"Excessive benefits to the Middle Class"

[4est_4est_Gump]

This is the thread for Throb to put up or shut up and post the quote or display his lying cowardice to the whole board.



We'll wait in eager anticipation!


rwingers! Get your popcorn and get behind the spittle shield!

 

[cjh]

Here is your quote.

Why the hell does the "Middle Class" need so many benefits, and to what cost?


I've been told for decades that we needed our safety net for the weak, the disabled, the very elderly, etc.

Now, we need a safety net for everything.



In fact, we need it now, more than ever seeing how it is bankrupting the middle-class...

When I read it, I read it to mean that you belive the middle class gets more benefits than it needs.

"Excessive" is a fair and concise way of saying more than is needed.

Clear things up for us. Did you mean something other than more benefits than the middle class needs?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Here is your quote.



When I read it, I read it to mean that you belive the middle class gets more benefits than it needs.

"Excessive" is a fair and concise way of saying more than is needed.

Clear things up for us. Did you mean something other than more benefits than the middle class needs?

No, what I said is clear. We went from safety net to having to "save" the middle class, one of the current Democrat memes and I merely ask, "What will it cost to save the Middle Class?" Will we not end up destroying the Middle Class with each new benefit designed to "save" it?

Excessive is a charge, nothing more.

It is an attack.

The modern Democrats seems to believe that in heated attack you win silence from across the aisle and thus the debate. On many issues, we see the blistering rhetoric, being the loudest and hardest to answer in a rational way, being taken as being in the right, only for the bitter, angry voices to be shocked by the voters to surprisingly find out that all the noise was not being in the right, but being the loudest from Wisconsin to the 31 states where Gay Marriage was defeated despite all the polling showing that the Unions and the Gays had the full support of "the majority" of Americans, which just, to me. goes to prove the validity of the Wilder/Bradley Effect theory.

People like Throb think they are winning by being vicious, but all they do is create a silent majority who doesn't want to discuss any issues of the day for fear of being lathered with spittle...

 

[zipman]

Here is your quote.



When I read it, I read it to mean that you belive the middle class gets more benefits than it needs.

"Excessive" is a fair and concise way of saying more than is needed.

Clear things up for us. Did you mean something other than more benefits than the middle class needs?

And really, all Rob did was ask that very question in what I thought was a very direct and civilized way as the quote below shows.

"so many benefits"?

Which "middle class" benefits, pray tell, are "excessive" in your mind?

Homeowner mortgage deduction?
Student loan interest rate subsidy?

Give us some specifics.

I love it when A_J plays the victim.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Again, where did I say the middle class was getting excessive benefits?

If Democrats receive a surprise this fall, it will be from the silent majority that realizes that there is no such thing as a civil conversation with Democrats; all you can do is wince and try to ignore their hatred or just nod your head and agree with them publicly while they demand a national suicide via altruism.

I think, for the nation, the good news is that you might be saved from your own good intentions and smug self-righteousness...

 

[zipman]

No, what I said is clear. We went from safety net to having to "save" the middle class, one of the current Democrat memes and I merely ask, "What will it cost to save the Middle Class?" Will we not end up destroying the Middle Class with each new benefit designed to "save" it?

Excessive is a charge, nothing more.

It is an attack.

The modern Democrats seems to believe that in heated attack you win silence from across the aisle and thus the debate. On many issues, we see the blistering rhetoric, being the loudest and hardest to answer in a rational way, being taken as being in the right, only for the bitter, angry voices to be shocked by the voters to surprisingly find out that all the noise was not being in the right, but being the loudest from Wisconsin to the 31 states where Gay Marriage was defeated despite all the polling showing that the Unions and the Gays had the full support of "the majority" of Americans, which just, to me. goes to prove the validity of the Wilder/Bradley Effect theory.

People like Throb think they are winning by being vicious, but all they do is create a silent majority who doesn't want to discuss any issues of the day for fear of being lathered with spittle...

"Blistering rhetoric?" He asked you a question. He didn't make any kind of attack.

And for the record, here's the definition of excessive, which is completely in line with what you were saying:


ex·ces·sive   [ik-ses-iv]

adjective
going beyond the usual, necessary, or proper limit or degree; characterized by excess: excessive charges; excessive criticism.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Playing victim?



I'm the one being stalked because I left a conversation that had turned decidedly idiotic before the idiots were done hurling accusations at me for merely asking. "How much more can we afford to pay for in benefits to the Middle Class?"

99 weeks not enough?
Food stamps not enough?
Forcing banks to eat profits not enough?
Targeted tax breaks that don't work not enough?

The rich don't pay for any benefits, they just pass taxes on as a cost.

It's the Middle Class that pays for their own relief as well as the relief of the poor which is all I was pointing out.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

"Blistering rhetoric?" He asked you a question. He didn't make any kind of attack.

And for the record, here's the definition of excessive, which is completely in line with what you were saying:


ex·ces·sive   [ik-ses-iv]

adjective
going beyond the usual, necessary, or proper limit or degree; characterized by excess: excessive charges; excessive criticism.

Not there. But a week later, he's still going fucking crazy in thread after thread after thread no matter how many times I try to rationally deal with him and those people like you who rally to his side DESPITE the fact that you know some of the things he's said to me about my daughter in the past.

Nothing I said was excessive, but it was a serious enough of a charge to get you interested in being one of Throb's willing tools even as you yourself understand his total lack of character, you think it expedient to go down to his level, for some reason...

 

[zipman]

Playing victim?



I'm the one being stalked because I left a conversation that had turned decidedly idiotic before the idiots were done hurling accusations at me for merely asking. "How much more can we afford to pay for in benefits to the Middle Class?"

99 weeks not enough?
Food stamps not enough?
Forcing banks to eat profits not enough?
Targeted tax breaks that don't work not enough?

The rich don't pay for any benefits, they just pass taxes on as a cost.

It's the Middle Class that pays for their own relief as well as the relief of the poor which is all I was pointing out.

The only thing that was idiotic was your reaction to a simple question. You do realize that's all he did, don't you? He asked you a question. Plain and simple.

You could have easily clarified what you meant right then and there. Instead, you disappear from that thread, cry about it in another one and then start this thread to redress how you were wronged?

Give me a break.

 

[cjh]

No, what I said is clear. We went from safety net to having to "save" the middle class, one of the current Democrat memes and I merely ask, "What will it cost to save the Middle Class?" Will we not end up destroying the Middle Class with each new benefit designed to "save" it?

Excessive is a charge, nothing more.

<snip>

It seems to me that you are saying any benefit beyond a "safety net" is excessive.

What comprises the safety net?

 

[zipman]

Not there. But a week later, he's still going fucking crazy in thread after thread after thread no matter how many times I try to rationally deal with him and those people like you who rally to his side DESPITE the fact that you know some of the things he's said to me about my daughter in the past.

Nothing I said was excessive, but it was a serious enough of a charge to get you interested in being one of Throb's willing tools even as you yourself understand his total lack of character, you think it expedient to go down to his level, for some reason...

Now that's an attack.

How did I "go down to his level?" Because I don't think asking a question is an attack? Or because I don't agree with you?

And you do recall that when I have criticized Rob in the past for comments he made about your daughter you berated me for doing so saying you didn't need me to defend you.

Remember?

 

[off2bed]

You have to put on the left's special marX-ray vision glasses to see that legal adjustments to income and legitimate tax deductions are "benefits" identical to receiving a welfare check.

Never mind that you have to earn money to qualify for the income adjustments, while you have to specifically NOT earn diddly squat to collect welfare.

Same with the term "subsidy." To the left, an earned tax break is a subsidy.

 

[Adre]

You recently said, in another thread, that all Democrats were liars, angry, bitter liars.

Would that be an example of excessive? Or just ignorant?

 

[off2bed]

You recently said, in another thread, that all Democrats were liars, angry, bitter liars.

Would that be an example of excessive? Or just ignorant?

None of the above; it would be the truth.

 

[Adre]

None of the above; it would be the truth.

I did not ask you, petunia.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It seems to me that you are saying any benefit beyond a "safety net" is excessive.

What comprises the safety net?

I do not know why it seems like that to you or why you would allow the racist homophobe to draw you into his personal vendetta.

We have already seen that the close interdependence of all economic phenomena makes it difficult to stop planning just where we wish and that, once the free working of the market is impeded beyond a certain degree, the planner will be forced to extend his control until they become all-comprehensive. These economic considerations, which explain why it is impossible to stop deliberate control just where we would wish, are strongly reinforced by certain social or political tendencies whose strength makes itself increasingly felt as planning extends.

Once it becomes increasingly true, and is generally recognized, that the position of the individual is determined not by impersonal forces, not as a result of the competitive efforts of many, but by the deliberate decision of authority; the attitude of the people towards their position in the social order necessarily changes. There will always exist inequalities which appear just to those who suffer, disappointments which will appear unmerited, and strokes of misfortune which those hit have not deserved. But when these things occur in a society which is consciously directed, they way in which people will react will be very different from what it is when they are nobody's conscious choice.
From Who, Whom?
FA Hayek, Road to Serfdom, Chapter eight p. 137

What class does not solicit the favors of the state? It would seem as if the principle of life resided in it. Aside from the innumerable horde of its own agents, agriculture, manufacturing, commerce, the arts, the theatre, the colonies, and the shipping industry expect everything from it. They want it to clear and irrigate land, to colonize, to teach, and even to amuse. Each begs a bounty, a subsidy, an incentive, and especially the gratuitous gift of certain services, such as education and credit. And why not ask the state for the gratuitous gift of all services? Why not require the state to provide all the citizens with food, drink, clothing, and shelter free of charge?

... under the name of the state the citizens taken collectively are considered as a real being, having its own life, its own wealth, independently of the lives and the wealth of the citizens themselves; and then each addresses this fictitious being, some to obtain from it education, others employment, others credit, others food, etc., etc. Now the state can give nothing to the citizens that it has not first taken from them.
Frédéric Bastiat

All I did was ask, who pays for all of this?

Answer: The Middle Class

Yet of late, the big buzz has been the disappearing Middle Class and what government can do to help them, what programs, what tax cuts, what can we do to reduce the rich and I ponder if it is not our insistence upon helping the Middle Class actually having helping exacerbate their plight. I think it is a valid point, not the least bit "excessive."

 

[Saint Peter]

Your playing the part of a hurt little pussy is excessive.

 

[off2bed]

I did not ask you, petunia.

That's MISTER Petunia, to you.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You recently said, in another thread, that all Democrats were liars, angry, bitter liars.

Would that be an example of excessive? Or just ignorant?

No, that is hoping to shame some people who know Throb very well and know better than to get around and roll in the mud with him, but despite all their protestations at being lumped in with him, they just cannot seem to help themselves once he gets going on someone with which they have political differences with.

Here's just a small sampling of some of the things he has said about my daughter:
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=745068

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Your playing the part of a hurt little pussy is excessive.

I'm not trying to play a part.

I'm trying to clean up threads which have nothing to do with Throb's daily attacks.

If he has to troll me, then here is the place for him to do it in.

I don't want to get put on ignore because of his antics.

Why do you so quickly go to his level?

You know what he is.

I think he actually takes more delight in watching you guys morph into him than he takes in trolling...

It gives him stature and credibility in his dark little mind.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

None of the above; it would be the truth.

Contemporary leftists, on the other hand, view their opponents as people you send off to the Gulag, unworthy of any respect, deserving of any kind of low blow, no matter how foul. So you accuse Goldwater of insanity, slander Justice Thomas as a sexual monster, casually publish plays, books, and films calling for the assassination of President Bush, and assault the first serious Republican female candidate at her weakest point -- her family. And of course, you scream to high heaven if any form of turnabout occurs in your direction, as in the case of the Obama family, which was declared "off limits" early in the presidential campaign, at the same time that Palin's family was being stretched on the media rack.

This style of political loathing has become effectively innate. It has been systemized to such a degree as to become integral. Modern liberalism cannot do without it. An entire structure has been erected on the basis of political hatred, and from that structure a whole new strategy has arisen.
J.R. Dunn

Throb is such a valuable tool because he gets his fellows to prove this on almost a daily basis.

They know they should put him on ignore, but the enemy of my enemy is a serious and valuable ally...

 

[Adre]

No, that is hoping to shame some people who know Throb very well and know better than to get around and roll in the mud with him, but despite all their protestations at being lumped in with him, they just cannot seem to help themselves once he gets going on someone with which they have political differences with.

Here's just a small sampling of some of the things he has said about my daughter:
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=745068

That's all interesting to somebody I suppose, but words have meaning. I read what you said.

 

[Saint Peter]

You are always quick to say I am on his level. This could not be farther from the truth. I have asked him to cool it with your family in the past. I am not a searcher or I would go retrieve those posts and place them here. Not just once, numerous times.

I understand there is guilt by association. I put you and busybody in the same boat. I will take my lumps on Rob in the same way.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Contemporary leftists, on the other hand, view their opponents as people you send off to the Gulag, unworthy of any respect, deserving of any kind of low blow, no matter how foul. So you accuse Goldwater of insanity, slander Justice Thomas as a sexual monster, casually publish plays, books, and films calling for the assassination of President Bush, and assault the first serious Republican female candidate at her weakest point -- her family. And of course, you scream to high heaven if any form of turnabout occurs in your direction, as in the case of the Obama family, which was declared "off limits" early in the presidential campaign, at the same time that Palin's family was being stretched on the media rack.

This style of political loathing has become effectively innate. It has been systemized to such a degree as to become integral. Modern liberalism cannot do without it. An entire structure has been erected on the basis of political hatred, and from that structure a whole new strategy has arisen.
J.R. Dunn

Throb is such a valuable tool because he gets his fellows to prove this on almost a daily basis.

They know they should put him on ignore, but the enemy of my enemy is a serious and valuable ally...

Historically such acrimony is the overture to civil war.

 

[Comshaw]

No, what I said is clear. We went from safety net to having to "save" the middle class, one of the current Democrat memes and I merely ask, "What will it cost to save the Middle Class?" Will we not end up destroying the Middle Class with each new benefit designed to "save" it?

Excessive is a charge, nothing more.

It is an attack.

The modern Democrats seems to believe that in heated attack you win silence from across the aisle and thus the debate. On many issues, we see the blistering rhetoric, being the loudest and hardest to answer in a rational way, being taken as being in the right, only for the bitter, angry voices to be shocked by the voters to surprisingly find out that all the noise was not being in the right, but being the loudest from Wisconsin to the 31 states where Gay Marriage was defeated despite all the polling showing that the Unions and the Gays had the full support of "the majority" of Americans, which just, to me. goes to prove the validity of the Wilder/Bradley Effect theory.

People like Throb think they are winning by being vicious, but all they do is create a silent majority who doesn't want to discuss any issues of the day for fear of being lathered with spittle...

It is an attack. But it has nothing to do with Democrats, Republicans, Centrist, Extremist or any other political affiliation. it does however have to do with two people who love to piss in each other's boot.

That being said, let's look at your statement shall we? You said:
"Why the hell does the "Middle Class" need so many benefits, and to what cost?"

The word excessive can be interchanged with the term "so many" in your sentence very easily without changing the apparent meaning of the sentence. When I say apparent, it's because most anyone reading it would take it to mean the same thing, the middle class has more benefits then you deem necessary or required, in other words they are excessive.

If that's not what you mean, you need to back up and clarify what you did mean, otherwise your audience is lost and will interpret it as they see fit rather then how you wanted them to see it.

You can always cling to the position you've taken. In that case the only person being convince of anything is you. But then you've already made up your mind, so why all the effort to convince yourself?

Choose wisely.

Definition of excess from:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/excess

Definition:
Noun 1. excess - a quantity much larger than is neededexcess - a quantity much larger than is needed
nimiety, surplus, surplusage
overmuch, overmuchness, superabundance, overabundance - a quantity that is more than what is appropriate; "four-year-olds have an overabundance of energy"; "we received an inundation of email"
2. excess - immoderation as a consequence of going beyond sufficient or permitted limits
excessiveness, inordinateness
immoderateness, immoderation - the quality of being excessive and lacking in moderation
extravagance, extravagancy - the quality of exceeding the appropriate limits of decorum or probability or truth; "we were surprised by the extravagance of his description"
exorbitance, outrageousness - excessive excess
overplus, plethora, superfluity, embarrassment - extreme excess; "an embarrassment of riches"
3. excess - the state of being more than full
overabundance, surfeit
fullness - the condition of being filled to capacity
4. excess - excessive indulgence; "the child was spoiled by overindulgence"
overindulgence
humoring, indulging, pampering, indulgence - the act of indulging or gratifying a desire
Adj. 1. excess - more than is needed, desired, or required; "trying to lose excess weight"; "found some extra change lying on the dresser"; "yet another book on heraldry might be thought redundant"; "skills made redundant by technological advance"; "sleeping in the spare room"; "supernumerary ornamentation"; "it was supererogatory of her to gloat"; "delete superfluous (or unnecessary) words"; "extra ribs as well as other supernumerary internal parts"; "surplus cheese distributed to the needy"
extra, redundant, supererogatory, supernumerary, surplus, superfluous, spare
unnecessary, unneeded - not necessary



Comshaw