Paul Ryan's speech-- case study in lies by ommission.

[Evil Semp]

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Greed is wanting something you do not have. Greed is even worse when it's wanting to actually take what someone else has and keep it for yourself.

Like more money? I have 8 million but I want 10 million.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/greed

[PLAYER57832]

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Obviously, its the cashier who actually thinks his job is worth enough to make a living. That is just not reasonable!

[PLAYER57832]

Yep, those poor deprived rich people. Their coffers keep growing, America goes down the tubes economically (with some restoration due to the stimulus, other reviled Obama policies).. but you still think the answer is to give the wealthy more tax breaks!

I didn't know fighting against tax hikes was considered giving the wealthy more tax breaks. No wonder why conservatives always "lie", the definitions of words keep changing after they say them!!

It is when allowing the tax breaks to continue means kids no longer get school lunches, old people cannot get healthcare and education is no longer freely available to all.

You may want to return to the "good old days" of child labor, locked emergency exits and extremely dangerous conditions for starvation wages, all considered "perfectly reasonable" so the people at the top could have "decent livings".

The wealthy society did not just happen. It takes a base of well fed, educated workers and stability that comes from having people fed and reasonably healthy in decent homes.

When it comes to Medicare, insurance companies are just not covering people.

Because the government doesn't pay out the full costs of the care. If any other insurance stopped paying out what they are charged, the doctors would stop taking that insurance company. That's why they either don't take Medicare patients or charge more to people who have real insurance.

Oh were on earth do you get this stuff!

Doctors are quite happy to take Medicare. Its usually far less hassle than dealing with any but the top tier blue cross plans (even the highmark plans have their limits) Insurance companies keep cutting payments and demanding more.

Insurance cuts mean more uninsured and underinsured people, which is a far bigger factor in increased medical costs than Medicare!

[Night Strike]

This is a PDF that may or may not work.

http://www.everettclinic.com/About_Us/Legislative_Advocacy/Current_Health_Issues/Medicare%20Reimbursement.ashx?p=1011

[Night Strike]

Yep, those poor deprived rich people. Their coffers keep growing, America goes down the tubes economically (with some restoration due to the stimulus, other reviled Obama policies).. but you still think the answer is to give the wealthy more tax breaks!

I didn't know fighting against tax hikes was considered giving the wealthy more tax breaks. No wonder why conservatives always "lie", the definitions of words keep changing after they say them!!

It is when allowing the tax breaks to continue means kids no longer get school lunches, old people cannot get healthcare and education is no longer freely available to all.

You may want to return to the "good old days" of child labor, locked emergency exits and extremely dangerous conditions for starvation wages, all considered "perfectly reasonable" so the people at the top could have "decent livings".

I hope that quote helps prove how you and the Democratic Party are extreme in your views of the world. If anyone disagrees with your positions, they automatically want to return to hurting and killing poorer people. It's an insane leap to take and absolutely destroys any chance of real discourse about how to reign in deficit spending.

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Greed is wanting something you do not have. Greed is even worse when it's wanting to actually take what someone else has and keep it for yourself.

Like more money? I have 8 million but I want 10 million.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/greed

They negotiate for that pay, they don't demand that the government take it from someone else first.

[PLAYER57832]

This is a PDF that may or may not work.

http://www.everettclinic.com/About_Us/Legislative_Advocacy/Current_Health_Issues/Medicare%20Reimbursement.ashx?p=1011

It worked, but its an opinion piece.

I don't have time right now to dig up the data, but we have been through this before in the healthcare thread with the title that Phattscotty keeps changing. Teh point isn't that some places deny seniors care. That happens, and it happens whether the doctors really have a legitimate gripe or not. The issue is what has more impact. You insist that Medicare is harming seniors more than insurance companies would. The evidence shows otherwise. Blue Cross/ Blue shield, even at the Highmark tier (the highest tier, where you actually get pretty good insurance from them), has a whole string of policies that restrict and inhibit the care people get.. and NOT for legitimate medical reasons.

[Symmetry]

[url=http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CEcQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aha.org%2Fcontent%2F00-10%2F08-medicare-shortfall.pdf&ei=06VGUOmEMsHfqgGFsIBg&usg=AFQjCNHEth4USdipfpP3CkmbS3kh1hq2WQ]This is a PDF that may or may not work./url]

http://www.everettclinic.com/About_Us/Legislative_Advocacy/Current_Health_Issues/Medicare%20Reimbursement.ashx?p=1011

That first link throws up a lot of malware warnings. Google chrome isn't a fan. Do you have a non-malware source?

[thegreekdog]

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Obviously, its the cashier who actually thinks his job is worth enough to make a living. That is just not reasonable!

What does the cashier's wage have to do with anything? Are you suggesting the CEO should give up his or her own salary to ensure that the cashier only has to work one job, rather than two? Should the government mandate this in some way?

[Evil Semp]

Yep, those poor deprived rich people. Their coffers keep growing, America goes down the tubes economically (with some restoration due to the stimulus, other reviled Obama policies).. but you still think the answer is to give the wealthy more tax breaks!

I didn't know fighting against tax hikes was considered giving the wealthy more tax breaks. No wonder why conservatives always "lie", the definitions of words keep changing after they say them!!

It is when allowing the tax breaks to continue means kids no longer get school lunches, old people cannot get healthcare and education is no longer freely available to all.

You may want to return to the "good old days" of child labor, locked emergency exits and extremely dangerous conditions for starvation wages, all considered "perfectly reasonable" so the people at the top could have "decent livings".

I hope that quote helps prove how you and the Democratic Party are extreme in your views of the world. If anyone disagrees with your positions, they automatically want to return to hurting and killing poorer people. It's an insane leap to take and absolutely destroys any chance of real discourse about how to reign in deficit spending.

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Greed is wanting something you do not have. Greed is even worse when it's wanting to actually take what someone else has and keep it for yourself.

Like more money? I have 8 million but I want 10 million.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/greed

They negotiate for that pay, they don't demand that the government take it from someone else first.

But maybe if people were paid a fair wage the spending on "hand outs" would decrease thus lowering the deficit a little.

So someone who accepts food stamps when they are out of work is greedy? Someone who needs help is greedy? There are some who cheat the system but a vast majority who accept the assistance need it. I don't call that greed.

Now I will make up my definition of greed like you did.

Greed is wanting something so bad that you don't care about others.

[Evil Semp]

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Obviously, its the cashier who actually thinks his job is worth enough to make a living. That is just not reasonable!

What does the cashier's wage have to do with anything? Are you suggesting the CEO should give up his or her own salary to ensure that the cashier only has to work one job, rather than two? Should the government mandate this in some way?

I am saying that CEO pay is way out of line when you pay your employees so little that they have to ask the government for help so the corporation can make a bigger profit. Maybe the government should mandate it.

[Night Strike]

But maybe if people were paid a fair wage the spending on "hand outs" would decrease thus lowering the deficit a little.

People get paid wages based on the (perceived) value they provide to the company. It's not the company's job to pay a person based on the lifestyle the worker wants to live. A person is not going to be paid $30 per hour if they only add $10 per hour value to the company. If the workers wants to make more money, it's their role to either better themselves to get that money or find a different company that puts more value on their position.

So someone who accepts food stamps when they are out of work is greedy? Someone who needs help is greedy? There are some who cheat the system but a vast majority who accept the assistance need it. I don't call that greed.

Now I will make up my definition of greed like you did.

Greed is wanting something so bad that you don't care about others.

There is value in providing a safety net; we do not need to provide a free paycheck. Today we do the latter, not the former.

[Phatscotty]

Yep, those poor deprived rich people. Their coffers keep growing, America goes down the tubes economically (with some restoration due to the stimulus, other reviled Obama policies).. but you still think the answer is to give the wealthy more tax breaks!

I didn't know fighting against tax hikes was considered giving the wealthy more tax breaks. No wonder why conservatives always "lie", the definitions of words keep changing after they say them!!

It is when allowing the tax breaks to continue means kids no longer get school lunches, old people cannot get healthcare and education is no longer freely available to all.

You may want to return to the "good old days" of child labor, locked emergency exits and extremely dangerous conditions for starvation wages, all considered "perfectly reasonable" so the people at the top could have "decent livings".

I hope that quote helps prove how you and the Democratic Party are extreme in your views of the world. If anyone disagrees with your positions, they automatically want to return to hurting and killing poorer people. It's an insane leap to take and absolutely destroys any chance of real discourse about how to reign in deficit spending.

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Greed is wanting something you do not have. Greed is even worse when it's wanting to actually take what someone else has and keep it for yourself.

Like more money? I have 8 million but I want 10 million.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/greed

They negotiate for that pay, they don't demand that the government take it from someone else first.

But maybe if people were paid a fair wage the spending on "hand outs" would decrease thus lowering the deficit a little.

So someone who accepts food stamps when they are out of work is greedy? Someone who needs help is greedy? There are some who cheat the system but a vast majority who accept the assistance need it. I don't call that greed.

Now I will make up my definition of greed like you did.

Greed is wanting something so bad that you don't care about others.

Yes, if people were paid a fair wage, it would. No, someone who accpets foostamps is not greedy, nor does that fit the answer I gave you, but to take your response anyways, the person who accepts food stamps and sell them for cash....yes that person is greedy.

It's not my definition. I think when someone reaches the point that they claim they deserve your earnings, and try to make you feel guilty for wanting to keep the fruits of your own labor,I think many can agree that is greed. One person is taking something from another person.

[Night Strike]

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Obviously, its the cashier who actually thinks his job is worth enough to make a living. That is just not reasonable!

What does the cashier's wage have to do with anything? Are you suggesting the CEO should give up his or her own salary to ensure that the cashier only has to work one job, rather than two? Should the government mandate this in some way?

I am saying that CEO pay is way out of line when you pay your employees so little that they have to ask the government for help so the corporation can make a bigger profit. Maybe the government should mandate it.

If the government stopped subsidizing the companies, they would have to pay more because otherwise there would be fewer people to buy their products.

[thegreekdog]

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Obviously, its the cashier who actually thinks his job is worth enough to make a living. That is just not reasonable!

What does the cashier's wage have to do with anything? Are you suggesting the CEO should give up his or her own salary to ensure that the cashier only has to work one job, rather than two? Should the government mandate this in some way?

I am saying that CEO pay is way out of line when you pay your employees so little that they have to ask the government for help so the corporation can make a bigger profit. Maybe the government should mandate it.

Who is asking the government for help in your scenario? The cashier or the CEO?

I'm not in favor of any government-provided subsidies, including those provided to companies who in turn provide the politician certain benefits. I'm less concerned with such subsidies because neither party provides a platform from which to stop such subsidies.

[Evil Semp]

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Obviously, its the cashier who actually thinks his job is worth enough to make a living. That is just not reasonable!

What does the cashier's wage have to do with anything? Are you suggesting the CEO should give up his or her own salary to ensure that the cashier only has to work one job, rather than two? Should the government mandate this in some way?

I am saying that CEO pay is way out of line when you pay your employees so little that they have to ask the government for help so the corporation can make a bigger profit. Maybe the government should mandate it.

If the government stopped subsidizing the companies, they would have to pay more because otherwise there would be fewer people to buy their products.

Isn't that the way it should work? Pay your people more, your people spend more so the government assistance programs aren't needed as much. Sounds like a win win situation to me.

[Juan_Bottom]

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-06-20/us/u ... e?_s=PM:US

Oracle CEO Larry Ellison has bought 98% of the Hawaiian island of Lana'i, according to a statement from the governor of Hawaii.

Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie said, "It is my understanding that Mr. Ellison has had a long-standing interest in Lana'i. His passion for nature, particularly the ocean, is well-known specifically in the realm of America's Cup sailing."

Ellison bought the island from Castle & Cooke, whose owner, David Murdock, is also the majority stock holder in the Dole Food Company.

Lana'i once grew 75% of the world's pineapples, according to the Honolulu Advertiser newspaper.

According to Castle & Cooke's website, the company employs nearly half of the island's 3,200 residents and was in the process of constructing a solar farm with the goal of making the entire island operate on renewable energy.

Ellison, who was No. 6 on Forbes' World billionaires list with a net worth of $36 billion, isn't the only billionaire to buy his own island. Richard Branson owns a private island in the British Virgin Islands.

Branson has substantial reason to be envious, however. Ellison's island is more than 1,100 times larger.

He recently laid off 1,500 employees. Then he bought an island.
THOSE GODDAMN SLOUCHERS.

[thegreekdog]

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-06-20/us/us_hawaii-ellison-island_1_billionaires-list-private-island-castle-cooke?_s=PM:US

Oracle CEO Larry Ellison has bought 98% of the Hawaiian island of Lana'i, according to a statement from the governor of Hawaii.

Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie said, "It is my understanding that Mr. Ellison has had a long-standing interest in Lana'i. His passion for nature, particularly the ocean, is well-known specifically in the realm of America's Cup sailing."

Ellison bought the island from Castle & Cooke, whose owner, David Murdock, is also the majority stock holder in the Dole Food Company.

Lana'i once grew 75% of the world's pineapples, according to the Honolulu Advertiser newspaper.

According to Castle & Cooke's website, the company employs nearly half of the island's 3,200 residents and was in the process of constructing a solar farm with the goal of making the entire island operate on renewable energy.

Ellison, who was No. 6 on Forbes' World billionaires list with a net worth of $36 billion, isn't the only billionaire to buy his own island. Richard Branson owns a private island in the British Virgin Islands.

Branson has substantial reason to be envious, however. Ellison's island is more than 1,100 times larger.

He recently laid off 1,500 employees. Then he bought an island.
THOSE GODDAMN SLOUCHERS.

Oooh... I wonder if this is his Libertarian paradise island.

[Juan_Bottom]

You're probably either thinking of Lithuania or Somalia.

[Woodruff]

That's right. Don't worry about the 50% of the country not chipping in shit, but getting tons of freebies. worry about the 1% who pay 35% of all the bills....and don't worry about the rich saying "FU you greedy pigs. If you aren't happy with the trillion dollars we pay in, then I'm leaving America, and you won't get another penny from me"

Lol- as if you're part of the 1%. You're welcome to crash on my couch in the UK when you leave.

I am absolutely convinced that Phatscotty is one of those people that votes for Republican policies because he always envisions himself as only "temporarily not wealthy", not recognizing the terrible ways that he's voting against himself.

[Woodruff]

I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

Greed is wanting something you do not have.

That's really not true. I mean, that is one form. But if you want the definition, it is "Intense and selfish desire for something, esp. wealth, power, or food."

[BigBallinStalin]

That's right. Don't worry about the 50% of the country not chipping in shit, but getting tons of freebies. worry about the 1% who pay 35% of all the bills....and don't worry about the rich saying "FU you greedy pigs. If you aren't happy with the trillion dollars we pay in, then I'm leaving America, and you won't get another penny from me"

To answer the comment above I would say "DON'T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU IN THE ASS ON THE WAY OUT."


http://www.ehow.com/info_8034082_averag ... mpany.html


I don't understand who the greedy pigs are. Is it the cashier at the local store who has to work two jobs just to make enough money to get by? Or is it the CEO of a Fortune company who makes 10.8 million a year or 344 time what the average American makes? How much is to much?

When benefits received are more than the value of one's productivity.

[PLAYER57832]

They negotiate for that pay, they don't demand that the government take it from someone else first.

Really? So they don't employ workers for wages so low the government must subsidize them just so they can put food on the table?

They don't decide to just cut the pay of workers or not give them raises so the company can show a nicer profit margin to the stockholders?

Seems like they very much DO get what they have off the backs of others.

[thegreekdog]

You're probably either thinking of Lithuania or Somalia.

No, I was thinking of a different guy. There is a guy associated with some computer-type company who wants to make a Libertarian island. I can't remember his name or the company.

[BigBallinStalin]

Are you talking about the Seasteading Institute?