holey kanoley! I'm a republican?

[patsopinion]

<p>I wrote this today for class.&nbsp; I thought it was so good and it was an intresting examination of who i am and what i believe as a voter.&nbsp; That said i dont feel good about feeling this.&nbsp; I grew up in sf and wasnt taught to think this way.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The question on whether or not Increasing Economic Inequality is a serious problem can be answered quite easily.&nbsp;The main issue is not how wealth is distributed or cash over time, instead three main questions arise to determine whether or not the rich getting ricer when the poor get poorer is a major issue.&nbsp;First, is the wealth of the rich, on a generational basis, being redistributed?&nbsp;Second, is it fare to judge the richest against the poorest?&nbsp;And second, is quality of life better for the poor now then previously recorded? </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The wealth of the richest one percent is being redistributed.&nbsp;This can be surmised by who is the wealthiest one percent.&nbsp;The richest one percent in this country had a great influx in the 1990&acirc;&euro;&trade;s of young, tech savvy business people.&nbsp;These people included Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and more recently the &acirc;&euro;&oelig;Google guys.&acirc;&euro;?&nbsp;This shows our society&acirc;&euro;&trade;s ability to take people from the middle class and move them up to new levels of wealth and financial success.&nbsp;Although these people cannot be considered the norm, it shows the society as a hole has a place for advancement into the richest one percent.&nbsp;This directly shows that there is no issue with our economic system because it allows for room in the upper one percent which inherently means that although the poor may or may not have the comparable assets to the poor of the past, the dream of coming to America and within three generations going from a poor blue collar immigrant to being at the top of the economic totem pole is still and achievable one.&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Is it fare to judge the richest one percent against the poor?&nbsp;The country as a hole is richer, the richest one percent of the country should not be directly compared to the poorest, and instead it should be compared to the classes below it.&nbsp;It is unfair to the richest one percent to be judged and not to judge the society as a hole.&nbsp;With the growth of wealth in the middle class and that the majority of upper middle class families that have the gross liquid assets totaling over one million dollars.&nbsp;Judging the poorest to the richest is judging outliers and is therefore unreasonable.&nbsp;Instead we should focus on the people directly above the poorest and see whether or not the two are directly comparable, and what is the ease in moving the poor into the lower middle class.&nbsp;This as a hole is not difficult seeing the gross wage for a high school graduate compared to someone who didn&acirc;&euro;&trade;t graduate is directly proportionate to poor and middle class incomes.&nbsp;The prevalence of availability of education in this country, both high school and now, affordable community colleges and the economic results of education nullify the ability of the poor to complain if they don&acirc;&euro;&trade;t have the education proportionate to success.</p> <p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The final question that I propose to determine whether or not the Inequalities in this country is an issue is whether or not the quality of life is better now then in previous years for the poor.&nbsp;One gauge of this is the life expectancy.&nbsp;Life expectancy is slightly down, especially in the select communities, but it is still above the norm for the planet.&nbsp;A lot of the lowered life expectancy in select lower income groups is due to at risk behaviors, not due to lack of health care, which shows even these groups abundance.&nbsp;You can&acirc;&euro;&trade;t die of heart disease or a gunshot wound if you can&acirc;&euro;&trade;t afford steak or bullets.&nbsp;From the text I pull my final argument: &acirc;&euro;&oelig;In

[Bob Impact]

<p>Being a republican is different than being fiscally conservative.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Read this:</p><p><img src="http://www.objektivist.no/z-ctui-stor.gif" border="0" width="230" height="396" />&nbsp;</p>

[Judge Smails]

<p><font size="1">kanoley = <span class="postdetails"><strong>Location:</strong> bay area california </span></font></p><p><font size="1"><span class="postdetails">That's funny</span></font></p><p><font size="1"><span class="postdetails"></span></font></p>

[Snacks]

<strong>patsopinion</strong> wrote:<br /><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<font style="background-color: #ffff00">&nbsp;The poor in the United States may be getting poorer and the rich getting richer but it is my arguments that just as the rich strive to amass wealth, the poor are directly responsible for their poverty and therefore it doesn&acirc;&euro;&trade;t fall on the society to supplement their lacks or the inequities inherent in the United States.&nbsp;Instead it is the poor that need to supplement whatever lacks they may perceive and work that much harder to increase their station in the economic pyramid, a pyramid that, although one can only move so high up, can move up, which nullifies all inherit inequalities.</font></p><p>My only problem with your argument is this. Most poor people do not seek poverity. Most republicans seem to think that people can make their way out of poverty puerly by working harder, well that wrong. The education in poorer city's do not help you make your way out. Ever hear the saying you need money to make money? well in most cases you can have the greatest idea, business plan etc. but without the connection, help or someone to back you, those plans arte useless. The rich have the connections, loan access,etc. A lot of the richer 1% make their wealth off the hard work of the poor in this country. So redistribution of wealth is needed to balance that out. I dont think someone should be screwed for making money and penelized (SP?) for it. There is no real answer but, something is wrong when the rich get richer and middle class is becoming poor in this society. </p><p>When a company like exxon is making 13 billion profit per quarter for the last 6 quarters something is wrong. They make that money off moddle class and poor people. Why cant they make a profit 1/2 that and allow it to be more affordable for lower classes to enjoy life? wouldnt 6 billion profit be enough?</p>

[patsopinion]

<p>exxon-</p><p>the hole point of commerece is to make money.&nbsp; If we payfor it and the gov doesnt say that it is a monoply or that they are practicing shady busissness tactics then they should go for it.&nbsp; Yes with something like gas it may create issues but that is the nature of the beast, some may not be able to afford everything.</p><p>school-</p><p>i dont understand your argument.&nbsp; If the schools arent as good then are u judging that by the students test grades and if so then that is just a symptom of their not wanting to increase their station.&nbsp; If the kids arent their to learn then the school will suck?&nbsp;</p>

[Reephdweller]

<p><img src="http://www.massinfotech.com/cannoli.jpg" border="0" width="400" height="320" /></p><p>Now I'm starvin!!&nbsp; Earl, we got any kanoley's around?</p>

[Recyclerz]

[quote]<strong>patsopinion</strong> wrote:<br /><p>I wrote this today for class.&nbsp; I thought it was so good and it was an intresting examination of who i am and what i believe as a voter.&nbsp; That said i dont feel good about feeling this.&nbsp; I grew up in sf and wasnt taught to think this way.&nbsp;</p><p>The question on whether or not Increasing Economic Inequality is a serious problem can be answered quite easily.&nbsp;The main issue is not how wealth is distributed or cash over time, instead three main questions arise to determine whether or not the rich getting ricer when the poor get poorer is a major issue.&nbsp;First, is the wealth of the rich, on a generational basis, being redistributed?&nbsp;Second, is it fare to judge the richest against the poorest?&nbsp;And second, is quality of life better for the poor now then previously recorded? </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The wealth of the richest one percent is being redistributed.&nbsp;This can be surmised by who is the wealthiest one percent.&nbsp;The richest one percent in this country had a great influx in the 1990&acirc;&euro;&trade;s of young, tech savvy business people.&nbsp;These people included Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and more recently the &acirc;&euro;&oelig;Google guys.&acirc;&euro;?&nbsp;This shows our society&acirc;&euro;&trade;s ability to take people from the middle class and move them up to new levels of wealth and financial success.&nbsp;Although these people cannot be considered the norm, it shows the society as a hole has a place for advancement into the richest one percent.&nbsp;This directly shows that there is no issue with our economic system because it allows for room in the upper one percent which inherently means that although the poor may or may not have the comparable assets to the poor of the past, the dream of coming to America and within three generations going from a poor blue collar immigrant to being at the top of the economic totem pole is still and achievable one.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Is it fare to judge the richest one percent against the poor?&nbsp;The country as a hole is richer, the richest one percent of the country should not be directly compared to the poorest, and instead it should be compared to the classes below it.&nbsp;It is unfair to the richest one percent to be judged and not to judge the society as a hole.&nbsp;With the growth of wealth in the middle class and that the majority of upper middle class families that have the gross liquid assets totaling over one million dollars.&nbsp;Judging the poorest to the richest is judging outliers and is therefore unreasonable.&nbsp;Instead we should focus on the people directly above the poorest and see whether or not the two are directly comparable, and what is the ease in moving the poor into the lower middle class.&nbsp;This as a hole is not difficult seeing the gross wage for a high school graduate compared to someone who didn&acirc;&euro;&trade;t graduate is directly proportionate to poor and middle class incomes.&nbsp;The prevalence of availability of education in this country, both high school and now, affordable community colleges and the economic results of education nullify the ability of the poor to complain if they don&acirc;&euro;&trade;t have the education proportionate to success.</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The final question that I propose to determine whether or not the Inequalities in this country is an issue is whether or not the quality of life is better now then in previous years for the poor.&nbsp;One gauge of this is the life expectancy.&nbsp;Life expectancy is slightly down, especially in the select communities, but it is still above the norm for the planet.&nbsp;A lot of the lowered life expectancy in select lower income groups is due to at risk behaviors, not due to lack of health care, which shows even these groups abundance.&nbsp;You can&acirc;&euro;&trade;t die of heart disease or a gunshot wound if you can&acirc;&euro;&trade;t afford steak or bullets.&nbsp;From the text I pul

[angrymissy]

<strong>Recyclerz</strong> wrote:<br /><font style="background-color: #ffff00">If you haven't handed this in yet you have to clean up the grammar.&nbsp; You're (consistently) using &quot;hole&quot; when you mean &quot;whole&quot;, &quot;fare&quot; when you mean &quot;fair&quot; and &quot;inherit&quot; when you mean &quot;inherent&quot;.&nbsp; This would get you slapped down in any decent high school, forget about college.</font><p>I'm curious to find out if this paper was handed in already, and if it was for college or high school.</p>

[ChrisTheCop]

<p>Sorry, cant read that first thing in the morning, but if it's true, </p><p>CONGRATULATIONS! Youve come to your senses.&nbsp;</p>