A Philosophical Question for Republicans

[chomerics]

Maybe some of you righties here can help me come to grips with the scenario, but it is something I have a hard time understanding. Why is it that people from the right side of the fence tend to focus on the small person abusing the system, while turning a blind eye to the big person abusing the system?

In other words, they seem more concerned about a welfare mother getting free butter and food from the Federal Government then when a large corporation gets billions from the government. Case in point, the oil companies have $18Billion dollars in tax breaks going to them from the federal government currently. They have made record profits for the past what, 12 quarters or something like that, and yet they still deserve a big tax break of $18 Billion dollars.

Why is it that the welfare mom draws the ire of republicans, but the oil company executive who is raping the American public and making more money then god could have possibly imagined draws not a whimper from the crowd? Free money is free money, it should go the same both ways no? Why are they not up in arms about an $18Billion dollar check to big oil, yet they are concerned about money the money going to help out people who need a little help in life.

Can someone help me come to grips with this conundrum? Is it just greed that goes through people's mind? Why is one side good and the other bad?

[Predicto]

Here's a Predicto prediction: I don't think this thread is going to go well.

[portisizzle]

Maybe some of you righties here can help me come to grips with the scenario, but it is something I have a hard time understanding. Why is it that people from the right side of the fence tend to focus on the small person abusing the system, while turning a blind eye to the big person abusing the system?

In other words, they seem more concerned about a welfare mother getting free butter and food from the Federal Government then when a large corporation gets billions from the government. Case in point, the oil companies have $18Billion dollars in tax breaks going to them from the federal government currently. They have made record profits for the past what, 12 quarters or something like that, and yet they still deserve a big tax break of $18 Billion dollars.

Why is it that the welfare mom draws the ire of republicans, but the oil company executive who is raping the American public and making more money then god could have possibly imagined draws not a whimper from the crowd? Free money is free money, it should go the same both ways no? Why are they not up in arms about an $18Billion dollar check to big oil, yet they are concerned about money the money going to help out people who need a little help in life.

Can someone help me come to grips with this conundrum? Is it just greed that goes through people's mind? Why is one side good and the other bad?

Welfare mom's don't make the world go round.

I suppose justice in your eyes would be to give "welfare mom" the job of the oil executive. Until you realize that VERY few people are capable of running such an organization. And the responsibility to do so while serving our country and the companies employees.

[zoony]

So in Chomerics bizarro-world, someone who collects welfare contributes as much to society as a multi-billion dollar corporation that employees 100k people.

Good question. Can't say I know the answer.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Welfare mom's don't make the world go round.

I suppose justice in your eyes would be to give "welfare mom" the job of the oil executive. Until you realize that VERY few people are capable of running such an organization. And the responsibility to do so while serving our country and the companies employees.

Now we all know that PS is the CEO of Exxon... you outed yourself.

[portisizzle]

Here's a Predicto prediction: I don't think this thread is going to go well.

It will work fine if we can get Chromes head out of his butt.

[portisizzle]

Now we all know that PS is the CEO of Exxon... you outed yourself.

Not nearly qualified. Few of us are.

[portisizzle]

So in Chomerics bizarro-world, someone who collects welfare contributes as much to society as a multi-billion dollar corporation that employees 100k people.

Good question. Can't say I know the answer.

Chrome = communist. It makes sense to him.

[zoony]

Corporations bad, welfare gooooood.

I think we should start punishing corporations, and heavily. They are evil and greedy. Let's start with the corporation that Chomerics works for. Then TSF. And on and on until there are no more tax revenues available to pay public defender salaries in places like San Fran.

Who's with me!

...

[Predicto]

So in Chomerics bizarro-world, someone who collects welfare contributes as much to society as a multi-billion dollar corporation that employees 100k people.

Good question. Can't say I know the answer.

I don't think that is a fair characterization of his point, is it?

It IS what I would expect a diehard partisan to say Chom's point was, but not you.

[Burgundy Burner]

You will never be able to understand it with the tone and rhetoric that you are using. Your bias is obvious - using words like "raping", "greed", and references to God/money. If you were to use verbiage that was much more rational and thought provoking, then we could have a discussion where respect for one another's views is genuine.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Not nearly qualified. Few of us are.

I could do that crap... fly to Saudi Arabia kiss some ass. Fly to DC, kiss some ass. Sit on my ass and count my money. Drink some champagne.

No problemo.

[portisizzle]

If you were to use verbiage that was much more rational and thought provoking, then we could have a discussion where respect for one another's views is genuine.

Let me know how that works out for you. :laugh:

[zoony]

You will never be able to understand it with the tone and rhetoric that you are using. Your bias is obvious - using words like "raping", "greed", and references to God/money. If you were to use verbiage that was much more rational and thought provoking, then we could have a discussion where respect for one another's views is genuine.

Hence the replies

But anyone who's read more than 5 of Chomerics posts knows this going in.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Corporations bad, welfare gooooood.

I think we should start punishing corporations, and heavily. They are evil and greedy. Let's start with the corporation that Chomerics works for. Then TSF. And on and on until there are no more tax revenues available to pay public defender salaries in places like San Fran.

Who's with me!

...

Wow, I got thrown under the bus there even before I made a real comment. (For the record, even my comment was made in pure jest.)

Too bad I don't work for a corporation though... partnership baby.

[zoony]

I could do that crap... fly to Saudi Arabia kiss some ass. Fly to DC, kiss some ass. Sit on my ass and count my money. Drink some champagne.

No problemo.

You would fold within 24 hours

.....

[portisizzle]

I could do that crap... fly to Saudi Arabia kiss some ass. Fly to DC, kiss some ass. Sit on my ass and count my money. Drink some champagne.

No problemo.

Righto.

[zoony]

Wow, I got thrown under the bus there even before I made a real comment. (For the record, even my comment was made in pure jest.)

Too bad I don't work for a corporation though... partnership baby.

:laugh: touche'

Partnerships will be on the radar once all the corporations move overseas, so no worries

[Darth Tater]

One problem is that your question makes no sense. Oil companies ARE creating value, the welfare mother you mention does not.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

:laugh: touche'

Partnerships will be on the radar once all the corporations move overseas, so no worries

Nah... once we kill the corporations, then partnerships will rule the world. BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

But, if I can make a real comment on this... I think it is real that corporate greed ends up crapping on the little guy in general. As one example, albeit an EXTREME example, that Wal-Mart case where Wal-Mart just sued and won 470,000 bucks from a woman who won 417K in a settlement for future medical costs....

I mean, stuff like that has to make any rational person question the system. At least a little bit.

[zoony]

I mean, stuff like that has to make any rational person question the system. At least a little bit.

oh absolutely. And I think it could be a great discussion in the right context.

In chom world, not so much

.....

[Mooney]

Oil companies ARE creating value, the welfare mother you mention does not.

She's a fellow human being. That's pretty valuable.

[Predicto]

One problem is that your question makes no sense. Oil companies ARE creating value, the welfare mother you mention does not.

Does the fact that they create value negate the significance of everything else they may or may not do vis a vis our tax dollars?

[Midnight Judges]

Maybe some of you righties here can help me come to grips with the scenario, but it is something I have a hard time understanding. Why is it that people from the right side of the fence tend to focus on the small person abusing the system, while turning a blind eye to the big person abusing the system?

In other words, they seem more concerned about a welfare mother getting free butter and food from the Federal Government then when a large corporation gets billions from the government. Case in point, the oil companies have $18Billion dollars in tax breaks going to them from the federal government currently. They have made record profits for the past what, 12 quarters or something like that, and yet they still deserve a big tax break of $18 Billion dollars.

Why is it that the welfare mom draws the ire of republicans, but the oil company executive who is raping the American public and making more money then god could have possibly imagined draws not a whimper from the crowd? Free money is free money, it should go the same both ways no? Why are they not up in arms about an $18Billion dollar check to big oil, yet they are concerned about money the money going to help out people who need a little help in life.

Can someone help me come to grips with this conundrum? Is it just greed that goes through people's mind? Why is one side good and the other bad?

A few theories:

Maybe they are front runners by nature. They want to side with the winner, and by all accounts, big oil has won.

Or maybe they want to reserve the right to pay 8% income tax should they get to a point where they are making $182 million in salary and stock options.

Or maybe they would prefer to be bumjacked than see someone get something for free.

Or maybe they listen to Republican radio and believe everything they hear.

[Midnight Judges]

She's a fellow human being. That's pretty valuable.

The national transportation safety board says human lives are worth about $6 million a pop. -Not literally of course but this number is used in estimating which projects get the green light.