Posted on 09/21/2012 6:51:52 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
also:
1) man exists for his own sake and not as a sacrificial animal that exists for the sake of others
2) a man is the proper beneficiary of his own action.
Indeed, absurd.
However, the reverse is true: ideas have pervasive consequences, and economic class is near unto a deterministic outcome of their actions.
And THAT is what Romney was getting at.
Exactly, “I’m gonna get me some of that obama stash. He gonna gib it to me.”
As for this: “In presidential elections, the majority vote according to what they think is right.”
Horseshit.
On the other hand, he did paint some probably god people with a very broad and probably undeserved black brush. The application to the label of dependent to 47% as all being in the entitlement class is wrong. There are some good people in the lower tax brackets who are just following the foolish tax law allowances and exclusions given by Bush II. Having so many people tax exempt was a bad idea then and a terrible idea now.
There are also people Romney branded as part of the entitlement class who are collecting SS benefits they did contribute to. It is not their responsibility that the program was managed terribly. It is our fault if we allow this foolishness to continue.
Maybe once upon a time people voted for those who uphold the principles of the Constitution but those days are long gone. Nearly half vote for the person who gives them the most of what the other half have worked for. They out breed the working class and they will out number the working class soon. Game over unless the “right” to raid the treasury of the working class is somehow ended.
The moochers are not ashamed, they think you should give
them even more. Ever seen that EBT Card rap? They are
proud that they get stuff working people have to pay for.
That class think you are stupid for working.
Whoever Harry Binswanger is, he is also a fool and a liar.
He must be a Democrat.
I hope your mother is factoring in some rate of return into her calculation and isn’t just going to stop when the amount of money received is equal to the total amount paid in. Historically, a broad-based portfolio of stocks is expected to return around 8% (and, yes this is factoring in stock market declines. It even holds true for periods that include the stock market crash preceding the Great Depression).
To be more concrete, suppose your father paid a constant amount into SS for 40 years. Using an 8% rate of return, your mother is entitled to claim just over 258 times that amout before she’s exhausted what your father paid into the system. So, if he paid say $2000 per year in for 40 years, rather than $80000, your mother would actually be entitled to claim $516,000. Quite a bit of difference!
BTW, that gives you a better idea of just how much the FICA tax REALLY costs!
Bottom line the majority of those people are going to vote for the guy who promises to keep the checks coming without cuts to the program.
This is a reality and Romney at least recognizes it.
Romney’s was a materialist’s argument—that people are always going to vote by their pocketbook, so those receiving money for the government will not vote for someone like him, who would like to at least slow down the gravy train.
His underlying assumption about human motivation is Marxian, even though he was advocating a free economy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.