Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

So how many of you AOC fans agree with this statement

2

Comments

  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 43,543 Standard Supporter

    Billionaires are fine.

    I wouldn't necessarily have a problem if there were regulations enacted limiting CEO pay to a multiple of some function of the mean employee salaries. Some of those cats are just raking in dough for having minions and not doing shit. I've met them - they aren't worth 100,000 times the wage of a line worker. They just aren't.

    I don't have an issue if their rewards are commensurate with Share Price or some such measurement.

    I find AOC likes to drop the 'immoral' line regularly. Eventually that just wears off.

    And she best be careful with playing the morality card too often because you know her nude pics/sex with goats videos are being held in a remote server somewhere just waiting to be unleashed on the world.

    There was Clinton era law that capped CEO pay so they went to stock options which pay better and are taxed lower

    That showed them

    Why do people get paid so much? Because they can
    There's a new disclosure requirement for public companies that now require Executive pay be compared to the median of the workers. The hope is that the market will recognize the robber barons and punish their share price.

    That's the hope any way.

    As you say, they'll figure out ways around it.

  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771

    Billionaires are fine.

    I wouldn't necessarily have a problem if there were regulations enacted limiting CEO pay to a multiple of some function of the mean employee salaries. Some of those cats are just raking in dough for having minions and not doing shit. I've met them - they aren't worth 100,000 times the wage of a line worker. They just aren't.

    I don't have an issue if their rewards are commensurate with Share Price or some such measurement.

    I find AOC likes to drop the 'immoral' line regularly. Eventually that just wears off.

    And she best be careful with playing the morality card too often because you know her nude pics/sex with goats videos are being held in a remote server somewhere just waiting to be unleashed on the world.

    I agree playing the morality card is very risky which is why I think what she’s doing is incredibly brave. This isn’t about her political career. I think that’s something a lot of people are struggling to get with her. We always view politicians as making moves around advancing their career but she’s genuinely trying to use her platform to shift the conversation.

    She’s made this a conversation and it’s not going to take a lot for poor Christian conservatives to realize what she’s saying sounds awfully familiar. And while she’ll never swing them to Democrats, if she can get 5, 10 or 15 percent of them to come around on taxing the rich it goes from fringe lunatic policy to 70 plus percent of the country wanting it and you just lose elections running against things like that.
  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771

    SFGbob said:

    HHusky said:

    It's a sophomoric statement, blob. Of course, you couch your economic arguments as moral arguments too, so you're just the opposite side of the same counterfeit coin.

    My problem isn't that she was making it a moral argument my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I was just asking if you agreed with it. It's immoral in my book to steal the labor of others. You being a Rat, you and your party have a long, long history supporting the stealing of labor in others. The fact that she was making some kind of moral argument isn't what bothered me.

    Workers wages have been stagnant for 50 years. Their productivity has sky rocketed. Profits have sky rocketed. CEO pay has sky rocketed. We call that stealing the labor of others.
    We agree to a certain degree - so bookmark this post as historic.

    See my post above regarding CEO/Executive pay. It's almost reached robber baron/coal miner multiples. Kind of ridiculous. As the pie grows, it should be shared pro-rata.

    Fuck, I sound like a communist. Fuck me. And fuck AOC's tits for making me even contemplate that.

    If she'd just get her teeth fixed....


    Literally all she wants is people to contemplate that.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781

    SFGbob said:

    HHusky said:

    It's a sophomoric statement, blob. Of course, you couch your economic arguments as moral arguments too, so you're just the opposite side of the same counterfeit coin.

    My problem isn't that she was making it a moral argument my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I was just asking if you agreed with it. It's immoral in my book to steal the labor of others. You being a Rat, you and your party have a long, long history supporting the stealing of labor in others. The fact that she was making some kind of moral argument isn't what bothered me.

    Workers wages have been stagnant for 50 years. Their productivity has sky rocketed. Profits have sky rocketed. CEO pay has sky rocketed. We call that stealing the labor of others.
    We agree to a certain degree - so bookmark this post as historic.

    See my post above regarding CEO/Executive pay. It's almost reached robber baron/coal miner multiples. Kind of ridiculous. As the pie grows, it should be shared pro-rata.

    Fuck, I sound like a communist. Fuck me. And fuck AOC's tits for making me even contemplate that.

    If she'd just get her teeth fixed....


    Literally all she wants is people to contemplate that.
    She’s not thinking that far ahead. You give her way too much credit.
  • HardlyClothedHardlyClothed Member Posts: 937

    Billionaires are fine.

    I wouldn't necessarily have a problem if there were regulations enacted limiting CEO pay to a multiple of some function of the mean employee salaries. Some of those cats are just raking in dough for having minions and not doing shit. I've met them - they aren't worth 100,000 times the wage of a line worker. They just aren't.

    I don't have an issue if their rewards are commensurate with Share Price or some such measurement.

    I find AOC likes to drop the 'immoral' line regularly. Eventually that just wears off.

    And she best be careful with playing the morality card too often because you know her nude pics/sex with goats videos are being held in a remote server somewhere just waiting to be unleashed on the world.

    There was Clinton era law that capped CEO pay so they went to stock options which pay better and are taxed lower

    That showed them

    Why do people get paid so much? Because they can
    There's a new disclosure requirement for public companies that now require Executive pay be compared to the median of the workers. The hope is that the market will recognize the robber barons and punish their share price.

    That's the hope any way.

    As you say, they'll figure out ways around it.

    The disclosure requirement is the perfect enscapulation of the failures of modern liberalism. As if simply making public the pay disparity would create a change instead of doing actual politics and using political power to change it. But Democrats since Carter have been terrified of actually wielding state power for their constituents benefit.

    But it looks like that’s starting to change at least.

  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771
    Maybe. I’ve been wrong before and I’ll be wrong again. We’ll see.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781

    Billionaires are fine.

    I wouldn't necessarily have a problem if there were regulations enacted limiting CEO pay to a multiple of some function of the mean employee salaries. Some of those cats are just raking in dough for having minions and not doing shit. I've met them - they aren't worth 100,000 times the wage of a line worker. They just aren't.

    I don't have an issue if their rewards are commensurate with Share Price or some such measurement.

    I find AOC likes to drop the 'immoral' line regularly. Eventually that just wears off.

    And she best be careful with playing the morality card too often because you know her nude pics/sex with goats videos are being held in a remote server somewhere just waiting to be unleashed on the world.

    There was Clinton era law that capped CEO pay so they went to stock options which pay better and are taxed lower

    That showed them

    Why do people get paid so much? Because they can
    There's a new disclosure requirement for public companies that now require Executive pay be compared to the median of the workers. The hope is that the market will recognize the robber barons and punish their share price.

    That's the hope any way.

    As you say, they'll figure out ways around it.

    The disclosure requirement is the perfect enscapulation of the failures of modern liberalism. As if simply making public the pay disparity would create a change instead of doing actual politics and using political power to change it. But Democrats since Carter have been terrified of actually wielding state power for their constituents benefit.

    But it looks like that’s starting to change at least.

    The public should stop paying the disparity. That’s how change happens.
  • HardlyClothedHardlyClothed Member Posts: 937

    Billionaires are fine.

    I wouldn't necessarily have a problem if there were regulations enacted limiting CEO pay to a multiple of some function of the mean employee salaries. Some of those cats are just raking in dough for having minions and not doing shit. I've met them - they aren't worth 100,000 times the wage of a line worker. They just aren't.

    I don't have an issue if their rewards are commensurate with Share Price or some such measurement.

    I find AOC likes to drop the 'immoral' line regularly. Eventually that just wears off.

    And she best be careful with playing the morality card too often because you know her nude pics/sex with goats videos are being held in a remote server somewhere just waiting to be unleashed on the world.

    I agree playing the morality card is very risky which is why I think what she’s doing is incredibly brave. This isn’t about her political career. I think that’s something a lot of people are struggling to get with her. We always view politicians as making moves around advancing their career but she’s genuinely trying to use her platform to shift the conversation.

    She’s made this a conversation and it’s not going to take a lot for poor Christian conservatives to realize what she’s saying sounds awfully familiar. And while she’ll never swing them to Democrats, if she can get 5, 10 or 15 percent of them to come around on taxing the rich it goes from fringe lunatic policy to 70 plus percent of the country wanting it and you just lose elections running against things like that.
    The real potential that her message has is non-voter > voter
  • sarktasticsarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    She’s selling envy, trying to stoke the Mob. nothing more.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    SFGbob said:

    HHusky said:

    It's a sophomoric statement, blob. Of course, you couch your economic arguments as moral arguments too, so you're just the opposite side of the same counterfeit coin.

    My problem isn't that she was making it a moral argument my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I was just asking if you agreed with it. It's immoral in my book to steal the labor of others. You being a Rat, you and your party have a long, long history supporting the stealing of labor in others. The fact that she was making some kind of moral argument isn't what bothered me.

    Workers wages have been stagnant for 50 years. Their productivity has sky rocketed. Profits have sky rocketed. CEO pay has sky rocketed. We call that stealing the labor of others.
    The people who are getting ripped off should quit.


    Workers productively didn’t skyrocket. The productivity of technology skyrocketed. Workerrs, including CEOS, are still subject to supply and demand.
    I'm hearing it was an increase in minimum wage that caused businesses use of technology. Now you are saying technology has been increasing business productivity for years?
  • SoutherndawgSoutherndawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,279 Founders Club

    She’s selling envy, trying to stoke the Mob. nothing more.

    And that has worked for others. She's an idiot, or rather a useful idiot, but that doesn't mean she won't be effective. She's photogenic, the MSM is head over heals in love with her, and we've had a few decades of k-12 "education" run by people who think like her and have been "educating" people to think as she does. They're becoming voters now. Her Marxist philosophy is not only acceptable, but preferable to many of these young and easily influenced "minds". She and her ilk will make a dent, that's my prediction.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    edited January 2019
    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    HHusky said:

    It's a sophomoric statement, blob. Of course, you couch your economic arguments as moral arguments too, so you're just the opposite side of the same counterfeit coin.

    My problem isn't that she was making it a moral argument my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I was just asking if you agreed with it. It's immoral in my book to steal the labor of others. You being a Rat, you and your party have a long, long history supporting the stealing of labor in others. The fact that she was making some kind of moral argument isn't what bothered me.

    Workers wages have been stagnant for 50 years. Their productivity has sky rocketed. Profits have sky rocketed. CEO pay has sky rocketed. We call that stealing the labor of others.
    The people who are getting ripped off should quit.


    Workers productively didn’t skyrocket. The productivity of technology skyrocketed. Workerrs, including CEOS, are still subject to supply and demand.
    I'm hearing it was an increase in minimum wage that caused businesses use of technology. Now you are saying technology has been increasing business productivity for years?
    Build that strawman dumbfuck.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    She’s selling envy, trying to stoke the Mob. nothing more.

    And that has worked for others. She's an idiot, or rather a useful idiot, but that doesn't mean she won't be effective. She's photogenic, the MSM is head over heals in love with her, and we've had a few decades of k-12 "education" run by people who think like her and have been "educating" people to think as she does. They're becoming voters now. Her Marxist philosophy is not only acceptable, but preferable to many of these young and easily influenced "minds". She and her ilk will make a dent, that's my prediction.
    Please to be explaining Marxism then relating that to her plans.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    HHusky said:

    It's a sophomoric statement, blob. Of course, you couch your economic arguments as moral arguments too, so you're just the opposite side of the same counterfeit coin.

    My problem isn't that she was making it a moral argument my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I was just asking if you agreed with it. It's immoral in my book to steal the labor of others. You being a Rat, you and your party have a long, long history supporting the stealing of labor in others. The fact that she was making some kind of moral argument isn't what bothered me.

    Workers wages have been stagnant for 50 years. Their productivity has sky rocketed. Profits have sky rocketed. CEO pay has sky rocketed. We call that stealing the labor of others.
    The people who are getting ripped off should quit.


    Workers productively didn’t skyrocket. The productivity of technology skyrocketed. Workerrs, including CEOS, are still subject to supply and demand.
    I'm hearing it was an increase in minimum wage that caused businesses use of technology. Now you are saying technology has been increasing business productivity for years?
    Build that strawman dumbfuck.
    When you lost the argument, you throw out strawman and don't discuss it further.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    edited January 2019
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    HHusky said:

    It's a sophomoric statement, blob. Of course, you couch your economic arguments as moral arguments too, so you're just the opposite side of the same counterfeit coin.

    My problem isn't that she was making it a moral argument my strawman ass fucking Kunt of a friend. I was just asking if you agreed with it. It's immoral in my book to steal the labor of others. You being a Rat, you and your party have a long, long history supporting the stealing of labor in others. The fact that she was making some kind of moral argument isn't what bothered me.

    Workers wages have been stagnant for 50 years. Their productivity has sky rocketed. Profits have sky rocketed. CEO pay has sky rocketed. We call that stealing the labor of others.
    The people who are getting ripped off should quit.


    Workers productively didn’t skyrocket. The productivity of technology skyrocketed. Workerrs, including CEOS, are still subject to supply and demand.
    I'm hearing it was an increase in minimum wage that caused businesses use of technology. Now you are saying technology has been increasing business productivity for years?
    Build that strawman dumbfuck.
    When you lost the argument, you throw out strawman and don't discuss it further.
    What argument? The discussion in this thread or the one you made up in your head?
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 104,479 Founders Club
    Oh shit for brains is back
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 31,943

    Billionaires are fine.

    I wouldn't necessarily have a problem if there were regulations enacted limiting CEO pay to a multiple of some function of the mean employee salaries. Some of those cats are just raking in dough for having minions and not doing shit. I've met them - they aren't worth 100,000 times the wage of a line worker. They just aren't.

    I don't have an issue if their rewards are commensurate with Share Price or some such measurement.

    I find AOC likes to drop the 'immoral' line regularly. Eventually that just wears off.

    And she best be careful with playing the morality card too often because you know her nude pics/sex with goats videos are being held in a remote server somewhere just waiting to be unleashed on the world.

    There was Clinton era law that capped CEO pay so they went to stock options which pay better and are taxed lower

    That showed them

    Why do people get paid so much? Because they can
    There's a new disclosure requirement for public companies that now require Executive pay be compared to the median of the workers. The hope is that the market will recognize the robber barons and punish their share price.

    That's the hope any way.

    As you say, they'll figure out ways around it.

    The disclosure requirement is the perfect enscapulation of the failures of modern liberalism. As if simply making public the pay disparity would create a change instead of doing actual politics and using political power to change it. But Democrats since Carter have been terrified of actually wielding state power for their constituents benefit.

    But it looks like that’s starting to change at least.

    Yeah, they need to wield state power and start confiscating wealth and killing off the rich.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 31,943
    2001400ex said:

    She’s selling envy, trying to stoke the Mob. nothing more.

    And that has worked for others. She's an idiot, or rather a useful idiot, but that doesn't mean she won't be effective. She's photogenic, the MSM is head over heals in love with her, and we've had a few decades of k-12 "education" run by people who think like her and have been "educating" people to think as she does. They're becoming voters now. Her Marxist philosophy is not only acceptable, but preferable to many of these young and easily influenced "minds". She and her ilk will make a dent, that's my prediction.
    Please to be explaining Marxism then relating that to her plans.
    The sad thing is that you know this dipshit thought this was a killer response.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 31,943
    Great moments in history where state power was wielded on behalf of the proletariat, I mean the constituents.



Sign In or Register to comment.