De Niro says it best

[Schnitzer318is]

I am all for spirited debate, sarcastic remarks, and the ocasional shrap borderline barb, in a back and forth, kinda keeps the old r3v feel alive. But the comment that got him banned was outta the blue and cossed that borderline definition imo, I would say this even if it had not been directed at myself.

Agreed. On all points.

[mrsleeve]

I am all for spirited debate, sarcastic remarks, and the ocasional shrap borderline barb, in a back and forth, kinda keeps the old r3v feel alive. But the comment that got him banned was outta the blue and cossed that borderline definition imo, I would say this even if it had not been directed at myself.

[flyboyx]

i guess one thing about having that guy around is that it kept everyone from bagging on ulysses.

[flyboyx]

no way!

LBJeffries be all


Nov 9. I want to see it.

he be all banned. even if its only temporary, there is still a lot of satisfaction in it.

i rather enjoy seeing people like this get banned from here. asshats be asshats. that isn't going to change.

[2761377]

Can someone ban LBJefferies. He's been an asshat this entire thread AND he's been warned.

no way!

LBJeffries be all



Nov 9. I want to see it.

[R3Z3N]

Can someone ban LBJefferies. He's been an asshat this entire thread AND he's been warned.

You can also ignore them so you don't even see it's posts.

[BraveUlysses]

there's a report post button if you feel the need to tell mom and dad to moderate this forum because someone hurt your feelings

[ahrensNW]

Can someone ban LBJefferies. He's been an asshat this entire thread AND he's been warned.

[CurrusDei]

Should I vote for Johnson or Stein?

Johnson. The greenies will shoot you for exhaust mods.

[CurrusDei]

We fundamentally disagree on just about everything. Except "Government spending must be severely constrained to stop the further accumulation of debt." That, I'll gladly cheers a beer with you on.

Thats ok. At least we agree on that, and presumably E30s. My core belief is that a man's life is his own, and that anything that an individual or individuals decide to do of their own free will and informed consent should not be subject to government interference, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others. Very much live and let live.

I come here to get away from politics and the news anyways. Just wandered into this thread for the De Niro vid. This is the first election in my lifetime where I have been actively against both major candidates.

[frankenbeemer]

Should I vote for Johnson or Stein?

[BraveUlysses]

How do you believe we need to be more free or return to our roots?

by clapping when the president he doesnt like is murdered! that's how we return to freedom.

It's what Jesus would do.

[Schnitzer318is]

We fundamentally disagree on just about everything. Except "Government spending must be severely constrained to stop the further accumulation of debt." That, I'll gladly cheers a beer with you on.

Personally, I know many wealthy individuals who feel the same way I do. I also know a few who feel the same way you do. All we can do is wait and see with Clinton as president unfortunately but at least Trump is going down in a ball of fire.

[CurrusDei]

De Niro says it best

Your spout about Madoff and Dick Fuld and Jamie Diamond (who don't belong in the same camp as Madoff by the way) doesn't even make a point, much less approach the clear disaster that collectivism wrought upon its victims and advocates in the 20th century.

Collectivism, and the idea that a man's property and production, which are the products of his body and mind, may be claimed by those who did not produce them, on the basis that they NEED them more, is the greatest evil the world has seen. Man's mind and body are put at the disposal of whatever impotent beggar claims his need the loudest. It makes need, rather than ability, the arbiter of property and wealth, enslaving the productive men to their inferiors, because of their mewling, ceaseless need. We saw how this played out. The collectivists found that the wealth whose existence they took for granted, and intended to steal and distribute equally owes its existence to productive men (of all income levels), without whom the nation falls into stagnation, hunger, decay, and death.

You talk about if someone "deserves" what he has produced. I say if a man has earned his wealth through free and open exchange, without the use of deception or force (i.e., not Madoff or a Washington lobbyist or crony), it is his by right and no amount of need from others can offset this.

I despise the concept of taxes on the rich to pay the national debt. It won't even make a dent in the debt, but most abhorrent is that the most productive, and most successful among us (or the children of those who were thus, and willed to pass their wealth to their next generation) should be sacrificed to atone for the sins of worthless politicians who have raided the coffers of future generations to keep themselves in office with handouts.

A debt as large as the U.S. government's cannot be erased by seizing capital from those in a position where their self interest dictates they put it to productive use to earn a return. It would not move the needle and it burns the seeds of future growth. Government spending must be severely constrained to stop the further accumulation of debt. Then the web of regulations must be eviscerated, meddling bureaucracies (looking at you, EPA) abolished, and the tax code drastically revised to allow the economy to regain true growth, not the anemic growth we have seen fueled by a decade of emergency level interest rates, QE, and artificial demand created by government spending - none of which are self sustaining.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Schnitzer318is]

Yes. What we need is a government that will make the selfish rich people share. Poor people need their wealth to eat more than the rich need to retire or take an extra vacation. Why should they hold on to it all. Why is their greed more important than another persons dire need? The government should make sure everyone has a decent life. The people need to rise up and break the greed of the wealth....oh wait, you mentioned history...shit. People already tried that in Russia in 1917 and over a hundred million people died, many of starvation, and that's before you get to China, Cambodia, Cuba...ok nevermind. Individualism and Capitalism, forever.

Did you even read the quoted post? I said EVERYONE is greedy and self-important, from every walk of life. We need to raise taxes on the wealthy AND (make sure you read the AND) cut spending on defense and entitlement programs. At least temporarily until the national debt is taken care of. It's not about the selfish rich sharing with the poor. It's about everyone giving up something to solve the country's problems. Everyone has been taking for too long, and now we ALL have to pay the piper.

We don't have (and haven't had) true capitalism for some time. We have no competition and corporations/special interests have so much influence on our government that we definitely do not have free markets anymore.

As for your history lesson. Reductio ad absurdum. But you sound like you've made up your mind that the wealthy are the victims (ask Bernie Madoff, Richard Fould, Jamie Dimon, and countless others) who are the only intelligent persons in the country... and obviously they are all the hardest working, most driven people, and deserve everything they earn. Only they can deliver this country from the evil liberal socialists. See, I can do it too.

Of course not all wealthy people are criminals. Many of them are very driven, and very intelligent. But so are A LOT of poor and middle class people as well.