Obama Says: Steve Jobs Deserves to be Rich

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Silmarunya

Distinguished
Nov 3, 2009
390
0
18,930
[citation][nom]greenrider02[/nom]Colberg's Stages of Moral Development... it's a pcychology theory that basically says that some people don't understand the golden rule (I'm putting this VERY simply), and never will, because surprisingly enough, it's a concept that, on the universal scale, cannot be conceived by every human mind. If you know what I mean, you'll agree. And if you don't know what I mean, you won't. And Colberg's scale tells me I can't really expect anything more from you. I'm sorry.[/citation]

At what stage in Kohlberg's theory am I stuck? Clearly none of us is in the sixth and highest, as it doesn't exist (it assumes there must be a universal ethical reasoning, which there clearly isn't - ethics are a cultural concept). Even the lower stages are questionable at best.
 

greenrider02

Distinguished
Dec 18, 2010
34
0
18,580
[citation][nom]Silmarunya[/nom]At what stage in Kohlberg's theory am I stuck? Clearly none of us is in the sixth and highest, as it doesn't exist (it assumes there must be a universal ethical reasoning, which there clearly isn't - ethics are a cultural concept). Even the lower stages are questionable at best.[/citation]

I would suggest reading it in its entirety and judging for yourself. I don't mean to be insulting in any way but Kohlberg showed that most of the time, you cannot understand a stage above your own, until you get there. There is no particular requirement for getting there, it's like having an epiphany; plus, each stage is much more in depth than a sentence that summarizes it. Each stage leads to the next, eventually. Some people might never progress, very few digress, and in the end I always think of it like a level of maturity. I've read all of your posts through these six pages, but that doesn't tell me which stage you are, because the criteria aren't based on characteristics we can describe with any few words. I do agree with you most of the time though.

As an example, Martin Luther King Jr. was a stage 6, because not only did he see that what was going on was ethically wrong, he knew why, he knew how it should be, AND he did something about it, because there was no better moral thing he could give his life for than fixing that injustice. He didn't see it as a choice. However, he abhorred violence and those who committed it in the name of his cause, for the same reasons he took up the cause. Malcom X would be more like a stage 4, or stage 3, picking up the cause without truly understanding it, and then campaigning for it in the wrong way.

Jesus of Nazareth/Buddha/Muhammed...etc was a stage 6 too, most likely, because the moral values he tried to communicate to his followers were truly revolutionary in civilizing the peoples of the region. That does not mean that his followers are in most cases as morally developed, and in fact someone who is a religious fanatic is most likely a stage 3 on Kohlberg's scale.

If you read that and think I'm crazy, then that's just proving the validity of the scale to those who do know what I mean...

Once again, I don't want to insult anyone, but what I was saying is that the entirety of the entire debate going on in this thread boils down to how Kohlberg's Stages are represented in various demographics. Similarly, when people support one party or the other, it's mostly because the some core values resonated, or not, and after that the details are just a result of petty fighting by the stage 3 and 4's over how to implement the moral ideology of some stage 5 or 6, while they lack -complete- understanding of the concepts over which they argue. This is quite the conundrum, which boils down further into Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's concept of society's cyclical nature on it's path to something called Absolute Freedom, the whole of which Marx and Engels misinterpreted (again, a lower stage of moral development missing the point) into what they called communism, in it's pure form, which was further botched by European radicals of the early 20th century (think Bulshevic) into what we see and fear as the "evil" communism and socialism oft misunderstood and deservedly feared today.

My interpretation comes from several philosophy books, plus my own interpretal nuances, plus studies in US History, European History, Humanities, Psychology, and especially Philosophy throughout college, just in case anybody feels like calling me out on facts. (I will happily rescind a statement if someone can show me evidence is wrong)
 

airborne11b

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2008
78
0
18,590
Obama has kept 127 Promises, failed to keep 28.
A canidate running for president does not have the information that the current president does. So often a canidate will get into office and then get handed new information and realize that it's not possible to do some of the things he wanted to as a canidate. But considering the man has
Kept his word on 127 things out of 155 subjects, I'd say he's really doing a great job. Then take into consideration that he's cleaning up 8 years of republican destruction, it makes Obama look even better imo.

A great mechanic can fix a broken car, but if throw a molotov cocktail into a car and let the thing burn to the ground, there is only so much a mechanic can do to restore the car.

Do your research before you post non-sense about our president. (And fox new + Glen Beck does not = research)

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
 

Yoder54

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2008
179
0
18,630
[citation][nom]davewolfgang[/nom]Sorry Marco - but he's right. You tax the wealthy - they LEAVE.You tax businesses - they LEAVE.You need to take some basic accounting classes (and history classes) to understand this. Now if you don't believe me - ask NYC what happened when they slapped extra taxes on the rich - a bunch MOVED. Ask New Jersey what happened when they slapped extra taxes on the rich - the MOVED. Why does Jon Kerry park his boat in another STATE?? To avoid paying TAXES. [/citation]

Where the rich going to move when they are forced to pay their fair share of taxes? India? Cuba? I seriously doubt if any will move out of the US, since it is one of the best countries around. Also, only the far right feels that the ultra-rich should be given tax breaks, while many of the rich feel as 65% of American's feel...tax those who make over $250,000 a year.

If US corporations do not want to pay their fair share of taxes and decide to move out of country, then slap some tariffs on their products. These corporations want the best of both worlds...no taxes, high profits, and cheap labor. They get it, but it is at the expense of the American citizen. Exxon Mobile had a profit of over $45,000,000,000 in 2009, and got a tax refund of $156,000,000. While an American worker who makes $45,000 a year will pay at least $3,000 a year in taxes...assuming some write offs. Where is the fairness?


 

greenrider02

Distinguished
Dec 18, 2010
34
0
18,580
On another note, I would like to admonish the person who published this for using deplorable sub-par press techniques for attracting attention to the article by creating a title designed to incite argument by using out of context phrasing. I just read an article recently about the downfall of legitimate journalism and public opinion of the press (surprise, it's true the public doesn't like or trust the press) due to that exact type of sensationalist journalism which I would have only thought I would see in tabloids, and not on a site like Tom's which at least has the intentions of writing without bias (note I don't point out exactly how much success I think they've had). I'm sorry, but a truly repectable reporter aspires to bring the public the facts, rather than aspiring to be popular by pre-establishing a negative tone.

As a comparison, I'll use J.K. Rowling's Rita Skeeter, from the Harry Potter books... that's what the feel of the article's title had...
 

pale paladin

Distinguished
Jul 27, 2009
73
0
18,580
The hardest part about being rich (not that I am) is loyalty over profit. It's easy to say that "if I were rich business owner that I would keep my labor force in the U.S." but realistically the costs are too immense to keep their profit margins at what they are for many companies. I'm not sticking up for Jobs or anyone else who choses to employ other countries citizens but keep the old profit equation in mind. P=R-C . The solution is subsidies for American labor and purchases of American goods by Americans. If we don't stand together we will all fall. F Mexico . F China. Let them deal with things on their own. That is all.
 

rdawise

Distinguished
Apr 18, 2008
75
0
18,580
[citation][nom]Marco925[/nom]If that was the case, why after so many tax cuts, we're in recession? we should be jumping in pools of money right now. Such crazy comments to think that tax cuts for wealthy people create jobs.. tax cuts to companies can help with performance and increase jobs, but personally, if i have money, i'm gonna bloody keep it. not spend it elsewhere, Keep living in your bubble if that's what makes you happy.[/citation]

Too few people realize this. It's business 101....

[citation][nom]davewolfgang[/nom]Sorry Marco - but he's right. You tax the wealthy - they LEAVE.You tax businesses - they LEAVE.You need to take some basic accounting classes (and history classes) to understand this. Now if you don't believe me - ask NYC what happened when they slapped extra taxes on the rich - a bunch MOVED. Ask New Jersey what happened when they slapped extra taxes on the rich - the MOVED. Why does Jon Kerry park his boat in another STATE?? To avoid paying TAXES. People, no matter how much they make, earn and have - actually like to KEEP it. And in American here - once it's yours - NOBODY, including the Gubment - has any business or right to touch it, ever. And please also tell us, how many poor people have hired you (or anybody) lately? How many poor people own and run multi-million dollar businesses?[/citation]

Really? A counter example is DeLL in NC. They were given so many tax cuts to be there it was crazy but guess what happened? They left. Even after tax cuts...
 

10tacle

Distinguished
Dec 6, 2008
329
0
19,010
[citation][nom]idiom[/nom]Don't let facts get in the way of your argument. Taxes are at their lowest level in 70 years. Since the 1980's the wealthiest 5% have seen their collective wealth multiply from $1 trillion to over $80 trillion. Transfer of wealth? It's not the poor that are seeing an 80x gain in their collective wealth. Can you specifically point toward any action by this administration that directly raised your taxes? Or the taxes of others? Turn off Fox News, and go read a book.[/citation]

When are you libtards ever going to stop with that "turn off FoxNews" bed wetting nonsense? Why don't you people turn off PMSNBC and Jon Stewart for a change. Fact check on wealth and taxes in the US:

Nearly 50% of US households - which includes the "poor" mind you - pay ZERO federal income taxes. The top 1% of income earners alone pay 40% of all income taxes. The top 10% of income earners pay 70% of them, and the top 25% pay 90% of all federal income taxes by US households.

And regarding transfer of wealth, go read a book indeed. Read about all those poor FAILURES who won the lottery and blew all of it. Yeah that's right - life FAILURES. America is a free country. When someone can come over here, not speak a lick of English, yet start a successful business (read: Mexican immigrant) and Americans BORN here can't even do that, well, there is ZERO sympathy from me on the wealth factor. Period end of discussion.
 

10tacle

Distinguished
Dec 6, 2008
329
0
19,010
[citation][nom]airborne11b[/nom]Obama has kept 127 Promises, failed to keep 28....I'd say he's really doing a great job. Then take into consideration that he's cleaning up 8 years of republican destruction, it makes Obama look even better imo.A great mechanic can fix a broken car, but if throw a molotov cocktail into a car and let the thing burn to the ground, there is only so much a mechanic can do to restore the car.Do your research before you post non-sense about our president.[/citation]

1) He's your president, not mine. I didn't vote for him (just regurgitating what you liberals said about Bush for 8 years.

2) Look at the state of this nation after the Congressional election in 2006 when Democrats took over both chambers of Congress and the state of this nation BEFORE that happened.

3) Obama (and the Pelosi/Reid-ocrats in Congress) have passed things alright - things Americans did NOT want, starting with Obamacare (the Congressional election of this past November shows just how "successful" the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress have been in the eye of America for ya).

4) Anyone who can sit there with a straight face and praise success stories about the likes of Obamacare being passed when we were LIED TO about what was in it (let alone Congress not even reading it and telling us arrogantly it has to be passed before we can even FIND OUT what's in it) is a full fledged loon, irrespective of what FoxNews (or whoever) reports.
 

idiom

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2009
23
0
18,560
[citation][nom]10tacle[/nom]When are you libtards ever going to stop with that "turn off FoxNews" bed wetting nonsense?[/citation]

You call people names when you disagree with them. Classy.

Top 1% of income earners alone pay 40% of all income taxes. The top 10% of income earners pay 70% of them, and the top 25% pay 90% of all federal income taxes by US households.

Interesting. Based on your figures 25% of the country is paying 225% of the taxes. Care to provide a source for these alarming numbers? Perhaps you are mistaken.


And regarding transfer of wealth, go read a book indeed. Read about all those poor FAILURES who won the lottery and blew all of it. Yeah that's right - life FAILURES.

As interesting as that particular subject might be to you, it really has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Maybe you read someone elses comment by mistake.

America is a free country.

Yay! You do realize that the very term "free country" is void of any specific meaning and has no context here, yet still you thought it was an important declaration which will not be refuted. I bet you are tons of fun at a party.

When someone can come over here, not speak a lick of English, yet start a successful business (read: Mexican immigrant) and Americans BORN here can't even do that, well, there is ZERO sympathy from me on the wealth factor.

And no right-wing talking point would be complete without at least a hint of racism.

What an amazing canvas for you to color with your pallet. You'd be welcomed at stormfront's forums, but not with any reasonably secure person. I pity you for being so fearful of brown boogie men, it must keep you up at night.

Period end of discussion.

You did not dispute the facts that I provided, and you went on a tangent about lottery winners and people from Mexico, I think the discussion ended before you began.

Stay classy.
 

cptnjarhead

Distinguished
Jun 22, 2009
131
0
18,630
Wow!.. funny how people believe taking anything from someone by force is a good thing and how all business owners are money hording racist!. Stop watching TV.. go to a church, place of worship or a community center.. and see what people are giving without a gun to their head!
 

10tacle

Distinguished
Dec 6, 2008
329
0
19,010
[citation][nom]idiom[/nom]You call people names when you disagree with them. Classy.[/citation]

I call 'em like I see 'em. Nothing personal.

[citation][nom]idiom[/nom]Interesting. Based on your figures 25% of the country is paying 225% of the taxes. Care to provide a source for these alarming numbers? Perhaps you are mistaken.[/citation]

Uhm, no, them's the facts. You need to learn basic math and percentages (and how not to add them up in an attempt to debate).

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

[citation][nom]idiom[/nom]As interesting as that particular subject might be to you, it really has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Maybe you read someone elses comment by mistake. Yay! You do realize that the very term "free country" is void of any specific meaning and has no context here, yet still you thought it was an important declaration which will not be refuted. I bet you are tons of fun at a party.[/citation]

WTF are you talking about? English please - and clear English. Mindless liberal psychobabble won't cut it with me.

[citation][nom]idiom[/nom] And no right-wing talking point would be complete without at least a hint of racism.What an amazing canvas for you to color with your pallet. You'd be welcomed at stormfront's forums, but not with any reasonably secure person. I pity you for being so fearful of brown boogie men, it must keep you up at night.You did not dispute the facts that I provided, and you went on a tangent about lottery winners and people from Mexico, I think the discussion ended before you began.Stay classy.[/citation]

What? RACISM??!! Where in my post? WHERE? What's under that beanie cap of yours? Am I "racists" because the current president is BLACK and I disagree with his socialistic near Marxist policies??!! Go ahead and spit it out. All you psychos on the left can do is claim racism at the drop of a hat. Sorry pal, that dog won't hunt with me. You can return to your Daily Kook, Huff & Puffington Post, and other lib wingnut sites, thanks. It's been fun, but you belong in the small ponds with the small minds.
 

cptnjarhead

Distinguished
Jun 22, 2009
131
0
18,630
@10tacle
hey.. i hear ya.. but having an argument or logical conversation with a liberal.. will go round and round till your head spins. i have caught myself in that vortex many times.
Liberalism is a mental disorder. Even if you win the argument.. if there is such a thing as wining... you will never cure them of their inability to use logic instead of emotion. idom is playing right out to the liberal hand book.. 1. generalize about the topic without facts or resources 2. use racism when confronted with facts. 3. Attack them on a personal level or belittle them to get off topic.
Im sure you know all this.. just a little reminder.
 

Silmarunya

Distinguished
Nov 3, 2009
390
0
18,930
[citation][nom]10tacle[/nom]I call 'em like I see 'em. Nothing personal. Uhm, no, them's the facts. You need to learn basic math and percentages (and how not to add them up in an attempt to debate). http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who- [...] taxes.htmlWTF are you talking about? English please - and clear English. Mindless liberal psychobabble won't cut it with me.What? RACISM??!! Where in my post? WHERE? What's under that beanie cap of yours? Am I "racists" because the current president is BLACK and I disagree with his socialistic near Marxist policies??!! Go ahead and spit it out. All you psychos on the left can do is claim racism at the drop of a hat. Sorry pal, that dog won't hunt with me. You can return to your Daily Kook, Huff & Puffington Post, and other lib wingnut sites, thanks. It's been fun, but you belong in the small ponds with the small minds.[/citation]

1) Calling people names shows stupidity. That's all there is to it, period.

2) NTU is hardly a reliable source, and even if these numbers are correct, what's wrong with them? You can't expect the poor to pay...

3) Mindless liberal psychobabble? It's not mindless, it's jut not in agreement with your views. It's liberal, what's wrong with that? Nothing. Psychobabble? I applaud your talent for using non-words, now say something useful please.

4) See? You do call people names. Proof you indeed aren't quite as intelligent as you think yourself to be. Besides, not being a conservative doesn't make us stupid. The world and America are large enough for more than one view. We're not psychos, but you seem dangerously close to one. After all, you insult people without a rational basis.
 

cptnjarhead

Distinguished
Jun 22, 2009
131
0
18,630
liberalism - latin "libralis" - "of freedom"
For some reason i cannot find anything about freedom, individual liberty or equal rights in any liberal view points.
It's all about collective rights and collective freedoms.
 

Silmarunya

Distinguished
Nov 3, 2009
390
0
18,930
[citation][nom]cptnjarhead[/nom]liberalism - latin "libralis" - "of freedom"For some reason i cannot find anything about freedom, individual liberty or equal rights in any liberal view points.It's all about collective rights and collective freedoms.[/citation]

You contradict yourself in there....

1) Liberal indeed means free. You only think of individual freedoms, a liberal thinks of both individual and collective rights (Jobs has a right to be rich - individual - but everyone has a right not to be poor - collective). This also implies equal rights for everyone. Everyone has the right to get an education, healthcare, an income at or above the poverty line and so on.

2) Do Republicans/conservatives/Tea Partier's/... believe in individual freedom? They don't. For example, they oppose the individual freedom of marrying a person of choice (even if that person has the same gender you have). They oppose the individual freedom to have an abortion. They oppose the individual freedom of a person to have pre-marital sex and so on.
 

greenrider02

Distinguished
Dec 18, 2010
34
0
18,580
So far the only thing I've gathered from recent comments is that the purpose of conservatism is to oppose liberalism. Flaming does not solve any of your problems. Has anybody here considered that there is more than one answer for these questions? To judge the argument of liberal vs. conservative, one must step out and look at perspective. When you consider the bigger picture in this demographic sense, you find that yes, liberals and conservatives DO actually think differently. And that's just how it is. Different cultures develop different ways of thinking, in the same way that the people of South Africa think much differently than the people of Japan, on a core level. It applies right down to the difference between families, schools, towns, states, and countries we are surrounded by growing up. Different circumstances necessitate different adaptations, meaning everyone is different, no matter what. So your who's-right argument is resolved like this: You use different logic, on different levels so you come to different results. It can be argued that there is absolute logic, but for any one group to claim they possess that infallible reasoning would be presenting a hypocritical fallacy themselves.

To both sides: Immediately dismissing a point without an actual counter-argument or rebuttle reduces your credibility for every point you've made thus far and thereafter.
 

cptnjarhead

Distinguished
Jun 22, 2009
131
0
18,630
whew!... almost got sucked into the vortex again!

1. humble
2. gracious
3. kindness
4. sturdy
5. forgiving
6. thankful
7. patients
8. faith
9. truth
10. strength
11. honor

I need to work on these more.

What do you need to work on?

"Positive thoughts and actions yield positive results!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.