Comedian ‘Redistributes’ Children’s Candy in Hilarious ‘Obama-Style’ Halloween Prank

Leave it to cons to go so low as to even slime the children.

 

If the rich/elite who pulls the government strings, and it is their tax code.

Welfare creates dependency, but more than anything it assures less competition, much like the public school system that is creating less intelligent students year after year. Ignorant people are more easily manipulated, and the rich/elite do not want or need the competition. This why the nation is where it is.

Only question is are you part of a solution or part of the problem? If you buy into the good cop/bad cop routine of the rich/elite's two party scam, you "ARE" the problem!

 

I saw your first comment. Paying lipservice to a conservative notion for one second does not inoculate you from criticism on your following comments.

You're conflating gains from earned and taxed income with gains from wages. They are different things, and should - for the benefit of an individual attempting to secure wealth AS WELL AS the rest of society - be treated differently.

I do not believe in Capital Gains taxes at all. Personal wealth should be used in our economy as a tool to promote more wage-paying positions, with the gains from that undertaking 100% kept by the person putting their assets at risk. That is what is best for society.

I really don't care what you think I am - but I am curious what level must be attained to be considered such by your standard.

Congratulations. You've found yourself a whipping dog. Nevermind that your disgust for someone looking to pursue wealth accumulation does so for the benefit of himself AND society, you actually have deluded yourself into thinking that society is better off taxing capital gains - and thus chilling the incentive to put assets at risk - than allowing free 100% gains in such undertakings because of the broadening of the tax base such undertakings create.

Won't you be surprised if you suddenly wake up one day intelligent enough to realize that your position is FOS. Perhaps if you could somehow talk to that unemployed person - on welfare - who would otherwise have worked at that new store an investor would have put money into had he not made the business decision that such investment wasn't worth the return due to tax overhead.

Hypocrite! Condescension is something about which your posts flaunt with regularity, which is why I smash you every time you throw sh!t like it out there. You know nothing about how to truly superpower an economic engine, but you've swallowed hook line and sinker a class envy position which is the mutual undoing of the rest of us.

All because you cannot abide by the notion that wealthy people make money for themselves through engaging in risking their capital for the purpose which simultaneously also allows people who are not rich to work.

[QUOET]This "analogy" is about as stupid as they come from the two party scam-meisters and you sound foolish defending it.[/QUOTE]

Or...you're utterly ignorant about what really happens when we choose not to tax a behaviour.

 

So you consider it slime to take by force from one person and give to another? Good, so you are against every welfare-type program that the government enacts.

 

Yeah, I had a problem with the Obama song, too...

Pretty sure I said so...

Most recently in this very thread...

And most of the gov't departments that you're referring probably use kids in said appeals because the dept's benefit children...

Making a political point does not benefit children in any way...

 

Gotta love getting liberals to accidently admit what slime is.

If this egregious behaviour 'slimes' children, then similar action does so to adults as well. The difference is that the children were part of this biting spoof with the knowledge and consent of their parents, and they lost only candy (and likely had it returned afterwards).

Not so with the adults, who have lost their money. Which means that their kids have lost that money as well.

So we've established that stupid liberals will admit that kids having things taken away from them is slimy.

Yep: we make you admit the truth one way or the other.

 

It's not a conservative notion, it is a convoluted supremacist mentality notion. The lie is that welfare is to redistribute wealth to those on the bottom when it is really in place to sustain wealth at the top, just like a monarchy's desire to keep the peasants from having the capabilities of rising any further than they were allowed too. Broke and ignorant means less to no competition.

Income is income, and if this country is going to have an income tax then income gained from investments should be taxed. It doesn't matter if a person invests their time or you invest your trust fund, mummy and daddy provided for you, the earnings are still income. I don't agree with the tax code, where you get this idiocy is beyond me, for several reasons but no matter how you wish to address it, the best government corporate money can buy keeps this one going, so whine all you want but it's not going any where any time soon. We can pay more when democrats raise the rates or when republicans remove the loopholes, but the rich/elites will still be exempt from paying at the same % of the peasants.

Considered what exactly? It's pretty obviously you are not interested in a fair and just tax since you seem to want to exclude the minority that already benefits the most from this one. Everybody pays the same % or nobody does, what is so difficult about that for you to understand? Preferential treatment should not come from status but from actual results, not just because you fit into a particular class. That is the definition of class warfare, and the rich/elites and the best government corporate money can buy have created the situation, not me.

Yes I am disgusted by cheats and arrogant supremacists who believe they are special and deserve to be treated as such. News flash, you are not special. Get over yourself! How many jobs did you create last year that paid a reasonably fair wage that didn't make that individual a candidate for food stamps. And the illegal aliens that mows your grass or cleans your pool doesn't count. If you actually created good paying jobs that provided an income that made your workers productive members of society, then by all means, some consideration should be given for the benefit to society you have provided. Otherwise you pay as much as the guy actually using his body (mind and/or muscle) to work for a living.

They are eligible for welfare if they take the crumbs being peddled and incorrectly called a job. Almost half of the people on government subsidies are employed, which is part of the problem. These businesses shouldn't be getting tax breaks for creating dependents on the tax payer, where wages do not support the basic necessities required to reside in this society. Rent, food, clothing, transportation/communications, etc... Death of competition, has created an over abundance of job seekers, which has driven down wages and increased profits for monopolized industries that take full advantage of the environment that has been created by government intervention, and over regulations imposed to eliminate the competition, once again to maximize profits, not sustain a national economy.

Save me the supremacist talking points. A powerful small business environment fuel an economic engine. Corporate monopolies/government cronyism destroy them. That's not 'envy', it's reality. Hasn't the past 30 years made that obvious to you yet?

When the government isn't playing favorites, or manipulating the market for selective heads of the industries to strive and survive at everybody elses cost I tend to agree. When we get back to a more capitalistic envorinment, that benefits everybody and not just the government's favorites, then we will compare notes again.


[QUOET]Or...you're utterly ignorant about what really happens when we choose not to tax a behaviour.[/QUOTE]


Once again, the tax code is an invention of the rich/elite, enforced by the best government corporate money can buy. They are not the one's being taken advantage of, as your mindless rants suggest. The poor and the middle working class are the victims of this tax code, and the manipulative nature of the plutocracy.

 

There is no reason that children cannot learn the valuable political lessons that parents wish to teach them through actions of this sort.

There is no problem with Crowder's spoof with the parent's willing consent. It's stupid to whine otherwise, as children's belief systems are influenced in myriad ways with parental supervision.

 

Might ought to give the yoots of America a good lesson in voting in a con artists election for fools too.

Ask them who they would vote for in the up and coming election. If they say Obama, punch them in the face hard enough to break their jaw, and if they say Romney, kick them in the knee, shattering the kneecap and possibly breaking the leg.

Teaching them that voting for the lesser of two evils is bad for the average voter for different reasons, and emphasize too them, to stop voting for the problem, the two party scam! Now that would be a good analogy of how voting works in this country. lol

 

If the parents are good with it, whatever...

I said I was not cool with using political points...

I still think it's stupid...

Kids are out trick-or-treating...

They don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about economics lessons...

 

sorta kinda like "horses and bayonets"?

 

I was referencing YOUR comment. Are you now saying that your comment was a convoluted supremacist mentality notion?

Welfare is a dead-end, kills individualism and achievement and is a perpetual drag on our economy. Were you expecting me to say anything different?

Why? Because you say so? Pay attention here: you aren't making an argument, you're just reiterating an opinion. If it can be proved that removing Capital Gains results in more economic activity, a broader tax base, less need for dependency programs, and more independence...

...why would you support anything else?

*sigh*. Most Capital Gains are derived from people putting their own wealth at risk to earn income. Taxing that action disincentivizes it, and reroutes the money that would be used for MORE wealth and economy building into the very Welfare programs you simultaneously lament! What part of that can you not understand?

You think that Capital Gains should be taxed - and your defense of that position is "if we have an Income tax, all income should be the same". That's an asinine position.

If you don't want me to respond to idiocy, defend a non-idiotic position.

WTF kind of stupid response is this? Discussions like this are about what makes the most sense, not some defeatist stupidity about what you can't change.

You continue to wallow in ignorance here. When the wealthy pay any capital gains at all, it does not help the rest of society; it removes from their control money which would be used to stimulate economic activity.

You felt like through some sort of stupid jab questioning my station in life. I want clarification from you: at what level of wealth would I be considered "elite" or "rich" to you? Is paying in taxes in one year 5 times what you earn in one year not qualify? That's the only statement I made in conjecture.

*blech*. I despise your use of the word "FAIR". Just what is "FAIR", exactly? Doesn't absolutely everyone have to agree to the definition of that word to justify even considering using it in this context? Here's my definition:

Flat tax on all earned income through wages regardless of level, not to exceed 10%. Zero taxes on all income earned through dividends or investments. Make the Government pay for itself with this amount of money, and no more. Float a currency controlled by the Congress and administered through the Treasury and provide the amount of currency necessary to ensure the economy of growth in line with the growth of population, and watch the value of said currency explode in relation to other currencies used in other countries.

There is nothing wrong with a wealthy person benefitting from choosing to put their wealth at risk, and you completely utterly ignore who else benefits. How about the person who just sold me a 2013 Porsche Carrera S? Did they benefit from my benefit?

Learn how economics entwines us all in mutual prosperity, merely for participating. Government simply gets in the way of that and saps the lifeblood of that prosperity, as a leach saps lifeblood.

Sometimes, however, the leach is necessary. Our Founding Fathers enumerated specifically when and where.

Nothing - on wages. You don't seem to understand the difference between taxing earning a living to self-sustain, and encouraging the continued participation in wealth once acquired by avoiding taxing.

One is necessary to survive - and should be taxed as a stable means of income upon a guaranteed activity - and one is strictly optional, and continues the means of production for those who need to find work to survive.

And it also ensures a retirement for those fiscally responsible enough to take their after-tax income and put it to work in similar investments. Such a policy will build upon itself and create impossible to imagine wealth and contentment, if you'd just the get fock out of the way and allow it to happen.

But you'd have to drop your hatred of wealthy people to enable it, and you won't do that.

Ignorance. I grew up dirt poor, and made of myself what I am. There is no "preferential treatment". If I should choose to work at Walmart as a greeter in my old age to keep myself involved socially, get exercise and stay busy, my paycheck should be taxed at a wage rate like everyone else.

My accumulated wealth AND WHAT IT IS INVOLVED IN, however, SHOULD NOT BE.

Because it isn't good for personal independence and wealth creation, and it isn't good for the rest of society who is deprived of the job opportunities which COME from what my wealth is involved in.

You need to separate the differences between income from wage, and income from investment, and understand that everyone goes through different phases in their lives, and most start in the 'need to make a wage and be taxed' department, and end up in the "I'm retiring, more tired, and need my assets to give me a return so I can live on it" stage.

Your class envy contrived this entire screed, just as I said it did. There may actually be people like you describe, but you're busy throwing EVERYONE of means in that same basket, and making fabricated villians of them all to continue to support your weaselly misguided notion of 'punishment' and 'fairness'.

Hypocritical. The person that needs to get over themselves is you, and your hatred and jealousy of others.

Last year? Only 2. Prior to that? About 50. There are people on this forum who know me, know my company, and can vouch for that. You should be careful not to put your foot in a beartrap from which you cannot escape.

How many, may I ask, have you accomplished that for?

 

I don't have a pool; I have a golf club in my neighborhood of which I am a part which has a pool. I belong to it, spend approximately 20K there a year, and - as a result - help employ many people there, and tip generously the fantastic staff.

I do employ a landscape company, and spend approximately 5K/year with them. I have employees at the company which is my primary work, but am invested in several other ventures which employ many more.

Much of what I do involves my income from capital gains. Without taxes on those risks I've taken, I would rebalance my investment portfolio, and pull more money from safe havens and put it to work in activities which carry a higher risk of failing, but also a potential better return.

So that I can do more of what it is you see I spend money with - money spent with people who are not rich (though the owner of the landscape company is getting there, and the owner of our golf club will be when his investment in that club is paid off - another move which was made with Capital Gains).

Your anger is misplaced, and your lashing out is misguided.

Tell me, what do you think Capital Gains do?

You have a profound misunderstanding of the uses of capital, and the risks and mindsets around both accumulating it, and employing it. You have what I call "Scrooge McDuck Syndrome": that is, you think that wealthy people simply put their cash in piles in a vault, and swim around in it regularly.

If Capital Gains were taxed at 100%, that is exactly what would happen, as there would be no point in even allowing a bank to hold the cash, for fear of losing it merely for a 1% return which would be then taxed at 100%.

As you lower that number, you start to encourage more and more placement of assets into society, at which point it operates to grow other's wealth. Wealth is a tool. It is not a mattress - but the minute you say that my tool may be lost if I use it, and if you succeed in using your tool but lose half of what is gained by using it if you DO succeed, I question whether I should risk losing my tool in the first place (read: allowing it to be 'borrowed' by someone willing to do work to create a return for themselves, and for me).

You do not understand Capital Gains, nor the mindset of those who get them, nor who benefits from the actions that create them.

You operate on the presumption that there is a force other than market demand which should set the level of compensation for a given job - that balance will not be created any other way than through massive interventionalism. To illustrate my point, I am going to use a scene from a movie I like:

[video=youtube;scBY3cVyeyA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scBY3cVyeyA[/video]

Here's why I picked that scene. If you know the movie, mankind receives a blueprint to build a machine which can transport man to a different plane. In this scene, Jodie Foster is sitting in the sphere which is the vehicle to that plane. The engineers see fit to bolt her chair right into the sphere. This results in a tremendously volatile shaking ride for Foster, until she realizes she should just let go - so she unbuckles herself - and the chair shortly thereafter breaks its mounts and floats freely.

All that extra work - all that extra attempt to control - and nothing of the sort was needed. They didn't trust the plans and blueprint they were given, so they tried something restrictive.

So it is with things like Capital Gains Taxes. Get the fock out of the way, and watch how smooth the ride becomes.

Save me the arrogant ******** answer. I own a small business, and have invested in two others. Capital Gains and other taxes have prevented me from being willing to invest in yet another one. Do you think small business does not get started based upon the investment of wealthy people?

Non sequitur. I haven't addressed this at all; you're flying all over the place with your ill-placed hatred. I do not support Corporate monopolies or government Cronyism. Haven't my 9000 posts made that clear to you yet?



What I wonder is how you can manage tiny Government and very low taxes while simultaneously providing us a mechanism that ensures control over the development of either. I have told you my answer already: let the market determine winners and losers, and let private individuals keep the wealth that they accumulate, so that those with the proven ability to grow wealth engage in activity which insures the continued wealth accumulation of those participating with them in the same economy.

How does increasing Capital Gains taxes do that? You are mixing two different topics as though I have addressed both of them, and I haven't.

Don Quixote, you are creating windwills with which to joust. I am in favor of eliminating Federal Income Taxes ALTOGETHER. Where I find your position batsh!t crazy - and fertile ground to attack - is your claim that if income taxes are at a certain level, then so should Capital Gains - and I'm pointing out the stupidity of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Eliminate Cap Gains Tax altogether; see the improvement in the economy. Recognize that public awareness of said improvement may soften minds to the notion of doing likewise with Federal Income Taxes. Meanwhile, you attacking someone like me who is extremely successful and knows how to build a business and create prosperity while also holding many of the same views you do IS STUPID.

If you hadn't been so busy farting out pejoratives, you'd have already understood that I agree with that, but CAPITAL GAINS TAXES do not HELP the poor and middle class, they HURT them.

They hurt EVERYONE except the exact Government which enriches itself, enlarges itself, and puts out the shingle to entertain Cronyist influence from those who can buy it.

You are a dog chasing your own tail.

 

Brilliant.

Meanwhile, tell them how voting for Gary Johnson is exactly as effective as writing in Mickey Mouse, and equally stupid.

Brain dead. While you work to change two-party voting - and you should - you meanwhile don't support the notion of voting for someone who cannot win as an attempt to bring about change.

 

It was completely staged, they gave kids different amounts of candy after explaining to their brain dead parents that it was a 'staged' political experiment, knowing that kids would act accordingly. When the cameras were then turned off each child walked out with the exact same amount of candy. It went from a 'staged' propaganda extremist nut job piece to an act of socialism/communism, as all the candy was equally distributed for those who participated in the deceptive experiment anyway.

Not a lesson for kids at all, just a hack propaganda piece for the feeble minded sheeple.

 

I don't even know if we are discussing the same thing at this point. Wealth redistribution does not enrich anybody at the bottom, but it insures wealth remains at the top, anyone who believes the poor are getting wealthy on welfare has the mentality of a convoluted supremacist.

Yes something more on the lines of; "the poor are stealing from me, the poor rich guy who is being taken advantage of." Basically what you said earlier.

Jobs are not being created, in fact the money is being used to remove more jobs from the economy as has been the norm for the last several decades. Check mate.

Nobody is re-taxing that money only the income generated from the investments. If it isn't reinvested it becomes income.

I never said I agreed with the tax code, but I did say if there is an income tax, then all income should be taxed equally. Your position is rich people should be treated differently, simply because they are rich and their income is called something else. Talk about idiotic.

Right and getting people to understand how the rich/elites and 'their' government, are bleeding this country for everything they are worth, then change will come. It however will never become a reality if the two party scam continues to muddy the waters, by maintaining the plutocracy we have and are being hamstringed with.

The fact that we are over running with jobs is proof of that, right? NOT!

Two completely different topics, one being completely irrelevant. The point is being one of the rich/elite doesn't give you carte blaunche or rights to preferential treatment. The fact that you may pay more than anybody else only means you make more than that person. If you make less and pay more then you have a legitimate complaint.

We still have the same problem. If there is an income tax it should be equal no matter where the income comes from. If you want to reinvest the earnings, I am good with no tax but once it is drawn out it is income, and should be taxed as any other income. Am I not speaking clearly enough for you. Income whether it comes from the sweat of your brow, or the size of you investment portfolio, is still income.

First part couldn't say without more specifics, the bold I agree and a government on the take is even more damaging, which is why we are sinking fast these days.

Yep a necessary evil, but when we place politicians on pedestals, start treating them as betters rather than the employees they are, the people get screwed and a small minority has a windfall. Note wealth increases for the upper class over the last 30 years.

Again jobs are not being created, they are being lost!

And again as long as it remains in investments no taxes are deducted. Only when it becomes income is it or should it be taxed if the country has an income tax for it's citizens.

God this is such a delusion. I don't hate rich people, any more than I hate a leaky roof. I see a problem and I want it fixed, and the moronic conclusion is I must hate rich people. Stop it you sound like an idiot.

 

I hear that a lot but in most cases the people who claim to have grown up dirt poor, actually came from a middle to upper middle class family for the time. Comparing the standard of today with what life was like when you were young is dishonesty at it's best. And again, your accumulated wealth will only be taxed when you decide to use it as income, you know, in a society that chooses a tax system that is based on an income tax.

Yea blah blah blah I heard you already you "deserve"..., I get it already you think you should be treated differently, cuz your wealth is XYZ, but tax that poor dumb slob who just worked a 12 hour shift. I get it.

Sorry but the plutocracy has destroyed that dream for most folks and for those who worked their entire life, did save, did invest, will die flat broke owing money to a somebody in the health care industry. Because their isn't enough days in a week or years in a lifetime to keep up with the rise in the cost of living and the average wage. The deck is stacked against the majority.

OK enough. The fact is, these so-called tax cuts that are supposed to create jobs, are not, for what ever reason, and the people getting the tax breaks under false pretense are not helping "THIS" economy. Neither are the corporatist, democrat/republican, that are looting the piggy bank, so by all means I will be more than eager to discuss economic theory with you, but what we have today, a plutocracy, no economic theory can tread water in. The economy is weak because we have a government that is running interference and manipulating the market for an exclusive minority. Welfare for the poor is in place to reduce their competition significantly, now and in future generations, and on top of that corporate welfare is assuring the selective few remain in power of their individual industries, even if they have to steal future generations wealth. You think going through the motions and continuing to feed the monster will make a difference, I on the other hand, know it will not, and see the monster for what it is and refuse to be a part of the lesser of two evils mind set. Ta ta for now, the weekend is upon us and I have to go spend the evening with my son who is in college and I have two jobs to do this weekend, so have a good weekend will ya.

 

I think that, even if I was really conservative, I still wouldn't find Crowder very funny. He has too much of that vanilla, frat boy demeanor.

The best comedians tend to be edgy, like George Carlin and Doug Stanhope.

 

Con comedians, Frank Burns and Rush Limpballs. Con musicians, Toby Keith and Kid Rock. Cons are just pretty lame at the "liberal arts."

 

No, of course they don't get it - way over their heads.

Hey, gal! Welcome back! Hope life is treating you good!

 

It wasn't just meant to be funny. It was meant to understand you don't take what you don't earn.

 

According to Jesus, nobody earns anything, it's all given by God. Square that with capitalism.