When did I suddenly become the board dictionary? If you want to know the meaning of a word, look it up!
Excessive: ~ going beyond the usual, necessary, or proper limit or degree; characterized by excess: ~ exceeding the normal or permitted extents or limits; immoderate; inordinate ~ Exceeding a normal, usual, reasonable, or proper limit. ~ going beyond the usual, necessary, or proper limit or degree; characterized by excess. ~ more than is necessary, normal, or desirable; immoderate
If you consider something 'excessive' then (in this case) it could be defined as greed. The concept would also continue with the other deadly sins: wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony... You could defend "gluttony, lust, pride, etc with the same lack of understanding.
If a guy eats one hamburger... is it excessive? If he eats 10? If he eats 100???
I wonder if this failure to grasp a concept is part of the general Right Wing, defense of their "sins" as listed above.
The whole "selfishness" of the Right may be the reason that GREED IS GOOD in their view. Similarly: Recently the Rabid Right has gotten into trouble defining RAPE... some see it as a minor act. Most of society sees it as a very serious crime.
A lot of sh*t but nothing there, I asked one simple question and you give me the definition, I want your opinion because that is what it takes if you label someone greedy, you are saying someone's desire to have more is greedy so who's to say what the limit is, you are obviously trying to say it is you who decides what is greedy. So it goes back to my original argument that greed is the opinion of others.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Box determines it. As long as Box can be exempted from whatever is determined excessive, so he can continue his luxuries like snow skiing or jet skiing. His desire to make extra money to afford those luxuries is not greedy.
The key to defining greed is to make sure your excesses aren't included. Then you can continue to be self righteous and point fingers at everybody else that has more than you. It's a great trick.
Exactly what I been saying all along, instead he wants to remove himself from the definition of greed because others could label his luxuries as greedy.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Exactly what I been saying all along, instead he wants to remove himself from the definition of greed because others could label his luxuries as greedy.
Box is a classic example of "he who is without sin, cast the first stone".
Box determines it. As long as Box can be exempted from whatever is determined excessive, so he can continue his luxuries like snow skiing or jet skiing. His desire to make extra money to afford those luxuries is not greedy.
The key to defining greed is to make sure your excesses aren't included. Then you can continue to be self righteous and point fingers at everybody else that has more than you. It's a great trick.
You are open to define "GREED" as your values see fit, as is everyone. I certainly can't define it for you. Society in general has a view, but even in that view, there is some differences.
The Righties are trying SOOOOO hard to justify their (apparent) greed. They consider feeding a starving child to be "excessive" and are trying their best to cut food for kids and infants in this country. I guess they could be able to find the exact definition of 'excessive' when it comes to tax breaks for the poor, or how much a child should starve,before it's considered "EXCESSIVE STARVATION!"
This may be part of the "ME" not "WE" view of some on the Right. If it isn't about "ME" then it's not important or valued.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
This may be part of the "ME" not "WE" view of some on the Right. If it isn't about "ME" then it's not important or valued.
Yes, your participation in the "we" is to empower the government to take from those you determine are "excessive" as long the you are not in that group, and your luxuries are not affected. Then you can feel good about yourself, because you helped those poor starving children, but you didn't have to sacrifice your luxuries, because "society" determined your luxuries do not meet the social definition of "excessive".
According to global poverty statistics, 2.7 BILLION people live on less than $2 per day. And box is preaching about greed as he is retired, collecting a pension, snow skiing, and wants to raise minimum wage to $10 PER HOUR. Yup, he's a real champion of the poor.
Yes, your participation in the "we" is to empower the government to take from those you determine are "excessive" as long the you are not in that group, and your luxuries are not affected. Then you can feel good about yourself, because you helped those poor starving children, but you didn't have to sacrifice your luxuries, because "society" determined your luxuries do not meet the social definition of "excessive".
According to global poverty statistics, 2.7 BILLION people live on less than $2 per day. And box is preaching about greed as he is retired, collecting a pension, snow skiing, and wants to raise minimum wage to $10 PER HOUR. Yup, he's a real champion of the poor.
Yes, tell me about greed again?
Cissy always gets it wrong!
What makes you think I would limit a minimum wage to $10.00?????
I would guess it should be closer to $15.00
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
What makes you think I would limit a minimum wage to $10.00?????
I would guess it should be closer to $15.00
WOW! So in just one hour working making your desired U.S. minimum wage, 2.7 billion people could survive for a full week for one hour of U.S. labor.
Talk about sticking it to the poor and income inequality. I guess when you talk about spreading the wealth, you don't want it to get down to those in abject poverty.
WOW! So in just one hour working making your desired U.S. minimum wage, 2.7 billion people could survive for a full week for one hour of U.S. labor.
Talk about sticking it to the poor and income inequality. I guess when you talk about spreading the wealth, you don't want it to get down to those in abject poverty.
Do Straw Men work on your associates down at the local bar??? Cause they fall flat every time here on this board!
Cissy... There are roughly 350 million Americans. But you already knew that, not 2.7 billion Americans and since we are discussing the MINIMUM WAGE IN A M E R I C A... The 2.7 is your childish attempt at some sort of desperate victory.
I am concerned with equality in the world as well. If you'd like to discuss that issue there is much that can help. Low or no interest loans have been very successful in helping the poor in the third world, especially for improving the economy for women.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Do Straw Men work on your associates down at the local bar??? Cause they fall flat every time here on this board!
Cissy... There are roughly 350 million Americans. But you already knew that, not 2.7 billion Americans and since we are discussing the MINIMUM WAGE IN A M E R I C A... The 2.7 is your childish attempt at some sort of desperate victory.
I am concerned with equality in the world as well. If you'd like to discuss that issue there is much that can help. Low or no interest loans have been very successful in helping the poor in the third world, especially for improving the economy for women.
Just making the point of the degrees of greed in relation to poverty. I find it amusing(and childish) that you use the Pope's words about income inequality as if it has to do with America and things like a higher minimum wage for Walmart workers. If the Pope's words about income inequality are directed at America and the disparity between the 1% and the 99% in THIS country, I think he - like you - are missing the mark when discussing poverty.
Just making the point of the degrees of greed in relation to poverty. I find it amusing(and childish) that you use the Pope's words about income inequality as if it has to do with America and things like a higher minimum wage for Walmart workers. If the Pope's words about income inequality are directed at America and the disparity between the 1% and the 99% in THIS country, I think he - like you - are missing the mark when discussing poverty.
The Pope's words were directed at GREED and Income Inequity... everywhere.
The only real opposition to his words were from the Rabid Right in the USA. The Hannity, Druggy Rush, FoxSnooze attacked the Pope, not the other way around.
The Pope didn't pick a fight with the Rabid Right... the Rabid Right picked a fight with the "SOCIALIST", "MARXIST" (their words) Pope!
Income inequity is a real problem in the US and around the world. The Rich want it all for themselves (even when a majority of Republicans agree that the deck is stacked in favor of the rich.
"A rising tide, lifts all boats"! A secure middle class and poor with the opportunity to move upward helps all citizens and the economy in general.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The Pope's words were directed at GREED and Income Inequity... everywhere.
The only real opposition to his words were from the Rabid Right in the USA. The Hannity, Druggy Rush, FoxSnooze attacked the Pope, not the other way around.
Box, do you even read the cartoons you post on here from media matters and other left wing sites? They used to Pope's words to attack political enemies. Not one of these left wing bomb throwing sites took the Pope's words and used them to address abject poverty around the world. No, they politicized it, and tailored his words to push the left wing political agenda in America.
You post nothing about caring about the poor...Only about hating the wealthy.
[img] http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/pope_24909f_4932170.jpg[/img] “The grave financial and economic crises of the present time … have pushed man to seek satisfaction, happiness and security in consumption and earnings out of all proportion to the principles of a sound economy… The succession of economic crises should lead to a timely rethinking of our models of economic development and to a change in lifestyles.”
“We need, then, to find ways by which all may benefit from the fruits of the earth, not only to avoid the widening gap between those who have more and those who must be content with the crumbs, but above all because it is a question of justice, equality and respect for every human being.”
Not one of these left wing bomb throwing sites took the Pope's words and used them to address abject poverty around the world.
Reagonomics... Trickle down... The GOP Bible for decades has CREATED much of the poverty in this country. Objecting to trickle down, a failed policy that never worked, IS addressing the problems of the poor.
The Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich, was actually "redistribution of wealth", from the middle class to the Rich.
The pope was addressing the CAUSES OF POVERTY in both cases.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Reagonomics... Trickle down... The GOP Bible for decades has CREATED much of the poverty in this country. Objecting to trickle down, a failed policy that never worked, IS addressing the problems of the poor.
The Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich, was actually "redistribution of wealth", from the middle class to the Rich. The pope was addressing the CAUSES OF POVERTY in both cases.
There is no abject poverty in America.
Oh yeah, BTW box...Obama's policy is virtually the same as Reagan's, same as Bush, same as Clinton. Borrow and spend, deficit spending - Trickle Down. Why do you think he continues to raise the debt ceiling? The government has be practicing supply side economics for a long time. How else to you explain the 95% of the wealth created since 2009 going to the top 1%? Ehem!! TRICKLE DOWN.
If you really were concerned about the working and middle class, you would call on the FED to raise interest rates, so the working class could save their money and retain it's value without gambling it away in the stock market to keep up with inflation. Keeping interest rates at zero do nothing for the middle and lower class, except devalue their money, while the 1% take the cheap money and buy up MORE assets.
Oh yeah, BTW box...Obama's policy is virtually the same as Reagan's, same as Bush, same as Clinton. Borrow and spend, deficit spending - Trickle Down. Why do you think he continues to raise the debt ceiling? The government has be practicing supply side economics for a long time. How else to you explain the 95% of the wealth created since 2009 going to the top 1%? Ehem!! TRICKLE DOWN.
If you really were concerned about the working and middle class, you would call on the FED to raise interest rates, so the working class could save their money and retain it's value without gambling it away in the stock market to keep up with inflation. Keeping interest rates at zero do nothing for the middle and lower class, except devalue their money, while the 1% take the cheap money and buy up MORE assets.
Low interest rates has also kept inflation to a minimum. It's always a balancing act.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
You haven't been shopping for groceries lately have you, price of gas has doubled since 2009, and many companies have reduced the size/weight off their products and kept the price the same to hide cost increases. Holding interest rates down artificially has had a negative effect on peoples savings, 401k's, and bank accounts as well.
Logged
