If immortality technology existed, but only the rich could purchase it . . .

Rune said:
Of course it does you idiot. You either pay your death-grip, or the bank takes your home. Sounds like you inherited your double wide. Who pays your property tax for you?
Click to expand...

No it doesn't mean "death grip" and you've not posted any dictionary definition which shows it does. Now you can either do that, or you can shut the fuck up, because I am done with this part of the conversation until you do. If you would like to continue making an ass of yourself, please feel free to do so, I won't stop you. But my participation in your attempted derailment is over. Is that clear?
 
Dixie said:
No it doesn't mean "death grip" and you've not posted any dictionary definition which shows it does. Now you can either do that, or you can shut the fuck up, because I am done with this part of the conversation until you do. If you would like to continue making an ass of yourself, please feel free to do so, I won't stop you. But my participation in your attempted derailment is over. Is that clear?
Click to expand...

It is clear that you are a pseudo-intellectual at best, and should try to stay in the shallower end of the pool.
 
Dixtard said:
In America, the wealthy don't get any special privileges just because they are wealthy. Sorry, it's a failed argument.
Click to expand...

Yes they most certainly do. This is why you are not worth it, you make the most ignorant claims as if they were facts. Moron.
 
Rune said:
Yes they most certainly do. This is why you are not worth it, you make the most ignorant claims as if they were facts. Moron.
Click to expand...

No they don't. You can't name one single law, regulation, requirement, taxation, or anything else, which is determined by a person's wealth. They use the same tax codes, they adhere to the same laws, they operate under the same constitution, as the rest of society. They have no privilege or advantage as far as the law and governmental system goes.

You have been brainwashed by Socialists to believe something else, but that is because you're retarded.
 
Dixie said:
No they don't. You can't name one single law, regulation, requirement, taxation, or anything else, which is determined by a person's wealth. They use the same tax codes, they adhere to the same laws, they operate under the same constitution, as the rest of society. They have no privilege or advantage as far as the law and governmental system goes.

You have been brainwashed by Socialists to believe something else, but that is because you're retarded.
Click to expand...

Shut up moron, I pay double the percentage of taxes on my income that Mitt does. Go fuck yourself.
 
Dixie said:
I'm sorry, but the debate and topic have nothing to do with your word epistemology. Most non-retarded people use the word "mortgage" to mean something besides "death grip." I'm sorry that you are so hung up on the root history of words which comprise our language, to the point you can't understand the language, but I don't have time to indulge retards here. We don't speak in dissection of words, it's not how human beings communicate. In order to have dialogue, we have to understand the language we're speaking to each other, and since you don't seem to comprehend how language works, it doesn't appear possible to have a dialogue with you.

http://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/the-meaning-of-the-word/mortgage.html

mortgage

1.the charging of real (or personal) property by a debtor to a creditor as security for a debt (especially one incurred by the purchase of the property), on the condition that it shall be returned on payment of the debt within a certain period.
2. a deed effecting the conditions of a mortgage.
3. a loan obtained through the conveyance of property as security.
4. convey (a property) to a creditor as security on a loan.
5. expose to future risk or constraint for the sake of immediate advantage.

As we see, the word simply doesn't mean, "death grip."

Now, do you want to get back on topic, or shall we continue to ridicule your runetardation?
Click to expand...

So then what you are saying is that words, like "marriage", are defined by their usage and their definitions can change?
 
Dixie said:
In America, the wealthy don't get any special privileges just because they are wealthy. Sorry, it's a failed argument.
Click to expand...
you can't be serious with this statement, you just can't be. seriousness with regards to no double standards of justice due to money makes you a special kind of stupid.
 
The 4th Amendment doesn't make distinctions are his point. Cops don't make the laws (they're just better positioned to break them).
 
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar said:
The scenario is too stupid. You would never make it into the 3% as their income would never decline, but rather continue to grow. The only way any new people would make it into the three percent would be for the population to grow or one of them died (they are immortal but I assume that means they wont die from natural causes not that they could survive a woodchipper). Any new entrants would most likely be connected to one of three percent. So if it inspires you to overcome your gag reflex maybe youd achieve immortality, otherwise it would be extremely unlikely.
Click to expand...
You're right to a point. That 3% would probably turn into another BCS. But even then, the BCS does let a few outsiders into the club (University of Utah & Texas Christian, for example). I have to believe something like this could happen for some of the hopefuls.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you can't be serious with this statement, you just can't be. seriousness with regards to no double standards of justice due to money makes you a special kind of stupid.
Click to expand...

I'm absolutely serious. The only thing you've presented is the obvious thing, money. Well, people are always going to have money, right? And there will always be some people with more than others, right? So how are rich people advantaged in the legal system with money? Are courts and juries paid off, is that what you are claiming? I will go so far as to say, if you can find any instance of a judge or jury deciding a case based on someone's wealth, I am opposed to this and think it should be stopped. No law on the books says, if you are wealthy it doesn't apply to you.

Now, I will state it again. The rich are afforded NO ADVANTAGE over others in our society. Yes, they do have money. Rich people are always going to have money, we're never going to know a universe in reality, where rich people don't have money. Our system of free market capitalism allows people to have money. Our system also provides an equal opportunity for everyone to acquire money. But most importantly, and this is something you need to pay close attention to... our rules of law are NEVER determined, based on a person's wealth or lack thereof. NEVER! It's against our general principles as well as the Constitution.

You and the Socialist Marxists, have crowed with this continuing meme about the advantage of the rich, and there isn't any. But you just keep on spewing it, and soon, moderate people start listening to this shit. Incrementalism. Win over a few at a time, to this wrong-headed viewpoint, and eventually you can transform our capitalist free market system, into a vibrant Socialist Marxist system where NO ONE HAS WEALTH except for the Ruling Class!
 
Rune said:
Shut up moron, I pay double the percentage of taxes on my income that Mitt does. Go fuck yourself.
Click to expand...

You also earn a different type of income than Romney. Most of his income is from dividends and not salary, yours is mostly salary. You and Mitt use the same U.S. Tax Code, and if you made his type income, you'd pay the same exact rate he pays, regardless of your wealth. Also, if Mitt earned income through wages like you, he would pay the exact same rate as you, regardless of his wealth. As a matter of fact, when Mitt was like you, he paid a higher tax rate than you are paying now. You actually have more advantage than he did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top