Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Too many folks still don't have a sense that tomorrow will be better than today. And so, the question in this election is which way do we go?" President Obama asked at a fundraiser in Chicago on Sunday.

"Do we go forward towards a new vision of an America in which prosperity is shared?" Obama asked. "Or do we go backward to the same policies that got us in the mess in the first place?"

"I believe we have to go forward," Obama said. "I believe we have to keep working to create an America where no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your last name is, no matter who you love, you can make it here if you try. That's what's at stake in November. That's what is why I am running for a second term as president of the United States of America.

Baldy wrote:What exactly is Chairman Obama trying to say here?

Too many folks still don't have a sense that tomorrow will be better than today. And so, the question in this election is which way do we go?" President Obama asked at a fundraiser in Chicago on Sunday.

"Do we go forward towards a new vision of an America in which prosperity is shared?" Obama asked. "Or do we go backward to the same policies that got us in the mess in the first place?"

"I believe we have to go forward," Obama said. "I believe we have to keep working to create an America where no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your last name is, no matter who you love, you can make it here if you try. That's what's at stake in November. That's what is why I am running for a second term as president of the United States of America.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... hared.html

Gil Dobie wrote:"proseperity will be shared"

Sounds like back in the USSR to me.

kalm wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:"proseperity will be shared"

Sounds like back in the USSR to me.

Since we're speaking in gross over-generalizations here, you don't think prosperity should be shared?

Gil Dobie wrote:"proseperity will be shared"

Sounds like back in the USSR to me.

Gil Dobie wrote:

kalm wrote:
Since we're speaking in gross over-generalizations here, you don't think prosperity should be shared?

The people that perform the most work should get a bigger chunk of prosperity.

kalm wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:
The people that perform the most work should get a bigger chunk of prosperity.

Define "most work".

And don't forget brains. As my friend Ivy likes to remind me, brains should be rewarded too. And I agree.

Now, how about leverage? You obviously have a better chance of receiving a bigger chunk if you have a head start.

So do you really think that anyone is suggesting the contrary or that every shared prosperity ain't a good thing?

How about ruthlessness? Cause we reward ruthlessness grandly in this culture.

D1B wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:"proseperity will be shared"

Sounds like back in the USSR to me.

Sounds pretty pragmatic to me.

Conkutopia: One super wealthy motherfucker in finance or overseas manufacturing who aint doing **** to create jobs and 40 poor/angry people

Progressive Rationalism: 11 wealthy dudes, 25 middle class consumers and 5 poor **** who can go **** themselves?

Gil Dobie wrote:

kalm wrote:
Define "most work".

And don't forget brains. As my friend Ivy likes to remind me, brains should be rewarded too. And I agree.

Now, how about leverage? You obviously have a better chance of receiving a bigger chunk if you have a head start.

So do you really think that anyone is suggesting the contrary or that every shared prosperity ain't a good thing?

How about ruthlessness? Cause we reward ruthlessness grandly in this culture.

I am thinking Obama shared prosperity means people that sits in a crack house 24x7 gets the same reward as a person that works for a living. In other words, if you have the ability to contribute to the prosperity and work 8 hours, mind, body or sole, you should not get the same reward as someone that works 12 hours, mind, body or sole all other measurements (output etc) being the same.

kalm wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:"proseperity will be shared"

Sounds like back in the USSR to me.

Since we're speaking in gross over-generalizations here, you don't think prosperity should be shared?

kalm wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:"proseperity will be shared"

Sounds like back in the USSR to me.

Since we're speaking in gross over-generalizations here, you don't think prosperity should be shared?

D1B wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:"proseperity will be shared"

Sounds like back in the USSR to me.

Sounds pretty pragmatic to me.

Conkutopia: One super wealthy motherfucker in finance or overseas manufacturing who aint doing **** to create jobs and 40 poor/angry people

Progressive Rationalism: 11 wealthy dudes, 25 middle class consumers and 5 poor **** who can go **** themselves?

Baldy wrote:

kalm wrote:
Since we're speaking in gross over-generalizations here, you don't think prosperity should be shared?

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

Bison Fan in NW MN wrote:

D1B wrote:

Sounds pretty pragmatic to me.

Conkutopia: One super wealthy motherfucker in finance or overseas manufacturing who aint doing **** to create jobs and 40 poor/angry people

Progressive Rationalism: 11 wealthy dudes, 25 middle class consumers and 5 poor **** who can go **** themselves?

Isn't progressive agendas where everyone is the same? We all contribute to the "pie" and the gov will redistribute it back to us all.

travelinman67 wrote:

Baldy wrote:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

"My dis-o-bill-it-ee check is late. I'm gonna starve or runs out uh smokes if'n I don't get some cash. We need Ba-rawk for another 4, maybe 8, years. But none uh that "work" shit."

D1B wrote:

Bison Fan in NW MN wrote:

Isn't progressive agendas where everyone is the same? We all contribute to the "pie" and the gov will redistribute it back to us all.

No. We all own the air, water, trees and land. The deal is, we're gonna allow smart fuckers like Tman a larger piece of these resources and in return we expect his intelligence and hard work to create jobs for those with less intelligence.

If he creates a lot of jobs, he will benefit immensely from the labor of the working class and he should further be rewarded by government in the form of tax breaks, loans and stipends. If he fails to create jobs and hides his money in the Cayman Islands or moves his plants to the Philippines, he will be killed by the masses.

That's the deal and that's why fucks like Hogan and DeNunZio carry guns.

Bison Fan in NW MN wrote:

D1B wrote:

Sounds pretty pragmatic to me.

Conkutopia: One super wealthy motherfucker in finance or overseas manufacturing who aint doing **** to create jobs and 40 poor/angry people

Progressive Rationalism: 11 wealthy dudes, 25 middle class consumers and 5 poor **** who can go **** themselves?

Isn't progressive agendas where everyone is the same? We all contribute to the "pie" and the gov will redistribute it back to us all.

travelinman67 wrote:

kalm wrote:
Since we're speaking in gross over-generalizations here, you don't think prosperity should be shared?

Prosperity is earned, NOT forcibly mandated by dystopian Robin Hood government.