This is a legend and it has been circulated many times, but I feel it is appropriate to share this here.

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and was very much in favor of the redistribution of wealth.

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.

Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was


taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing ?" She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over."

Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA." The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"

The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, " Welcome to the Republican party."


Now while I don't necessarily agree that this is party specific, I do agree that those that WORK HARD should be REWARDED for their EFFORTS and they shouldn't be PUNISHED in the form of paying HIGHER TAXES because they WORKED HARD, only to have those taxes be GIVEN to someone who DIDN'T work AS HARD. Not Saying that they didn't work at all, but the work ethic between a successful business owner, and someone on assistance is DRASTICALLY different, at least in my experience.

frivolous and cheap are subjective standards, I have no interest in debating them in terms of how individuals assess other individuals

I don't want to tell anyone what to do with their money either, I can tell them what they are to contribute if they live in MY HOME though

just as americans and citizens of any countries have governments and laws which tell them what they are expected to contribute to live there and have the protections of citizenship

the 'future' comes much sooner and more often for some than others

I also don't wish to debate all the different situations and circumstances that may keep people from having a 'savings' at the moment that they suffer a setback,,,,

You don't want to tell anyone what to do with their money but you want the government to tell them what to do with their money? i'm confused.

I find it hard to compare having a GPA, to being able to eat safe food and have safe shelter

and I also find the analogy lacking because it compares a one to one contribution/exhcnage , instead of addressing spending on a COLLECTIVE contribution to a particular collective goal,,,,

you misread, I said I don't want to tell anyone what to do with their money BUT, I will tell someone living in MY HOME what they are to contribute to continue doing so..


I believe the government can set reasonable expectations of what CITIZENS should contribute to continue enjoying their citizenship/residency in america

But is expecting 53% of the population to PROVIDE FOR the 47% who don't CONTRIBUTE Anything REASONABLE?

That is close to a 50/50 ratio or a 1/1 ration same thing, so the idea of collective vs 1:1 ratio is not the same doesn't work out mathematically.

Long as I gits mine, why should I care if the others are legal?

again with the 47 percent figure, I don't know what that refers to,,, the unemployment rate is at 7 percent

93 percent of those who can ARE contributing something 'reasonable' everytime they go to work to contribute to the profits of those who will earn enough to pay taxes,,,,

As Janelle Monae sings:
They keep us underground working hard for the greedy
But when it's time pay they turn around and call us needy
My crown too heavy like the Queen Nefertiti
Gimme back my pyramid, I'm trying to free Kansas City


assets and debts are a part of life,,, as assets grow, often so does debt

is debt increasing ? YES,, so is GDP(revenue),,, it goes in cycles, it reaches a peak and goes back down and starts over

when we increase revenue, we can pay debt

and it makes little difference for instance

if I have 10 owners with 10 employees each,

and

if I need 1000 revenue, whether I get it by charging 10 business owners 100 dollars off the profits that the work of their 10 employees help create, or whether I charge all 100 individuals 10 dollars,,, they are all still doing the same amount of 'work' that translates into the same amount of available REVENUE for me to collect

they are ALL contributing,,,,however I choose to collect it

7% is nowhere near the representation of REAL unemployment figures.

Obamabots misrepresent all matters.

“All the altars and all the thrones united to arrest the forward march of the human race. The king said that mankind must not work for themselves. The priest said that mankind must not think for themselves. One forged chains for the hands, the other for the soul.”
— Robert G. Ingersoll

mankind must not work 'just for themself',, mankind must work towards the progress of MANKIND,,,,

Progressive oBummerbutts no sabes la diferencia en hand up and hand out.

Ellos sabe muy bien la manda y begging.

Pobresitos son esclavos de la macina.

Hussein did say, learn Spanish, no?

yep,just look around at the "Progress"!

same tired character attacks,,,




some people continue to equate asking for help with begging,,,

It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions.
-Daniel Webster

constitution was made to be a living and growing document

Demands.
They demand ayuda y benificios.

No fue la culpa mia que no queres aprender como trabajar uno.

To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.

Thomas Jefferson

Those who've built their houses in sand, gubament help, will be washed away in the incoming tide.

We need, at least, half the nation in houses built in sand for the rest of us to survive.

Thank you for salvar la vida de nosotros, esclavos de la macina.

"again with the 47 percent figure, I don't know what that refers to,,, the unemployment rate is at 7 percent

93 percent of those who can ARE contributing something 'reasonable' everytime they go to work to contribute to the profits of those who will earn enough to pay taxes,,,,"

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/census-49-americans-get-gov-t-benefits-82m-households-medicaid

I believe the 47% that is being used refers to the people who receive government assistance from one or more agencies.
It's actually higher than 47% but I believe that the figures isn't fair so it shouldn't be used. It include Social Security received by seniors which is a earned benefit rather than an unearned benefit.....even if they get more than was contributed on their behalf. That Ponzi scheme isn't the fault of those seniors.

You think the governments taxation system makes 93% of the people contribute what is reasonable? I can't believe you think "wealthy people" are contributing something "reasonable". Or didn't you realize that those evil people are part of 93%?

What a stretch....now you are contending that because someone's employer is paying taxes it wouldn't happen without the employees who don't pay any income tax. Many of who get a tax credits on top of not paying any income tax that far exceeds what they "contributed". Is this derivative of Obama and Elizabeth Warren declaration to employers that "you didn't build that" crap?

Beyond ridiculous.
Keep reaching. SMH