Hashtag Of The Entitlement Generation

Kids can learn more from that 3 min video than one semester of a Lib arts program.

Funny as heck to boot. Love the "you didn't build that" segment!

Powerful stuff. Right up there with the socialized college classroom where the students get to vote, once, on whether each should be graded individually, or whether all share the " average" grade. When the ideas of collectivism are tried in any simple way, they fail because the results are bad for so many. Despite this, there are some who think that the right people in charge/enough rules imposed on people will make the ideas work. That pigs CAN fly, if you glue enough feathers to them before you put them in the catapult.

Well done.

Apologies to the raving right, but most wealthy people come from wealthy families or have some advantage along the way. The self made man (person) exists, but is pretty rare.

If you have lots I'm not sure that ignoring poor or needy people is much of an ideological achievement. It's a bit more like childish greed.

How to make taxes fair is not really as simple as a two year old grabbing toys - whatever I've got is mine. On the other hand, it's also not foolish spending as was done in Greece, Ireland and Italy. There needs to be a common sense balance. If Obama wins the election it will probably be because the right didn't project that balance.

L:

No human being created themselves. Our families, our environment, have much to do with who we are. But why should the fact that some people have advantages in wealth, wisdom, intelligence, work ethic, and health imparted from their families justify forcible exactions of their goods for those less fortunate?

However, we are all what we make of ourselves. With respect to your observation I say that a fool and his money are soon parted. No wealthy person remains so for long if he is a fool.

Your second statement is a strawman. Most reasonable people would not ignore a poor or needy person out of childish greed. We perhaps differ in the methods and means by which we might look after the unfortunate in our society. Also, such charity should be voluntary and subsidiary. Otherwise it becomes slavery.

By the rule of natural law, no forcible extraction of anyone's goods is fair. Taxes will never be fair. Some fees for service, including the service of keeping hungry fools off my lawn, is valuable, and is also more valuable to those who have more, and it is reasonable that I should pay more for that service because I have more and thus it is worth more to me. But most taxation is manifestly not fair.

Blaming the victim isn't helpful, either.

L, please watch the video repeatedly until reality sets in.

Childish greed? Really? So wanting to keep what you EARN is greedy (your BS about the wealthy is pathetic) but expecting others to give you what THEY earned isn't?

How commie of you.

"L" at 9:53...
Yes indeed, some people have advantages over others...that is the human condition.
Your statement about inherited wealth and the self made man is pure drivel.
The object lesson of the video is telling and reflects a basic reality; altruism is learned and nurtured in a culture. Excessive taxation gives rise to resentment and is a disincentive, choking creativity and energy. Only the misguided, lazy and mediocre among us demand such inordinate levies.

Redistribution is the mantra of the lazy. That's right, the lazy.

Notice how even the kids who GAINED candy, were no fans of the concept. Instinct I guess.

L says "you didn't build that", in somewhat modified jargon.

No-one has ever lived, who did not use *something* built by someone else. The baby didn't build the bottle, the farmer didnt build the combine, the engineer didn't build the hammer, Einstein never made a pair of shoes.

And though there is much to be said for brilliant hardworking people who make superior use of the tools available to them, your argument is best destroyed from another angle.

Imagine if I buy an iPod, and Steve Jobs comes to me years later, asking for more money. Because I didnt build the circuit traces that connect the memory to the CPU? It would be laughable if he were to demand double paymnent like this.

And yet the progs think it's ok to charge a small minority for roads and infrastructure that already exists, and already paid for? Nonsense.

Big government will use any argument to get more for itself.

It’s interesting that the L would write something he knows nothing about.
While I have fierce dislike for this class stuff, most people of today, in north America, are comfortable with their conditions, than not.

It is true, as human nature demands, people complain. Tell me about it. They mostly complain that they can’t have a hummer, a big house, a stay in Buckingham palace.
Well, too bloody bad. You can have a compact four door sedan, a house in the burbs and stay in Motel 6, amounts to the same in everyday life.

Hey L, have a look in here:
Rich People Who Were Born Poor
http://www.intelligenius.net/rich-people-who-were-born-poor/

Does not mean that everybody ends there, though it shows that everybody has an even chance. It’s up to you to take advantage. If you choose the government do it for you…….you lose every time you try, guaranteed.

Interesting that this vid was shot in a church parking lot, where, by extension, a lot of those children would be attenders of that gathering.

They have no doubt been taught about stealing and lying and cheating and many other Godly principles and good on them for speaking up and speaking the truth. They know because they have been taught.

Take and shoot that vid in a Chicago or Detroit inner-city neighbourhood and there would have been a few caps popped. Law of the jungle there.

The evil "1%"pay 17% of US federal income taxes I understand. The top 15% or so pay about half of the income taxes. How is that not paying their "fair share?"

L you spout nonsense; I can't speak to your experience but in my world, the real working world, the private sector, the "rich" work their butts off, plain and simple. Most of the "rich" who would have to pay more taxes under Obamasocialism would be middle class entrepreneurs who are successful and create most jobs.

Government never has and never will "create" a job (ie increase overall employment). It's clear from GDP analysis that fiscal policy actually destroys jobs, once we get through the Obama/Clinton BS; it's net jobs folks.

The argument that the Dems want the rich to pay a little more is pure BS. There simply aren't enough "rich" to sustain their redistributionist tax and spend programs, so as usual, the burden will fall onto the middle class, where it's always been.

I just love the lefty argument that we've all used something by someone else and therefore it is OK to take from some people to give to others, presumably under the premise that this would enable them to be productive, i.e. just levelling the field.

Sounds good in theory, like all things socialist, but always ends with body piles. The reason is very simple.

Productive people are simply more efficient than non-productive (lazy) people regardless of their starting point. To be clear, both types of people want the resources, i.e. it can be argued both types are greedy.

Productive people work to acquire resources and will individually always find a way to use them in the most efficient manner (as they understand their value) which naturally tends to be the most efficient collective manner as well.

Lazy people will tend to use all the resources provided to them (with no/little effort on their own part) as fast as they can (no inherent understanding of their value), which tends to be the most inefficient use collectively as well.

The end result is predictable and why communism always, ALWAYS ends in piles of bodies, there is simply never enough resources to meet the demands of a socialist/communist society.

Please note, that I use productive and non-productive (lazy) rather than wealthy or poor as distinctions. Not all productive people are wealthy and not all lazy people are poor. However, their is a strong correlation between production and wealth and vice-versa.

I define being in a socialist system as equivalent to everyone being lazy because this is, in effect, what a socialist system does to everyone.

However, none of this above is new - everyone who productively works for a living knows this.

"Kids can learn more from that 3 min video than one semester of a Lib arts program."

Eagle you nailed it!

"Apologies to the raving right, but most wealthy people come from wealthy families or have some advantage along the way. The self made man (person) exists, but is pretty rare."

Thats pure "BS". As usual from a lefty. When confronted with thses various annologies their most oft used reasons is "its different"

We sneer (quite properly) at leftist brainwashing of children in the public schools and gleefully point at groups of 12 year old "Pioneers" singing cutesy songs in praise of Obama but, every comment above drools over this little experiment. Am I the only one to see irony here? The expoitive "experiment" really sucks.

Sure some the wealthy come from wealth. Okay I buy that.

But then they discover cocaine, and your argument comes to a screeching halt.

The trick in this case is to STAY wealthy.

"The self made man (person) exists, but is pretty rare."

Pure Leftist bullsh*t! The owners of inherited wealth are extremely rare,like the Rockefellers,Trudeaus,Desmarais of this world.

I have met many wealthy people in my time,and the only family connection is usually taking up the business their father did, such as construction contracting or logging,but there was NO monetary wealth inherited.The "wealth" is usually in the form of a work ethic and role model.

The Left likes to pound on the "you didn't earn it, you inherited it drum", and I've heard every Lefty from NDP'ers,Greens,Democrats and Communists spout this sophistry all my life.They have no evidence that this is factual, just a mantra repeated.

Funny how Leftists,in taxpayer-funded positions of power and wealth,will spend other people's money like the proverbial inebriated seaman. Example: Saint Jack Layton and Olivia Chow.

In MY world, a million bucks a year between the two in expense money alone makes them 1%'ers.

"Hey, dude, what's happening?"

You can say that again.

With Obambam, it's rob Peter to pay Paul, when Peter's the one who's done most of the work and built it.

NObama on November 6th.

Man, I wish I could vote.

But, I can pray!

I would have liked it if he also took back a "fair share" to give to Bambam. Candy tax, yeah.

NDP CANADA want to redistribute wealth; just as long it is not theirs nor their unions.

Obama and the Canadian NDP are one and the same in their views to: redistribution, protectionism, environmentalism, moratorium and so forth.

Even children know it's wrong.

One can make a case against materialism but how can one morally defend redistribution? It is not only the education/training and hard work that matter when one owns things. It is the time put in, time away from family, friends and other pursuits, and what effect these things have on others that also matter. If you "redistribute" a man's home, you've taken away his and his family living space AND the time and effort he took to provide it for them. His self-worth will also go down the tubes when he can't provide for his family. I thought redistribution was supposed to be healthy for the ego?

THis is good Sent it all over

Think that is that Crowder guy they have on SunMedia regularly. Louder with Crowder or some such.