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.6 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
"So you agree with Rumsfeld? All those Kurds died of natural causes...even the 3 year old kids..." - Modern

No, and I take it from your question that we are both in agreement that Republican Rumsfeld and the Reagan Administration, and Republican Bush and the Bush Administration were liars in claiming that it was so, and then claiming after the U.N. investigators (including Americans) had concluded that Iraq had none.

And how about those baby incubators that Bush Sr. told Americans had been stolen by Iraq from Kuwait.

More Republican Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012
Komrade Kochevnik says:
@Modernmystic Secondly we KNOW Saddam had WMD...he used them on his own people. It's historical FACT.
Why yes in fact Bush still has the RECEIPT!


LOL. . .good joke, Komrade. But actually, the historical fact was that a lot of deaths occurred from Saddam Hussein using poison chemicals on the Kurds and others. I think the definition is. . .ah yes, it's "genocide". Saddam invaded Kuwait also and burned the oil fields amongst other things and attempted to lay waste the country. I recall almost feeling sorry for the Iraqi troops who were buried in the sands of Iraq or Kuwait by American bulldozers as those troops sat in their "foxholes".
Modernmystic
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012
"So you agree with Rumsfeld? All those Kurds died of natural causes...even the 3 year old kids..." - Modern

No, and I take it from your question that we are both in agreement that Republican Rumsfeld and the Reagan Administration, and Republican Bush and the Bush Administration were liars in claiming that it was so, and then claiming after the U.N. investigators (including Americans) had concluded that Iraq had none.


Indeed...we are in agreement.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
Dawkins is much smarter than you Tard Boy and capable of
comprehending the subtle difference between atheist and extreme agnostic.

A an atheist I can not rule out the existence of the giant spaghetti monster. But this should provide no solace for Pastafarians since I deem the probability to be smaller than 1e(minus 1000).

"Speaking of religion, has anyone read up on the latest on Richard Dawkins, whose interview with a clergyman revealed that Dawkins is NOT a dyedinthewool atheist." - RichieTard
Modernmystic
1.4 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012
Dawkins said in an interview that intelligent design was possible, that aliens could have created life on Earth...not someone I would overly quote or rely upon for sound theory....

Is that evidence of mental illness? Should he be disqualified from holding political office? All that's missing IMO is a tinfoil hat...
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012
"Indeed...we are in agreement." - Modern

Lying is pure evil, and since as I have illustrated, the Republican party is a party of congenital liars, I will support the party of lesser evil - which at this time is the Democrats.

RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012
It was a stroke of genius from whomever thought up the idea to use bulldozers. No shots were fired, or very few. The result. . .hundreds of dead Iraqis. . .all because of Saddam
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
Denied by Ronald Reagan's administration and Donald Rumsfeld in particular.

Here is a video of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand after the gassing of the Kurds, for a job well done.

http://www.youtub...oejmpkgw

"But actually, the historical fact was that a lot of deaths occurred from Saddam Hussein using poison chemicals on the Kurds and others" - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
Dawkins is a jackass and his followers are fools for following him. . .LOL
Lies and half-truths from atheists are worse even than those from creationists.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012
Stalin used the same technique to commit mass murder. All murders ordered by Bush Sr.

"It was a stroke of genius from whomever thought up the idea to use bulldozers" - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
How about the video of Gaddafy calling Obama his "son". The dead man actually thought that Obama was loyal to their friendship. . .a haw haw haw haw
Rumsfeld, like many Jews in many administrations, was still climbing the ladder of success. He might have run for President if he could.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTardboyboy says: ""Stalin used the same technique to commit mass murder. All murders ordered by Bush Sr."" There you go again, invoking the names of past presidential foibles. I doubt that Bush Sr. had anything to with Stalin's murderous mayhem on his own people. Don't make up untruths, boyboy
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012
Entirely false.

"They were only allowed to search the places he didn't have them. All he had to do was open the entire country up for inspection, but he didn't...hence the invasion." - Modern

The U.N. inspectors had nearly unfettered access to all of Iraq. But since the Iraqi's had caught American inspectors funneling classified information to U.S. spy agencies - a charge confirmed by the U.N. inspectors themselves, Americans were correctly barred from inspecting certain facilities. Inspectors from other nations were however permitted in those facilities.

If you have a different view of recent history it is false.

You have fallen for Republican lies sold to you in the form of Propaganda.

Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012
"I doubt that Bush Sr. had anything to with Stalin's murderous mayhem on his own people." - RichieTard

But we do know that both mass murderers, Stalin and George Bush Sr. used the same bury them alive technique.

And you say. It was genius.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012
Here RichieTard shows that he can't distinguish between who is truthful and who is lying.

"How about the video of Gaddafy calling Obama his "son". - RichieTard

In the above case Gaddafy was lying not Obama.

In the case of Rumsfeld, it was Repubican Rumsfeld that was lying along withthe Republican Reagan Administration.

In no case were any Democrats lying.

Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
In fact, Al Gore took the initiative to write and push through congress - the legislation that opened up the private arpanet network to public access, thereby creating what is now known as the internet.

Without Gore's vision, the net as you know it today would not exist.

"AlGore INVENTED the computer, don't you remember him admitting that?" - RichieTard

Do you intend to be an idiot for the rest of your life Tard Boy?

RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTardboyboy says: ""Stalin used the same technique to commit mass murder. All murders ordered by Bush Sr."" There you go again, invoking the names of past presidential foibles. I doubt that Bush Sr. had anything to with Stalin's murderous mayhem on his own people. Don't make up untruths, boyboy


I was right. . .Bush Sr. had nothing to do with Stalin

http://en.wikiped...a_Summit

They may have employed the same methods, but Stalin was a murderer and Bush was a Commander in Chief during a war that was caused by the Iraqi dictator. I wasn't referring to Bush Sr. as the genius who thought up burial by earth movers in the desert. That would be a strictly military decision.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
"Did the government invent electricity, flight, internal combustion, assembly lines?" - Modern

Nope. But Government funding has paid for the development of virtually all science and technology since then, either entirely or in terms of the underlying science.

Without government funding, the transistors currently managing your compute session would not exist as they were produced to replace bulky and unreliable tubes that could not be used in the space program.

The GUI interface you are undoubtedly using was produced through government funding at MIT's media lab.

The teflon in your frying pan also comes from government funding of the space program, as do the air bags in your car, the refrigerant used in your refrigerator, freezer, air conditioners etc.

Look around you. Virtually everything you see is the result of government funding, from the paint on the walls to the plastics coating everything in sight. Even the light bulb above your head.

RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
Bush was invited by the Kuwaiti gov't in a plea for help after Saddam invaded their country. Bush Sr. at that time was being a humanitarian for helping them. The burying of Iraqi troops, while a barbarian act, could be considered almost similar to the bombing of Hiroshima. It saved a lot of American and Kuwaiti lives that would otherwise have been massacred by Iraq army.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012
Yes, the tyrant King of Kuwait and the Bush family go back a long time, almost as far as the Bush Family's financial support of Hitler.

"Bush was invited by the Kuwaiti gov't in a plea for help after Saddam invaded their country." - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTardboy says: "But Government funding has paid for the development of virtually all science and technology since then, either entirely or in terms of the underlying science."

You seem to conveniently forget where that government funding money comes from, Tardboy. ALL moneys in government hands only uses the government AS A CONDUIT to spread out the appropriate payments to the funded FROM taxpayer money. There is NO funding anywhere without that taxpayer money that is forcibly wrested from the taxpayers' wallets through federal income tax
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
everything you said above. . .all the improvements and discoveries were funded BY the taxpayers. I am a taxpayer and it is MY money as well as the money of millions of other American citizens that PAID for all those discoveries. Place the kudos where it belongs. . .on me and other Americans who pay taxes. . .don't pretend that it's the government that pays for it without us.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
Ahhh. Chuckle... A Conservative voice of Reason.

"...the treasonous policies of the Democrat corps of pseudo-intellectuals who brainwash American children grades K-12 and on through college with these Communist professors and teachers spouting hatred..." - Richie

As long as the above kind of Lunacy is epidemic in the Republican Party of Treason, the collapse of America will continue.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
Correct

"I am a taxpayer and it is MY money as well as the money of millions of other American citizens that PAID for all those discoveries." - RichieTard

Government is organization.

You don't have the intellectual capacity for that either.

If you had the capacity, and a billion life times you could have made those discoveries yourself.

But you aren't smart enough... and clearly never will be.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
the government is nothing but a go-between bunch of glorified bureaucrats whose job it is is to make a debits and credits list of payments in and payments out. . .many of us freely agree to allow the government to take our hard earned money to pay for infrastructure, military, etc.
but the government does not have the ability to exist without the taxpayers.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
Correct

"I am a taxpayer and it is MY money as well as the money of millions of other American citizens that PAID for all those discoveries." - RichieTard

Government is organization.

Government is disorganized without a set frame of values which are written into the U.S. Constitution

You don't have the intellectual capacity for that either.
My intellectual capacity has nothing to do with organizing the government. My taxes pay for the organizing so that I and millions of others don't have to do it;

If you had the capacity, and a billion life times you could have made those discoveries yourself.
damn right. . .a billion lifetimes are not in my playbook.

But you aren't smart enough... and clearly never will be.
It is not my role in life to make such discoveries. There are properly funded people to make those discoveries through payment of my tax money to set them up and equip them well.

RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTardo says: "As long as the above kind of Lunacy is epidemic in the Republican Party of Treason, the collapse of America will continue."
LOL not if I can help it, it won't. America will go on long after you and people like you are dead and buried.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
do not equate the Republican Party with Conservatism. . .that would be a huge mistake on your part and the enemies of loyal Americans. We Conservatives are not Libertarians either. World of difference there. The TEA Party is just an offshoot of Conservatism. Don't lump us in with the TEA Party either.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012
Watching you ConservaTards "help" is like watching the three stooges and a dozen fire bugs put out a house fire.

"LOL not if I can help it, it won't." - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012
VendiTardo says: "Yes, the tyrant King of Kuwait and the Bush family go back a long time, almost as far as the Bush Family's financial support of Hitler."

LOL. . .Bush Sr. was Navy pilot during WW2, I hardly think that he, his father or his sons would have been in the cheering section for Hitler. . .financially or otherwise
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012
So you are a self styled retard.

They are typically the most retarded of them all.

Self styled Conservatives are kinda like self styled Christians with their magic underpants and invisible glasses and demons from the planet Mongo.

"do not equate the Republican Party with Conservatism" - RichieTard

RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
"Watching you ConservaTards "help" is like watching the three stooges and a dozen fire bugs put out a house fire."

LOL. . .is that all you can come up, VendiTardo? That's not terribly intellectual of you. It figures you're a fan of the 3 stooges. . . .shiiiiiit
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012
BTW. . .do you have a retarded sister or brother that you resent? Just asking.
How many loyal Americans have you confessed to as being an enemy of their country? I'll bet you're scared $hitless to admit to that. You'd wind up as dogmeat. LOL
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012
Documents in National Archives Prove
George W. Bush's Grandfather Traded
with Nazis - Even After Pearl Harbor

http://presidentb...ary.org/

How the Bush Family Financed Hitler and Nazism

http://theamerica...and.html

The Bush - Nazi Connection

http://www.brassc...ion.html

How the Bush family made
its fortune from the Nazis

http://www.tetrah...zis.html

"Documents: Bush's Grandfather Directed Bank Tied to Man Who Funded Hitler" - Fox News

http://www.foxnew...,00.html
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Mar 01, 2012
Presumably 350 million.

But you see. Unlike you, I am not a coward.

"How many loyal Americans have you confessed to as being an enemy of their country?" - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012
LOL. . .VendiTardo. . .you and your kind should go off to some little corner of the Earth and complain to each other about how the American political system and cultures suck when you no longer can savor the benefits of living in a free country and all it entails. You need to be with others of your ilk, competing with each other as to who can bitch the loudest and the longest. Wear rags and no shoes, since clothing and shoes are the products of private industry in America. China also creates stuff. Go there. They would love to get a hold of you.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012
Why would I do anything to please you? Tard Boy.

You don't seem to be capable of rational thought.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012
Are you not aware that the production of textiles and shoes has almost entirely been moved outside of the U.S. and to second and third world nations?

You clearly have a dramatic detachment from reality, and are living in a ConservaTard fantasy land.

"Wear rags and no shoes, since clothing and shoes are the products of private industry in America." - RichieTard
kochevnik
2.7 / 5 (12) Mar 01, 2012
The same will occur with Iran. Everyone suspects they're developing nuclear weapons, but no one knows for absolute certainty outside Iran. What matters is what the majority suspects, because access to certainty is not available.
Your zionist neokhan news failed you again, Noumenon. You need to get your news direct, and not passed through Israel as every Iranian piece is before arriving in the USA: IRAN CALLS ON TREATY TO BAN NUCLEAR WEAPONS "It's a sin" http://rt.com/new...sin-421/
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012
Documents in National Archives Prove
George W. Bush's Grandfather Traded
with Nazis - Even After Pearl Harbor

http://presidentb...ary.org/


So? What does this all mean? Lots of people collaborated with despots and dictators. Does that mean that Bush was a despot or a dictator himself? Did that make him greedy and disloyal to his own country? Americans buy shares of foreign stocks and bonds. Does that make them less loyal to their own? Would you say that Churchill and FDR were bad people for meeting up with Stalin at Yalta?
What does any of it mean? Did Bush's grampa become a monster for liking Hitler? No. Hitler probably put his best face on to hide the fact that HE was the monster. It's all in the past, just like Jimmy Carter. . .only J.C. is still trying to grab attention by going to north Korea, et al. . .to relive his glory days.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012
RichieTard begins with denial.

"Bush Sr. was Navy pilot during WW2, I hardly think that he, his father or his sons would have been in the cheering section for Hitler. . .financially or otherwise" - RichieTard

and then when presented with overwhelming evidnence that Daddy Bush was a financer and fan of Hitler, RichieTard responds...

"Lots of people collaborated with despots and dictators." - RichieTard

I find it interesting that Daddy Bush was still dealing with the Nazi's after Pearl Harbour.

Don't you?

Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Mar 01, 2012
"What does any of it mean? Did Bush's grampa become a monster for liking Hitler? No." - RichieTard

I don't think a ConservaTard has ever said any more in a single sentence.

Well done Richie.

Remember. Greed is the ultimate good, and money the only true God.

RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012
Are you not aware that the production of textiles and shoes has almost entirely been moved outside of the U.S. and to second and third world nations?

You clearly have a dramatic detachment from reality, and are living in a ConservaTard fantasy land.

"Wear rags and no shoes, since clothing and shoes are the products of private industry in America." - RichieTard


The antidote to that would be to deregulate, at least partially, all the companies who wish to come back to the U.S. and give them a break for once. Give them incentives to hire American workers by lower taxes, fees and charges. And get rid of the union thugs who incite violence so that workers are afraid to go to work. Private industry admins understand the value of good workers and are not going to let go of the good ones, but may want to get rid of the bad workers who don't want to do their fair share. Unions don't allow bad workers to be fired and that's not right.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012
It promotes inefficiency and the good workers harbor resentment and tend to believe that there is some favoritism going on.

A little bit of greed is good as I've said already several pages back.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012
If you don't have that certain healthy amount of greed. . .then kindly send me a check for half the amount you have in your checking or savings account, as I am full of healthy greed and I need a new pair of expensive sneakers.......LOL

To assuage my greed since you have none, and the fact that money is my god. . .kindly send me that money or I will have to burglarize your home because I am finding out that you are greedy after all.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 01, 2012
oh ok. . .I won't burglarize your home and take your electronics just because you have no greed. I'll just have to mug you in a dark alley and steal your wallet and all the money in it. Maybe even a pop on your head with a brick for good measure. What? You still won't give me half of your wealth? Are you greedy?
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 01, 2012
and with that. . .as Archie Bunker used to say, ""good night nurse"" ROFLOL
kochevnik
2.5 / 5 (13) Mar 01, 2012
I'll just have to mug you in a dark alley and steal your wallet and all the money in it.
Sounds like the stormtroopers are already yearning for another fuhrer to warm up those ovens.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012
What is your real name and address.

"If you don't have that certain healthy amount of greed. . .then kindly send me a check for half the amount you have in your checking or savings account" - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012
Isn't that always the backup Republican plan?

"I'll just have to mug you in a dark alley and steal your wallet and all the money in it." - RichieTard
kochevnik
2.1 / 5 (14) Mar 01, 2012
They may have employed the same methods, but Stalin was a murderer and Bush was a Commander in Chief during a war that was caused by the Iraqi dictator. I wasn't referring to Bush Sr. as the genius who thought up burial by earth movers in the desert. That would be a strictly military decision.
Actually Stalin presided over catapulting the CCCP from feudal to modern times. Practically everything modern like indoor electricity, radio, tv, transport, skyscrapers, modern arms came under Stalin. In contrast Bush presided over mass murder and Bush has slaughtered thousands of Iraqis, imprisoned hundreds without trial or charges, and presided over the torture and sexual abuse of many of them. He is the world's leading recruiter for hate-America insurgents the world over. He presided over the economic destruction of the US and world economy.
Ethelred
3.4 / 5 (10) Mar 01, 2012
Ritchiepirouette.

Would you please go on another honeymoon. And stay on it this time.

You make Marjon seem intelligent and truthful.

This thread has had two intelligent posters with either some ideology issues or a total lack of a sense of proportion and two blithering idiots that lie when they aren't brain damaged chiming in with stupefying idiocy. And for once Marjon isn't the bigger lying idiot of the two.

That is quite an achievement. Even Geokster hasn't managed it for so many posts.

If you go away, and take Marjon with you, the average IQ here will go up at least 10 points. Just seeing this nonsense from you two is depressing that America could have produced such a distillation of so much idiocy and mendacity in any two people that think they belong on a science site.

Why aren't you blessing Yahoo with your posts where there are plenty of like minds willing to admire your fool posts.

Ethelred
ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 01, 2012
Do you agree the satellite should be used or not? Yes or no


Should it be used? Sure.
How do you plan to 'persuade' the owner to use it?
How will you prevent the owner from defending it from attack or destroying it?
rah
2.5 / 5 (15) Mar 01, 2012
Then they are not "Upper Class" if that is how they act. Money does not determine a person's class. Their behavior does.
Ferky
1.7 / 5 (11) Mar 01, 2012
Thank you, rah. I was just about to write that when the discussion was hijacked by trolls and I gave up. The title of the study should read "High income (or wealth) predicts increased unethical behavior", not "high social class".

There used to be a time when the rich were expected to show class and behave in a higher manner than the lower classes. Today, money alone gives entrance into the "upper class". That's too bad.
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (15) Mar 01, 2012
You can't have it both ways, Ferky.

If money grants entrance into the "upper class," then the "wealthy" are upper class.

In the US, just how many "high social class" persons are those that are not also wealthy?
lologagalitho
1 / 5 (10) Mar 02, 2012
a friend's sister-in-law makes $65 hourly on the laptop. She has been laid off for 6 months but last month her pay was $19426 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Go to this web site and read more NuttyRich dot com
ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
Just wondering how many think Bill Gates, George Soros, Warren Buffet, Waltons, Van Andles, etc, are 'high class' and cheat?
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
Ritchiepirouette.

Would you please go on another honeymoon. And stay on it this time.

You make Marjon seem intelligent and truthful.

This thread has had two intelligent posters with either some ideology issues or a total lack of a sense of proportion and two blithering idiots that lie when they aren't brain damaged chiming in with stupefying idiocy. And for once Marjon isn't the bigger lying idiot of the two.

That is quite an achievement. Even Geokster hasn't managed it for so many posts.

If you go away, and take Marjon with you, the average IQ here will go up at least 10 points. Just seeing this nonsense from you two is depressing that America could have produced such a distillation of so much idiocy and mendacity in any two people that think they belong on a science site.

Why aren't you blessing Yahoo with your posts where there are plenty of like minds willing to admire your fool posts.

Ethelred


Are you censoring me, Red? Are you a Communist now?
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 02, 2012
KKK says:
I'll just have to mug you in a dark alley and steal your wallet and all the money in it.
Sounds like the stormtroopers are already yearning for another fuhrer to warm up those ovens.


KKK. . .have you forgotten how to read English or do you only read the most recent posts and disregard what had been said earlier as my answer to Vendicar/Cardacian?
kochevnik
2.8 / 5 (11) Mar 02, 2012
KKK. . .have you forgotten how to read English or do you only read the most recent posts and disregard what had been said earlier as my answer to Vendicar/Cardacian?
I think the former ;)
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 03, 2012
good enough reason. . .btw. . .when are the elections? Will Vlad become tsar of all Russiar?
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Mar 03, 2012
George W. Bush gave 12.5 percent of his tax cuts to the top 10th of 1 percent. Romneys plan gives a third of the tax cuts to the top 10th of 1 percent. And Romneys plan gives 57 percent of the total cuts in his package to the top 1 percent. Thats people who make more than about $400,000 a year. Its astonishing how heavily weighted it is to the top. Under his plan, there would be no estate tax and no gift tax, which means that very wealthy families can move money around freely, pass it from one generation to the next." said Johnston, author of "Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (and Stick You With the Bill)
Ethelred
3.5 / 5 (13) Mar 03, 2012
Are you censoring me, Red?
No. I am asking you to improve the site by going away.

Are you a Communist now?


Sorry that you felt the need to lie again.

You blinded yourself to reality long ago. But the reality is that you are a detriment to this site BECAUSE you have blinded yourself. You live in a fantasy world.

Ethelred
Isaacsname
5 / 5 (1) Mar 03, 2012
Loooooooooooooooooooooool^3

Tell me how much enlightenment costs ?

Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 03, 2012
"Tell me how much enlightenment costs ?" - name

Well according to American corporations, all Americans have to do to become enlightened is bend over and drop their pants.

"I ask for so little. Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave." - Joe Corporation

Buy now and save.
StarGazer2011
1.6 / 5 (14) Mar 03, 2012
this study was done on middle income earners, not 'the upper class'. People on 150K - 500K are the hired thugs of our society, the prison guards, they are not the owners.
Ferky
1.6 / 5 (14) Mar 03, 2012
You can't have it both ways, Ferky.

If money grants entrance into the "upper class," then the "wealthy" are upper class.

In the US, just how many "high social class" persons are those that are not also wealthy?


deepsand,

You have a serious problem with reading comprehension. There's "is", and there's "ought", and my comment was very clear as to what is and what ought to be.
Leigh_Pierce
2.3 / 5 (14) Mar 04, 2012
I just had dream: In the dream I was visiting an upper class friend of mine whom was having a dinner party. He's upper.class friends looked down on me with disdain for I am a man with out status or wealth. I am a mere mortal living a simple truthful life. I value friendship and LOVE, My upper class associates value Power, Eliteism. They look apon me as filth dwilling in the gutter of life. So sad we cannot yet find common ground, I long to share with them some true delights of life.
_nigmatic10
2 / 5 (12) Mar 04, 2012
The number of responses to this article say it all. That being said, the curve ratio for upper class cheating only continues the higher it goes. It should be noted that at a certain point, the terminology for cheating redefines itself to those at the class level and simply becomes a tactical advantage.
leDendrite
3.6 / 5 (7) Mar 04, 2012
The system is rigged so that success is largely determined by ones willingness to screw others over. It's a bummer.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Mar 04, 2012
Society defines success as having significant quantities of money who's acquisition is associated with cheating society.

Only fools play that game.

The proper course of action is to redefine success to mean something other than wealth, and this has never been easier to do as a lack of wealth (in first world Capitalist nations) no longer provides a significant impediment to having a good or even great life.

Work less. Live more.

Acquire less junk. Be happier as a result.

"The system is rigged so that success is largely determined by ones willingness to screw others over." - ieDendrite
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (7) Mar 04, 2012
Correct.

"It should be noted that at a certain point, the terminology for cheating redefines itself to those at the class level and simply becomes a tactical advantage." - nigmatic

That is the true corruption, and over the last 40 years it has been facilitated almost exclusively by Republican and Libertarian interests.

Know the enemy.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (20) Mar 04, 2012
The system is rigged so that success is largely determined by ones willingness to screw others over. It's a bummer.

That is the 'progressive' way. It started over 100 years ago in the US when the large meat packers in Chicago supported the creation of the FDA and expensive regulation to screw over their competitors.
That is the intent of most regulation promoted and supported by industries, use govt coercion to screw their competition.
That happened to Microsoft a few years ago when the US sued MS on behalf of a politically connected competitor.

"Its a vast protection racket, practiced by politicians and political operatives of both parties. Nice little software company youve got here. Too bad if we have to regulate it or if Big Government programs force us to raise its taxes. Your archrival just wrote a big check to the Washington Bureaucrats Benevolent Society. Are you sure you wouldnt like to do the same?"
http://www.politi...483.html
TabulaMentis
2 / 5 (12) Mar 04, 2012
Add illegal eavesdropping and that makes the situation even worse. The Murdoch's are a good example of illegal eavesdropping. Who knows how much the Murdoch's have profited from their illegal activities. Then when they get busted they just pay the people off to shut them up, though they may find out that it is illegal to pay-off government employees.

Illegal eavesdropping (spying) is becoming the biggest threat to humankind and people will probably figure that out until it is too late. But guess who will gain the most from illegal spying? The rich!
Vendicar_Decarian
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 04, 2012
Don't forget Murdoch also owns the Wall Street Journal and that newspaper has recently been caught in a massive campaign of fraud regarding how it has been lying about it's circulation numbrers. Padding them by almost 50 percent.

It has been doing this by paying Conservative groups in Europe to purchase it's own newspapers.

Fraud seems to be the standard way of operating for Conservative Companies like NewsCorp.

"The Murdoch's are a good example of illegal eavesdropping." - Tabula
Vendicar_Decarian
3.9 / 5 (7) Mar 04, 2012
You have to understand that Libertarians like RyggTard believe that all standards and practices are invalid.

They believe that anyone should have the right to call themselves a police office, or a lawyer or a medical doctor.

They believe that all commercial standards of weights and measure are invalid, and that the policing of commercial scales is tyranny.

They believe that there should be no standards of quality, efficacy, or purity in any foods or drugs sold to the public.

Neither do they believe that laws can compel any business to honestly tell consumers what is in their products.

This is the "Paradise" that Libertarians plan for the world.

"the large meat packers in Chicago supported the creation of the FDA and expensive regulation to screw over their competitors." - RyggTard

Vendicar_Decarian
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 05, 2012
Heartland Institute (Libertarian) Employee Commits Perjury in New Zealand

http://hot-topic....roversy/

I have never encountered a Libertarian/Conservative who wasn't a scumbag liar.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 05, 2012
Illegal eavesdropping (spying) is becoming the biggest threat to humankind and people will probably figure that out until it is too late. But guess who will gain the most from illegal spying? The rich!

You do know the NSA is spying on everyone? It is called Echelon and is 100% supported by the govt.
http://www.fas.or...elon.htm
TabulaMentis
1 / 5 (9) Mar 05, 2012
You do know the NSA is spying on everyone? It is called Echelon and is 100% supported by the govt.
http://www.fas.or...elon.htm
Before you know it (within fifty years) the government will be reading our minds and changing it to their ideals whatever that may be???
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (4) Mar 06, 2012
Are you afraid that they will come after your collection of child porn, Tard Boy?

Your collection is perfectly legal under Libertarian law.

"You do know the NSA is spying on everyone?" - RyggTard
Excalibur
2.4 / 5 (14) Mar 11, 2012
You can't have it both ways, Ferky.

If money grants entrance into the "upper class," then the "wealthy" are upper class.

In the US, just how many "high social class" persons are those that are not also wealthy?


deepsand,

You have a serious problem with reading comprehension. There's "is", and there's "ought", and my comment was very clear as to what is and what ought to be.

Seems to me that the problem just be yours. If your writing is misread, look first to the writer.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 11, 2012
Venditardo says:
Are you afraid that they will come after your collection of child porn, Tard Boy?

Your collection is perfectly legal under Libertarian law.

"You do know the NSA is spying on everyone?" - RyggTard


It's a well known fact that Socialist AGWites are completely lacking in social more's and the values that would uphold morality. Thus, it is the role of these completely immoral Socialist AGWites to falsely accuse and condemn those with whom they disagree to prevent those same judgements of immorality to be justifiably leveled at the accuser. Not much can be done to alleviate or eliminate this problem, as it is the accuser of immorality whose supposed righteous indignation draws into his camp those whose bent is similar to the accuser, and thus retains a great retinue of followers.
:-P
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (11) Mar 11, 2012
Preservation of the "Invasion of privacy" laws are broken every day for the sake of "security" and the nation's gullible applaud the move by U.S. government officials, the same appointed officials whose Liberal/Socialist bent coincide with the tyrannical Socialist motives of the Obama White House.

The insane laws that prevent law enforcement agencies from profiling members of certain ethnicities and religions as to their potential for terrorism and other crimes, also gives permission to TSA workers to physically grope the private parts of blue eyed, white haired grandmothers in wheelchairs, amongst other victims of such invasion of privacy.
It was a long-held belief that in order to command and gain complete control over a population, it is necessary to subdue them by giving them a false sense of security even while their freedoms are slowly removed. The necessity of that process being done slowly but surely is necessary to lull the population into believing that it is being done. .
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (11) Mar 11, 2012
cont'd
for their own good. A population's idea of what is relevant can be skewed by a resourceful and clever dictatorship using tyrannical methods, but with kid gloves.
In truth, class envy is what motivates those whose wish it is is to bring down those who have success and wealth down to their own level of poverty in order to justify their laziness and lack of justification for being lazy, indolent and subservient to their own greed. The masses are greedy and wish to level everyone else to their own level of incompetence and immorality. The so-called 99% want desperately to be a part of the 1% but are not willing to be educated and work hard to achieve those goals. So they have to disrupt and destroy all the good things that made America a great country. What will be left after the 99% are done disrupting and destroying? It will be a Utopia only in their minds but for those in power in an expanded Socialist or Communist government, it will be their dream come true.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (3) Mar 11, 2012
Richie, a considerable number of your kind will soon find your heads separated from the rest of their bodies via the neuvo-Natioal Razor.

Do you honestly think that we should speak politely to the heads in the bascket?

"It's a well known fact that Socialist AGWites are completely lacking in social more's and the values.." - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (3) Mar 11, 2012
Are these invasions of privacy a legal consequence of George Bush's war on terror and his "Patriot act"?

Yup. American Liberty has always declined under Republican Presidents.

"Preservation of the "Invasion of privacy" laws are broken every day for the sake of "security" and the nation's gullible applaud the move by U.S. government officials, the same appointed officials whose Liberal/Socialist bent coincide with the tyrannical Socialist motives of the Obama White House." - RichieTard
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (14) Mar 11, 2012
"In arguably the most secretive and far reaching electronic surveillance program ever created, the Clinton Administration and the National Security Agency employed a global spy system, code named Echelon, which monitored just about every phone call, fax, email and telex message sent anywhere in the world.

Continue reading on Examiner.com Operation Echelon: Will Obama resurrect Clinton's spy program? - National Law Enforcement | Examiner.com http://www.examin...orPLF0gv
"
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (3) Mar 11, 2012
A stupid population can be easily swayed by good advertising. Just look at all the junk Americans purchase because they were told to by corporate advertising.

After a life of being trained to be suckers and trained "consumers", is it any wonder why people like Richie Tard fall for the lies told to him by the Heritage Foundation and the other pro-corporate propaganda groups poisoning America?

Thinking people are capable of seeing through their anti-intellectual nonsense. But those of low intellect like RichieTard don't have a chance.

"A population's idea of what is relevant can be skewed by a resourceful and clever dictatorship using tyrannical methods, but with kid gloves." - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (4) Mar 11, 2012
Oh my Bush.

The Information Awareness Office (IAO) was established by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in January 2002 to bring together several DARPA projects focused on applying surveillance and information technology to track and monitor terrorists and other asymmetric threats to national security, by achieving Total Information Awareness (TIA).

"the Clinton Administration and the National Security Agency employed a global spy system, code named Echelon" - RyggTard

Ethelred
2.3 / 5 (6) Mar 12, 2012
Still can't stop lying I see Pirouette. What is it about RightWingNutRetainerClips that they think lying is better than dealing with the real world?

Bush taps phones throughout the US and lies that he didn't need a search warrant and you lie that it was Obama that stole our rights.

It was that vile, incompetent, economy destroying, draft dodging MORON President DUMBASS that did those things. And instead of learning that your are on the wrong side you LIE and just keep going down the path of the RightWingNutRetainerClip as if you hadn't been complaining about things that BUSH did.

The only real questions about you is

Are you really this dishonest or are you just that stupid?

Where you born this way or is it brain damage from the RetainerClip?

Ethelred The Appalled
Ethelred
2.3 / 5 (6) Mar 12, 2012
I already know the answer for Marjon. He has a terrible case of AnnRand Induced Brain Damage that was initiated by pre-existing brain damage caused by burying his head in the sands of ignorance.

Ethelred
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (13) Mar 12, 2012
'Progresssives' are quite eager to establish enemy lists and use their political power to crush their enemies.
Recall the Clinton's FBI files and politically motivated IRS audits?
Obama has an enemy list and uses the IRS for politically motivated audits.
"In the 1990s Bill Clinton had an enemies list too. The Clinton administration targeted for IRS audit the National Rifle Association, the Heritage Foundation, the National Review, the American Spectator, Citizens Against Government Waste, Citizens for Honest Government, Concerned Women for America and the San Diego Chapter of Christian Coalition.

Today, Obama has an enemies list. The IRS is investigating conservative political groups including the Tea Party who oppose Obama's agenda."
http://www.humane...id=49908
And then we have a tax exempt org, Media Matters, campaigning for Obama along with several regulated TV networks. No conflict of interest there?!
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 12, 2012
Like all Libertarians and RandTards that I have ever encountered, RyggTard most certainly (IS) that dishonest.

"Are you really this dishonest or are you just that stupid?" - Ethel
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 12, 2012
"The official purpose, as described by the White House Counsel's Office, was to "screw" Nixon's political enemies, by means of tax audits from the Internal Revenue Service, and by manipulating "grant availability, federal contracts, litigation, prosecution, etc"

http://en.wikiped...ies_List

"'Progresssives' are quite eager to establish enemy lists and use their political power to crush their enemies." - RyggTard
Ethelred
2.6 / 5 (5) Mar 12, 2012
'Progresssives' are quite eager to establish enemy lists and use their political power to crush their enemies.


Thus speaks the liar that has this 'progressive' on his enemies list.

How does lying so much make things better Marjon?

Recall the Clinton's FBI files and politically motivated IRS audits?


All were groups not people, much like that attacks on Acorn.

Recall Reagan sending a legal hit squad out to California to damage the Democrats? Actual people not corporations.

A hit squad that only caught Republicans taking bribes?

I didn't think you would remember that.

Ethelred
Ethelred
3 / 5 (4) Mar 13, 2012
Good old Dogbert. Can't back up nearly anything he says so he gives me ones.

Tit for tat doggy. One each and it goes geometric for any after this warning.

Now is you show that I was wrong that will be different. Reagan did exactly what I said.

Ethelred