Some are more equal than others...

[UncleBuck]

gotta get past the Reductio Ad Retardum Level where you transform the content of statements, twisting them into bizarre mutant creations which only you can slay, before we get to the Final Boss Level where you scream "That's Racist" over and over.

of course we are currently trapped in the Derailment Level, where you attempt to sidetrack the argument and drive the entire thread into an area where screaming "That's Racist!!" doesnt seem so retarded.

unfortunately, Rapesey's idiotic assumptions remain the star of the show, as he tirelessly recycles the worn out claims of the Occupytards and pretends his constant creation of "new" threads, which are indistinguishable from all his previous "New" threads isnt a direct result of his humiliating failures

this thread will circle the bowl exactly the same way observed in the previous incarnations of this selfsame "Teh 1% R Steeling Frum Mee!!" thread.

Rapesey claims X ("Teh 1% R Teh Reesun Their Is Poor Ppl", "Republicans R Teh Devil", etc.)
Rapesey's claims are refuted over and over.
Rapesey finestones his claims, moving the goalposts, and redefines his assertions until they are unrecognizable.
Rapesey declares everyone who disagrees is "Part Of Teh Cunspirahsee"
Rapesey responds to demand for evidence to support his claims with "Doo Ur Own Reeserch!!"
Rapesey declares victory
Rapesey makes another thread using the same argument and starts it all over again.

so why are you derailing this thread with preemptive, overcompensating defenses of racism and republicans?

 

[Red1966]

Where is your evidence for this claim?

Because it's complete bullshit.

The reason every measurable metric shows wealth inequality increasing near 1980 is because of 4 supreme court cases;



(2010) Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission (restricting independent political expenditures by a nonprofit corporation)

(2014) McCutcheon v. Federal Elections Commission - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._Federal_Election_Commission (All political campaign contribution limits are unconstitutional)

Court cases in 2010 and 2014 caused changes in 1980? Do realize how stupid you sound? No, obviously not. Seems like every day you cite something that either disproves your statements or makes them look foolish, or both.

 

[Dr Kynes]

I didn't bring up the global economy after WW2, Harrekin did as "the only reason" economic inequality decreased from 1945-1970, but failed to address or acknowledge what changed to reverse that trend

Economic inequality increased ~1980 because the Supreme Court ruled campaign spending limits are unconstitutional in 1976 in Buckley v. Valeo and ruled that corporations have first amendment rights in 1978 in the First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti

Here is the FEC Litigation page that summarizes it; http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation_CCA_B.shtml

Here are both cases in their entirety;

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=424&invol=1

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=435&invol=765

You'll find the exact same information on Wikipedia

So what you get when you remove spending limits and tell multinational corporations they have first amendment rights is increased economic inequality with 93% of growth going to the top 1% from 1980-present.

Here's a handy graph that illustrates this;

Here is a graph depicting the distribution of wealth in America;

Citizens United in 2010 & McCutcheon v. FEC in 2013 compounded the issue by prohibiting the federal government from restricting independent political expenditures & ruling all political campaign contributions are unconstitutional, effectively transferring the power of the vote from the American people to multinational corporations

If you can identify the part where I'm blaming republicans for any of this, point it out. If you can spot where I'm wrong, tell me, lets have a little chat about it without your constant addition of adhoms

Why does every measurable metric show the same thing, economic inequality shooting up right at the start of the '80's and increasing ever since? What was the cause of that if not everything I just stated?

your delightful wall of pointless bullshit does not explain why, in response to the assertion regarding Post WW2 global economics, you felt the rebuttal should be some court cases on US electoral regulations.

you maintain this pretense still, repeating and reinforcing this nonsense with even more wildly irrelevant claims.


just like your "global warming" graphs, you start your timeline at a historic low, and attempt to give the impression that somehow this is proof of your claims, and these claims are now somehow relevant .

it's a double fallacy.

adding in OPINION POLL bullshit as if it were proof of anything other than SOME OPINIONS is simply retarded.

make your claim, explain why you believe it, then support it.

this Texas Sharpshooter nonsense is tiresome.

 

[Padawanbater2]

your delightful wall of pointless bullshit does not explain why, in response to the assertion regarding Post WW2 global economics, you felt the rebuttal should be some court cases on US electoral regulations.

you maintain this pretense still, repeating and reinforcing this nonsense with even more wildly irrelevant claims.


just like your "global warming" graphs, you start your timeline at a historic low, and attempt to give the impression that somehow this is proof of your claims, and these claims are now somehow relevant .

it's a double fallacy.

adding in OPINION POLL bullshit as if it were proof of anything other than SOME OPINIONS is simply retarded.

make your claim, explain why you believe it, then support it.

this Texas Sharpshooter nonsense is tiresome.

Why does every measurable metric show the same thing, economic inequality shooting up right at the start of the '80's and increasing ever since? What was the cause of that if not everything I just stated?

 

[Dr Kynes]

so why are you derailing this thread with preemptive, overcompensating defenses of racism and republicans?

why cant you tell the difference between "Derailment" and Accurate Predictions of where the thread will go, based on your collected works.


you will attempt to derail this thread, start a pissing match, degenerate into name calling, and screaming "That's Racist!!" until you burst a hemorrhoid and the Butthurt drives you to seek your Primary Obamacare Provider.


im just officially InB4, declaring exactly how you will do the same shit you ALWAYS do, thus subverting your "achievements", and demonstrating that you are in fact a Twat.

 

[Red1966]

Where is your evidence for this claim?

Because it's complete bullshit.

The reason every measurable metric shows wealth inequality increasing near 1980 is because of 4 supreme court cases;

(1976) Buckley v. Valeo - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckley_v._Valeo (No limits on spending in campaigns)

(1978 ) First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_National_Bank_of_Boston_v._Bellotti (Corporations have first amendment rights)

(2010) Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission (restricting independent political expenditures by a nonprofit corporation)

(2014) McCutcheon v. Federal Elections Commission - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._Federal_Election_Commission (All political campaign contribution limits are unconstitutional)



According to the article in the OP, they can afford to do that now. Annual record breaking profits. The problem is 93% of it goes to the top 1%. The money is there, the allocation of it is the problem



I would love to see some evidence of this. Now will you man up and provide it or backpedal and not even address it?



Every single full time job in this country should pay a living wage, if a business can't pay that, that business shouldn't be in business because providing for your employees is part of being in business.

The point of business is profit, not charity. You can live eating out of dumpsters and sleeping under bridges, so nothing is technically a "living wage".If my choice was to pay you a minimum of $15.00/hr or not hire you at all, I wouldn't hire you. I'd hire someone worth that $15.00/hr. This is why you get paid shit wages. It's all you're worth, Mr. "I only wish I made $900.00 a month".

 

[Dr Kynes]

copy/paste repetition of previous claims.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-texas-sharpshooter

 

[UncleBuck]

why cant you tell the difference between "Derailment" and Accurate Predictions of where the thread will go

looks a lot like derailment to me in order to lavish praise on your republican heroes and deny that anything you say is ever racist.

 

[Red1966]

Where is your evidence for this claim?

Because it's complete bullshit.

The reason every measurable metric shows wealth inequality increasing near 1980 is because of 4 supreme court cases;

(1976) Buckley v. Valeo - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckley_v._Valeo (No limits on spending in campaigns)

(1978 ) First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_National_Bank_of_Boston_v._Bellotti (Corporations have first amendment rights)

(2010) Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission (restricting independent political expenditures by a nonprofit corporation)

(2014) McCutcheon v. Federal Elections Commission - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._Federal_Election_Commission (All political campaign contribution limits are unconstitutional)



According to the article in the OP, they can afford to do that now. Annual record breaking profits. The problem is 93% of it goes to the top 1%. The money is there, the allocation of it is the problem



I would love to see some evidence of this. Now will you man up and provide it or backpedal and not even address it?



Every single full time job in this country should pay a living wage, if a business can't pay that, that business shouldn't be in business because providing for your employees is part of being in business.

Profits are counted AFTER wages are deducted, idiot.

 

[Padawanbater2]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-texas-sharpshooter

Tell me where I'm wrong and lets have an honest discussion about it

 

[sheskunk]

so why are you derailing this thread with preemptive, overcompensating defenses of racism and republicans?

Could just post dick clouds.

 

[Dr Kynes]

looks a lot like derailment to me in order to lavish praise on your republican heroes and deny that anything you say is ever racist.

 

[Red1966]

I didn't bring up the global economy after WW2, Harrekin did as "the only reason" economic inequality decreased from 1945-1970, but failed to address or acknowledge what changed to reverse that trend

Economic inequality increased ~1980 because the Supreme Court ruled campaign spending limits are unconstitutional in 1976 in Buckley v. Valeo and ruled that corporations have first amendment rights in 1978 in the First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti

Here is the FEC Litigation page that summarizes it; http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation_CCA_B.shtml

Here are both cases in their entirety;

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=424&invol=1

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=435&invol=765

You'll find the exact same information on Wikipedia

So what you get when you remove spending limits and tell multinational corporations they have first amendment rights is increased economic inequality with 93% of growth going to the top 1% from 1980-present.

Here's a handy graph that illustrates this;

Here is a graph depicting the distribution of wealth in America;

Citizens United in 2010 & McCutcheon v. FEC in 2013 compounded the issue by prohibiting the federal government from restricting independent political expenditures & ruling all political campaign contributions are unconstitutional, effectively transferring the power of the vote from the American people to multinational corporations


If you can identify the part where I'm blaming republicans for any of this, point it out. If you can spot where I'm wrong, tell me, lets have a little chat about it without your constant addition of adhoms

Why does every measurable metric show the same thing, economic inequality shooting up right at the start of the '80's and increasing ever since? What was the cause of that if not everything I just stated?

So your contention is that free speech causes income equality? I guess you need to be silenced, for the good of the nation. I noticed you quit claiming court rulings in 2010 and 2014 caused changes in 1980. Since that was half your argument previously, and you've now abandoned it because others pointed out how asinine it was, it undermines the entirety of the rest of it.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Tell me where I'm wrong and lets have an honest discussion about it

you are wrong in your basic assumption which SEEMS to be:

1: in 1979 the us supreme court made a ruling
2: some other shit happened over the next 30 years, but that shit is irrelevant
3: ????
4: Teh 1% R 2 Blame 4 All Teh Werldz Prolumz!

 

[Red1966]

I didn't bring up the global economy after WW2, Harrekin did as "the only reason" economic inequality decreased from 1945-1970, but failed to address or acknowledge what changed to reverse that trend

Economic inequality increased ~1980 because the Supreme Court ruled campaign spending limits are unconstitutional in 1976 in Buckley v. Valeo and ruled that corporations have first amendment rights in 1978 in the First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti

Here is the FEC Litigation page that summarizes it; http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation_CCA_B.shtml

Here are both cases in their entirety;

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=424&invol=1

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=435&invol=765

You'll find the exact same information on Wikipedia

So what you get when you remove spending limits and tell multinational corporations they have first amendment rights is increased economic inequality with 93% of growth going to the top 1% from 1980-present.

Here's a handy graph that illustrates this;

Here is a graph depicting the distribution of wealth in America;

Citizens United in 2010 & McCutcheon v. FEC in 2013 compounded the issue by prohibiting the federal government from restricting independent political expenditures & ruling all political campaign contributions are unconstitutional, effectively transferring the power of the vote from the American people to multinational corporations


If you can identify the part where I'm blaming republicans for any of this, point it out. If you can spot where I'm wrong, tell me, lets have a little chat about it without your constant addition of adhoms

Why does every measurable metric show the same thing, economic inequality shooting up right at the start of the '80's and increasing ever since? What was the cause of that if not everything I just stated?

"If you can spot where I'm wrong, tell me" OK..........

"ruling all political campaign contributions are unconstitutional," That was not the courts ruling at all.

 

[Padawanbater2]

So your contention is that free speech causes income equality? I guess you need to be silenced, for the good of the nation. I noticed you quit claiming court rulings in 2010 and 2014 caused changes in 1980. Since that was half your argument previously, and you've now abandoned it because others pointed out how asinine it was, it undermines the entirety of the rest of it.

Citizens United in 2010 & McCutcheon v. FEC in 2013 compounded the issue by prohibiting the federal government from restricting independent political expenditures & ruling all political campaign contributions are unconstitutional, effectively transferring the power of the vote from the American people to multinational corporations

you are wrong in your basic assumption which SEEMS to be:

1: in 1979 the us supreme court made a ruling
2: some other shit happened over the next 30 years, but that shit is irrelevant
3: ????
4: Teh 1% R 2 Blame 4 All Teh Werldz Prolumz!

What caused economic inequality to sharply increase starting in ~1980?

Seems like a pretty straightforward question

 

[Padawanbater2]

"If you can spot where I'm wrong, tell me" OK..........

"ruling all political campaign contributions are unconstitutional," That was not the courts ruling at all.

"McCutcheon, et al. v. FEC

Case Summary

On April 2, 2014, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC that struck down the aggregate limits on the amount an individual may contribute during a two-year period to all federal candidates, parties and political action committees combined. By a vote of 5-4, the Court ruled that the biennial aggregate limits are unconstitutional under the First Amendment."

http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/McCutcheon.shtml

 

[UncleBuck]

Could just post dick clouds.

those were chemtrail dicks.

last time i help you out.

 

[Red1966]

Tell me where I'm wrong and lets have an honest discussion about it

Now it's the "prove me wrong instead of me proving I'm right" ploy (again). You already proved yourself wrong when you claim court decisions in 2010 and 2014 caused changes in 1980.

Is "Tell me where I'm wrong and lets have an honest discussion about it" a direct quote from "Rules for Radicals"?

 

[Padawanbater2]

Now it's the "prove me wrong instead of me proving I'm right" ploy (again). You already proved yourself wrong when you claim court decisions in 2010 and 2014 caused changes in 1980.

Is "Tell me where I'm wrong and lets have an honest discussion about it" a direct quote from "Rules for Radicals"?

Citizens United in 2010 & McCutcheon v. FEC in 2013 compounded the issue by prohibiting the federal government from restricting independent political expenditures & ruling all political campaign contributions are unconstitutional, effectively transferring the power of the vote from the American people to multinational corporations