General Discussion

Whiskeytide

(4,656 posts)

84. "what is wrong with making money? Nothing, unless ...

Reply to Land of Enchantment (Reply #53)

Tue May 3, 2016, 11:13 AM

May 2016

... you benefit at the expense of others' pain and suffering."

That is well said, indeed. I have come to believe that THIS principal is the fundamental difference between modern conservatives and progressives. Certainly it's not universal (and there are many other differences), but I suspect most conservatives feel that making money on the pain and suffering of others is simply the way it's supposed to happen - and it goes to their core philosophy of life. The whole "zero sum game", "me first", "I got mine" approach to society. It's a mind set crafted over time - especially since the Reagan era.

It explains a lot if you view things through that prism.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

84 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

OK for men but not women? [View all] kpete May 2016 OP

she of all people should know about the Streisand Effect MisterP May 2016 #1

Jeepers. Not OK for anyone---ever heard of avarice? Land of Enchantment May 2016 #2

It's not ok for anyone to be highly paid? Chico Man May 2016 #19

Is that what he said? Scootaloo May 2016 #34

It depends Land of Enchantment May 2016 #53

"what is wrong with making money? Nothing, unless ... Whiskeytide May 2016 #84

EXACTLY! SammyWinstonJack May 2016 #75

Democrats must be pure as the driven snow gratuitous May 2016 #3

Yes. True Democrats must wear sackcloth and carry a begging bowl. They must walk barefoot... Hekate May 2016 #8

I think it is actually Democratic WOMEN must be pure WhiteTara May 2016 #46

I was thinking about Al Gore gratuitous May 2016 #54

I honestly can say I don't care a lick about the sexual purity of any Democrat of any sex or gender. Chan790 May 2016 #82

Oy. There's logic for ya'. nt Smarmie Doofus May 2016 #4

Sorry, Barbara, nobody is stupid enough to fall for that twist n/t arcane1 May 2016 #5

it is a legitimate point Skittles May 2016 #22

It's a strawman argument -nt Bradical79 May 2016 #31

And yours is mere spin. nt LanternWaste May 2016 #78

Why did nobody care that Obama's campaign was funded by corporations? Hmm? nt BreakfastClub May 2016 #60

Lots of people cared. I was one of them n/t arcane1 May 2016 #83

Not to worry, she'll earn the big bucks after her stint in the Oval Office. bluesbassman May 2016 #6

Ah... So now she ought to check her self accomplishments to your requirement? seabeyond May 2016 #29

What the hell does that even mean? bluesbassman May 2016 #36

She also complained that no one bats an eye when a man gets paid for speaking meow2u3 May 2016 #40

Well I bat an eye. bluesbassman May 2016 #74

Well, no one in the media bats an eye when a repuke man gets paid for speaking meow2u3 May 2016 #79

She was not an elected official or appointee when she gave the speeches, right? brush May 2016 #52

You should have just stopped at your subject line. At least you would have been correct. bluesbassman May 2016 #72

Did you hear what Streisand commented about that? brush May 2016 #77

That's so silly. If Hillary wanted big bucks she wouldn't have gone into public service BreakfastClub May 2016 #61

Well considering HRC's net worth is estimated at $30,000,000... bluesbassman May 2016 #73

To Republicans, maybe. Maedhros May 2016 #7

Well said Egnever May 2016 #15

How about ... surrealAmerican May 2016 #9

yeah, we're not voting for the Bushes and Trumps MisterP May 2016 #13

How about... No corruption. No evidence of corruption at all. Fabricated accusation. seabeyond May 2016 #28

So, you're cool with the conflicts of interest when Republicans ... surrealAmerican May 2016 #35

I see no conflict of interest. seabeyond May 2016 #38

Your personal inabilities do not alter the reality at hand Scootaloo May 2016 #63

And John Kerry got paid for speeches while he was still a Senator -- it was made illegal pnwmom May 2016 #10

Greatpoint...plus all the Bernie relatives receiving cash from the campaign.n/t KelleyD May 2016 #11

And money being funneled from Burlington college to Jane's daughter's business. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #12

It was banned in 1990 and even when it was allowed Senators were only permitted to keep $27,337 (27% Midwestern Democrat May 2016 #45

Not OK for any of them. Egnever May 2016 #14

Sex has nothing to do with it felix_numinous May 2016 #16

Hillary is not Trump or Bush. HuckleB May 2016 #23

Why would someone change their opinion JackInGreen May 2016 #25

People expect Republicans to be grifters. alarimer May 2016 #17

I think her point is Skittles May 2016 #18

+1, the men aren't called on to give their speech transcripts by the media uponit7771 May 2016 #20

Hillary is endlessly grilled over Benghazi Skittles May 2016 #21

I don't think we should lower our bar to match Republicans Scootaloo May 2016 #33

Republicans are not trying to get my vote Rebkeh May 2016 #39

Because the man she is running against bigwillq May 2016 #30

You mean 1/30th of 1 yrs salary over 5 years? That amount? She was under paid you know that right? uponit7771 May 2016 #42

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!! meow2u3 May 2016 #41

if she can't figure that one out she should quit while she's ahead stupidicus May 2016 #24

Damn straight. My issue too. Sing it Streisand. Nt seabeyond May 2016 #26

I knew there was a link between Hillary and the Republicans. n/t. jalan48 May 2016 #27

WHy are we using Republicans to set standards for Democratic primaries? Scootaloo May 2016 #32

This is my thought as well Rebkeh May 2016 #37

The media is involved also not just dem standards uponit7771 May 2016 #43

Streissand is comparing her directly to Jeb and Trump, both Republicans Scootaloo May 2016 #44

I agree on that point, its the media that's also not stressing transcript from everyone not just uponit7771 May 2016 #47

That's a meaningless statement Scootaloo May 2016 #49

When did you ask to see John Kerry's paid speech transcripts? n/t pnwmom May 2016 #56

I was not aware that John Kerry was running. Scootaloo May 2016 #58

Even in 2004 we were well aware of the possibly corrupting influence of money in politics pnwmom May 2016 #59

Really? REALLY? Scootaloo May 2016 #62

You didn't know and neither did I. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #64

I was completely certain. Scootaloo May 2016 #66

Really. I thought being Secretary of State would be the capstone. pnwmom May 2016 #67

Then maybe you don't understand your candidate all that well? Scootaloo May 2016 #68

I've never pretended to be a mind-reader. I judge her based on her actions and words. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #69

Nope. Those men were also bought and paid for politicians. nt ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #48

They are ALL overpaid davidn3600 May 2016 #50

After listening to Hillary speaking, she does command an audience, probably has good information. Thinkingabout May 2016 #51

This message was self-deleted by its author U4ikLefty May 2016 #55

Someone can pay me a fraction of that, where ya want me at? Rex May 2016 #57

Unfortunate examples, Babs. (n/t) Iggo May 2016 #65

"Why Barbara Boxer Isn�t Bothered By Hillary Clinton�s Wall Street Speaking Fees" Lady_Chat May 2016 #70

Yes, I hold Hillary to a higher standard. Warren DeMontague May 2016 #71

Barbra doesn't seem to understand the difference between a candidate and a past president. Scuba May 2016 #76

Streisand may not have noticed... Chan790 May 2016 #80

Most of the people attacking Clinton are Trump supporters Democat May 2016 #81