http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/29/ob...ugh-money/

I kindly disagree, sir Prez -- you (nor any other POTUS) get to decide when I have made enough money.

Thank you.

(04-29-2010 10:24 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/29/ob...ugh-money/

I kindly disagree, sir Prez -- you (nor any other POTUS) get to decide when I have made enough money.

Thank you.

Wow. What a surprising post. A greedy rightwinger believes that profits are more important than morals.

Pay no mind to Roberta in the peanut gallery. Roberta's morals allow the support of terrorists. As for Obama's comments, he had another unscripted moment, he is a baboon without a teleprompter.

(04-29-2010 10:41 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Pay no mind to Roberta in the peanut gallery. Roberta's morals allow the support of terrorists. As for Obama's comments, he had another unscripted moment, he is a baboon without a teleprompter.

Hey SOAF, is your robe back from the cleaners yet?

(04-29-2010 10:43 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:41 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Pay no mind to Roberta in the peanut gallery. Roberta's morals allow the support of terrorists. As for Obama's comments, he had another unscripted moment, he is a baboon without a teleprompter.

Hey SOAF, is your robe back from the cleaners yet?

Don't own one, peanut.

(04-29-2010 10:34 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:24 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/29/ob...ugh-money/

I kindly disagree, sir Prez -- you (nor any other POTUS) get to decide when I have made enough money.

Thank you.

Wow. What a surprising post. A greedy rightwinger believes that profits are more important than morals.

What do morals have to do with honestly making money or how much you earn? Obama is a millionaire, lives for free and travels on AF1 nearly every week and it's on the tax payers dime yet he is the decider of who makes too much? What's next, will he say that at some point a person has used up too much resources and it has to end? Death panels?

Do you need more proof that Obama is a commie?

(04-29-2010 10:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:43 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:41 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Pay no mind to Roberta in the peanut gallery. Roberta's morals allow the support of terrorists. As for Obama's comments, he had another unscripted moment, he is a baboon without a teleprompter.

Hey SOAF, is your robe back from the cleaners yet?

Don't own one, peanut.

You rent your robe?

(04-29-2010 10:48 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:34 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:24 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/29/ob...ugh-money/

I kindly disagree, sir Prez -- you (nor any other POTUS) get to decide when I have made enough money.

Thank you.

Wow. What a surprising post. A greedy rightwinger believes that profits are more important than morals.

What do morals have to do with honestly making money or how much you earn? Obama is a millionaire, lives for free and travels on AF1 nearly every week and it's on the tax payers dime yet he is the decider of who makes too much? What's next, will he say that at some point a person has used up too much resources and it has to end? Death panels?

Do you need more proof that Obama is a commie?

While I don't buy the "commie" hype, the statement he made is just ridiculous.

That's the way capitalism is built - all you can eat. Now, at some point, morals should tell you that you can do a lot with your wealth to help others. Gates learned that from Buffett and became a great philanthropist.

But where that line is drawn is a personal choice, not something the government should determine.

(04-29-2010 10:53 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:43 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:41 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Pay no mind to Roberta in the peanut gallery. Roberta's morals allow the support of terrorists. As for Obama's comments, he had another unscripted moment, he is a baboon without a teleprompter.

Hey SOAF, is your robe back from the cleaners yet?

Don't own one, peanut.

You rent your robe?

Who entered the thread by attacking a black poster? You did.

See how easy that is? Conservatives can play that sillyass game as well.

(04-29-2010 10:34 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Wow. What a surprising post. A greedy rightwinger believes that profits are more important than morals.

Honest question for you...

Do you think there should be a limit or cap on someone's earnings? Assume we're talking about people working for a private business and the income was earned legally/honestly.

I'm talking about in general. Not specifically in the context of this particular Obama-Wall Street case.

(04-29-2010 10:53 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:43 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:41 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Pay no mind to Roberta in the peanut gallery. Roberta's morals allow the support of terrorists. As for Obama's comments, he had another unscripted moment, he is a baboon without a teleprompter.

Hey SOAF, is your robe back from the cleaners yet?

Don't own one, peanut.

You rent your robe?

I'll just borrow yours if I ever need one. I'll pay for the fumigation.

(04-29-2010 10:48 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:34 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:24 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/29/ob...ugh-money/

I kindly disagree, sir Prez -- you (nor any other POTUS) get to decide when I have made enough money.

Thank you.

Wow. What a surprising post. A greedy rightwinger believes that profits are more important than morals.

What do morals have to do with honestly making money or how much you earn? Obama is a millionaire, lives for free and travels on AF1 nearly every week and it's on the tax payers dime yet he is the decider of who makes too much? What's next, will he say that at some point a person has used up too much resources and it has to end? Death panels?

Do you need more proof that Obama is a commie?

I have no problems with people making money-even obscene amounts of it- as long as they don't use immoral means to obtain it.

Quote:I have no problems with people making money-even obscene amounts of it- as long as they don't use immoral means to obtain it.

Fair enough. You covered my other question.

(04-29-2010 10:54 AM)BGSUalum1987 Wrote:  That's the way capitalism is built - all you can eat. Now, at some point, morals should tell you that you can do a lot with your wealth to help others. Gates learned that from Buffett and became a great philanthropist.

But where that line is drawn is a personal choice, not something the government should determine.

Well said.

(04-29-2010 10:54 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:53 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:43 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:41 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Pay no mind to Roberta in the peanut gallery. Roberta's morals allow the support of terrorists. As for Obama's comments, he had another unscripted moment, he is a baboon without a teleprompter.

Hey SOAF, is your robe back from the cleaners yet?

Don't own one, peanut.

You rent your robe?

Who entered the thread by attacking a black poster? You did.

See how easy that is? Conservatives can play that sillyass game as well.

He will never understand that tit for tat game. He is a driveby poster, always has been, always will be.

(04-29-2010 10:54 AM)BGSUalum1987 Wrote:  That's the way capitalism is built - all you can eat. Now, at some point, morals should tell you that you can do a lot with your wealth to help others. Gates learned that from Buffett and became a great philanthropist.

I beg to differ. Gates was every bit as much a philanthropist when he grew Microsoft and provided pay to tens of thousands of employees. The big drawback is that he tried to monopolize the industry by many means except putting out a superior product.

Nevertheless, Microsoft provided jobs for many people and their products did aid in progress. Far more than any gov't social program.

That's what the left doesn't understand.

(04-29-2010 10:54 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:53 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:43 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:41 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Pay no mind to Roberta in the peanut gallery. Roberta's morals allow the support of terrorists. As for Obama's comments, he had another unscripted moment, he is a baboon without a teleprompter.

Hey SOAF, is your robe back from the cleaners yet?

Don't own one, peanut.

You rent your robe?

Who entered the thread by attacking a black poster? You did.

See how easy that is? Conservatives can play that sillyass game as well.

Sorry Rebs but your post is ridiculous. I did not attack him based on his race like SOAF did with the baboon comment. I attacked him as a rightwing nutcase not his race. But try again, I need a good laugh.

(04-29-2010 11:37 AM)RobertN Wrote:  I did not attack him based on his race like SOAF did with the baboon comment. I attacked him as a rightwing nutcase not his race.

This may be true, but I hope you remember your quote for future uses. There are literally countless instances out there where left-wingers immediately slap the race card on a conservative, even when said conservative was referring to an issue, policy or government program and not someone's skin color.

(04-29-2010 10:56 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(04-29-2010 10:34 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Wow. What a surprising post. A greedy rightwinger believes that profits are more important than morals.

Honest question for you...

Do you think there should be a limit or cap on someone's earnings? Assume we're talking about people working for a private business and the income was earned legally/honestly.

I'm talking about in general. Not specifically in the context of this particular Obama-Wall Street case.

I would not say any certain level. I am not a socialist and think everyone should have the same salary. But once you start crossing the line of morality to make money, then it is enough(though I realize morality is subjective).

Quote:I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service.

I don't see what the problem is. I don't think this implies that Obama is in favor of any sort of earnings cap. He says that, while he believes that there is a point where enough is enough, the ability to earn what you want is part of the American way. Reading it this way fits in much better with his theme of not regulating wall street to punish success (my quick take from the article) than it would to interpret this as a clarion call to "change" the American way.

I do agree with the author that the entrepreneur has no responsibility to grow the economy.