# Envy /sour grapes & some liberals



## Lon (Aug 9, 2015)

I have come to the conclusion that with many, certainly not all liberals that that their pre-occupation with Income disparity coupled with their distain and even hatred of the very wealthy, corporations & Capitalism has less to do with their Altruism and sense of Fairness and more to do with Envy and Sour Grapes over the victories and successes of others.  He was born with a Silver Spoon, he was lucky, he couldn't have gotten where he is without screwing a lot of people. He's got lots of money off shore. He uses the tax code to his advantage.  Hey, would you believe that there are rich people that have done good deeds and continue doing good deeds, and that there are actually big corporations that have benefitted people. Capitalism is there for every one to grab a  piece of.


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 9, 2015)

Do you need to light up a cigarette now Lon??


----------



## ronaldj (Aug 9, 2015)

well said, we have ours because someone else got theirs...and if theirs is bigger we want more......how much is enough? just a little more


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 9, 2015)

I would say that ENOUGH is when you have enough money to support yourself and your family without the need of assistance..  Wouldn't you?


----------



## AZ Jim (Aug 9, 2015)

I will not respond as I want since it would probably result in my post being removed.  Clearly the chasm shows here.


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 9, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> I will not respond as I want since it would probably result in my post being removed.  Clearly the chasm shows here.



You are right Jim...   My nausea would definitely influence my further response..  So I will also refrain.


----------



## Falcon (Aug 9, 2015)

Rave on !


----------



## Josiah (Aug 9, 2015)

I don't agree at all Lon. The oligarchs (1%s) are able to buy legislators and the results are laws that favor the rich and hurt the poor. The result is greater income inequality.


----------



## AZ Jim (Aug 9, 2015)

Falcon said:


> Rave on !



John if you quote who you are responding to it makes more sense.


----------



## tnthomas (Aug 9, 2015)

Lon said:


> I have come to the conclusion that with many, certainly not all liberals that that their pre-occupation with Income disparity coupled with their distain and even hatred of the very wealthy, corporations & Capitalism has less to do with their Altruism and sense of Fairness and more to do with Envy and Sour Grapes over the victories and successes of others.  He was born with a Silver Spoon, he was lucky, he couldn't have gotten where he is without screwing a lot of people. He's got lots of money off shore. He uses the tax code to his advantage.  Hey, would you believe that there are rich people that have done good deeds and continue doing good deeds, and that there are actually big corporations that have benefitted people. Capitalism is there for every one to grab a  piece of.



Wow, millions of people painted with a broad brush and labeled as having 





> Envy and Sour Grapes


 over the fortunes of others.

Ain't that just peachy...


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 9, 2015)

Ah, the politics of male white privilege, kinda reminds me of ancient Rome. Darn those pesky plebes anyway. Who do they think they are? I am educated, but in many arenas, my  phd title still won't buy me parity with a good ole boy. Hmmm.


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 9, 2015)

I never knew we had a bunch of old rich white men on this forum... Who'd have thought they would show up here.. You would think they would be too busy  counting their money, and sailing their yachts..


----------



## AZ Jim (Aug 9, 2015)

I won't give this person the attention they are so desperate to reap.


----------



## Jackie22 (Aug 9, 2015)

Lon said:


> I have come to the conclusion that with many, certainly not all liberals that that their pre-occupation with Income disparity coupled with their distain and even hatred of the very wealthy, corporations & Capitalism has less to do with their Altruism and sense of Fairness and more to do with Envy and Sour Grapes over the victories and successes of others.  He was born with a Silver Spoon, he was lucky, he couldn't have gotten where he is without screwing a lot of people. He's got lots of money off shore. He uses the tax code to his advantage.  Hey, would you believe that there are rich people that have done good deeds and continue doing good deeds, and that there are actually big corporations that have benefitted people. Capitalism is there for every one to grab a  piece of.




.........spoken like a true Republican......peachy indeed.


----------



## Lon (Aug 9, 2015)

Josiah said:


> I don't agree at all Lon. The oligarchs (1%s) are able to buy legislators and the results are laws that favor the rich and hurt the poor. The result is greater income inequality.



I am not sure with what you are disagreeing  Josiah. Envy & Sour Grapes on the part of SOME liberals?


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 9, 2015)

Ladies, it is definitely time for women to take over the forum. Time for a coup? Lol. Who wants to Empress? I am too small, not enough presence. Lol.


----------



## AZ Jim (Aug 9, 2015)

We all must remember these are "*compassionate *conservatives" we're dealing with.


----------



## Lon (Aug 9, 2015)

Wow!  SOME LIBERALS has now become MILLIONS according to tnThomas


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 9, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> We all must remember these are "*compassionate *conservatives" we're dealing with.



Can you say "OXYMORON"  ?


----------



## Lon (Aug 9, 2015)

Jackie22 said:


> .........spoken like a true Republican......peachy indeed.



You are so Wrong   I am a independent that voted for Obama both times. How's that grab ya?


----------



## tnthomas (Aug 9, 2015)

Lon said:


> Wow!  SOME LIBERALS has now become MILLIONS according to tnThomas



O.K., how 'bout some-millions liberals?


----------



## Jackie22 (Aug 9, 2015)

Lon said:


> You are so Wrong   I am a independent that voted for Obama both times. How's that grab ya?



....ever think you were a closet Republican?


----------



## SeaBreeze (Aug 9, 2015)

Josiah said:


> I don't agree at all Lon. The oligarchs (1%s) are able to buy legislators and the results are laws that favor the rich and hurt the poor. The result is greater income inequality.



You're right Josiah, we've talked about his before.  https://www.seniorforums.com/showth...-Want-You-To-Know?highlight=income+inequality


----------



## Josiah (Aug 9, 2015)

Lon said:


> I am not sure with what you are disagreeing  Josiah. Envy & Sour Grapes on the part of SOME liberals?



I'm disagreeing with your contention that liberals have a "pre-occupation with Income disparity". The expression "pre-occupation" suggests an unhealthy obsession and it's my contention is that liberals are finally starting come to grips with the importance of this issue and their concern and emphasis on the issue is entirely justified.


----------



## AZ Jim (Aug 9, 2015)

Lon said:


> You are so Wrong   I am a independent that voted for Obama both times. How's that grab ya?



And there is a tooth Fairy.


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 9, 2015)

Just keep in mind.... that a lot of liberals are just as rich... if not more so than some Conservatives spouting this "sour grapes" nonsense..   Some just have an understanding about real life.. and a compassion for those not as fortunate..   It's not "sour grapes" at all...  It's called being human.


----------



## Lon (Aug 9, 2015)

Thanks folks-------------I give up and yield-----I post no more on this topic.  Still friends?


----------



## Josiah (Aug 9, 2015)

Lon said:


> Thanks folks-------------I give up and yield-----I post no more on this topic.  Still friends?



Yup, still friends.


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 9, 2015)

The "Sour Grapes" crap still bothers me Lon..   You are making a whole bunch of assumptions about the people here that you shouldn't.. ..  You say that we have no idea about YOU or your life and circumstances.....  perhaps... but by the same token.. YOU have no idea about the rest of us to be able to make a blanket statement like that.


----------



## Lon (Aug 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> The "Sour Grapes" crap still bothers me Lon..   You are making a whole bunch of assumptions about the people here that you shouldn't.. ..  You say that we have no idea about YOU or your life and circumstances.....  perhaps... but by the same token.. YOU have no idea about the rest of us to be able to make a blanket statement like that.


 You are forgetting that I said some liberals which hardly makes it a blanket.

 I don't live in a cave without contact to the real world. I was making reference in my post to personal contacts that I have made over a period of time in my life with bitter and vocally envious liberals of the type I was referring to. My problem with this whole thing is that I personally find the Hard Core Liberal as Nauseating and Irritating as the Hard Core Conservative. This debate the other night makes me want to puke when they tried to Out Christianize each other which is nothing more than pandering to the FUNDAMENTALS


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 9, 2015)

Lon... when you make blanket statements about Liberals... even if you think you are tempering it by using the word "Some"... you are still on THIS forum.. and you are talking to the Liberals on this forum...  I am a Liberal...  Let me assure you... I have no "sour Grapes" mentality... NOR do I have a reason to "envy" anyone..   Got it?


----------



## Lon (Aug 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Lon... when you make blanket statements about Liberals... even if you think you are tempering it by using the word "Some"... you are still on THIS forum.. and you are talking to the Liberals on this forum...  I am a Liberal...  Let me assure you... I have no "sour Grapes" mentality... NOR do I have a reason to "envy" anyone..   Got it?


  You have taken this whole thing personally QS and that is a mistake. Got it??


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 9, 2015)

Lon said:


> You have taken this whole thing personally QS and that is a mistake. Got it??



No Lon...  YOU have made it personal...  Got it?


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 9, 2015)

Not all the liberals on this forum are American. Something to consider.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Aug 9, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Lon... when you make blanket statements about Liberals... even if you think you are tempering it by using the word "Some"... you are still on THIS forum.. and you are talking to the Liberals on this forum...  I am a Liberal...  Let me assure you... I have no "sour Grapes" mentality... NOR do I have a reason to "envy" anyone..   Got it?



Lon is making a statement about some Liberals, and he is not just talking to the Liberals on this forum Quicksilver, he's talking to all members here of all political parties.

  I agree with him that you are taking this too personally, and you really shouldn't.  He has the right to express his views and opinions as much as anyone else here, he's not pointing the finger at anyone in particular.

  We often post threads about Conservatives that are not flattering, but we make our points about what they are doing or trying to do that we disagree with. I know I have done this many times, and I don't mean it to be a personal attack on anyone here.

  If all the Conservatives took all of our threads and posts personally, it would not be very good for any of us.  When any politician or political party is criticized, none of us should take it personally.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Aug 10, 2015)

I only take time from counting my money and sailing my yacht to try enlighten you about the divine right of WASP men to rule...


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 10, 2015)

Oh my Ralphy, guess you will be first against the wall when the revolution comes, waspy....


----------



## Ralphy1 (Aug 10, 2015)

You will have to storm my castle, which means getting over my moat that will be filled with burning oil and suffer the arrows of my archers lining the parapets, so bring it on...


----------



## Rocky (Aug 10, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> You are right Jim...   My nausea would definitely influence my further response..  So I will also refrain.



_As will I, QS and Jim ..._


----------



## Cookie (Aug 10, 2015)

I have heard that line of thinking before when it was said to me:  The Haves-Nots always want what the Haves have.  This remark came from a nouveau riche wasp, who might be conservative or even a pseudo liberal, and I found it a very offensive and mean thing to say to someone in lesser financial circumstances.


----------



## AZ Jim (Aug 10, 2015)

Cookie said:


> I have heard that line of thinking before when it was said to me:  The Haves-Nots always want what the Haves have.  This remark came from a nouveau riche wasp, who might be conservative or even a pseudo liberal, and I found it a very offensive and mean thing to say to someone in lesser financial circumstances.




Those who have wealth, modest or great wealth, and rub it in the face of those who do not, are jerks (substitute for another word) of the first order.


----------



## Underock1 (Aug 10, 2015)

Late to the party here. I have only read Lon's original post, and a couple of the earlier responses. Lon and I went at it pretty hard on another post, and he revealed a few details about his early upbringing. There are reasons why he holds his opinions.
I think he is way off base, but he's not a monster. He is not one of "them".
 There are as many views of things as there are people. There _are_ people who have a "sour grapes" view. There _are_ many who envy and/or hate the rich. There _are _super rich people and large corporations that do as much good as any charitable organization or religious institution.
What I find lacking in Lon's statement and in the attitudes of many of the super wealthy is any real understanding or compassion for those who find themselves through no fault of their own in circumstances that make it impossible to rise up without assistance.
Basic food, shelter, and health. _Not _within the reach of everybody.
I certainly have no envy of the rich. Spending my life trying to maintain all of my "things" and defending them against others? 
Not _my_ idea of fun. I much preferred spending the time with my wife and kids.


----------



## Underock1 (Aug 10, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I would say that ENOUGH is when you have enough money to support yourself and your family without the need of assistance..  Wouldn't you?


:thumbsup1:


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 10, 2015)

Often, "bootstraps psychology," is a foil for avoiding any sense of guilt/compassion/responsibility for those less fortunate than ourselves. This attitude is also prevalent among persons without a wealthy lifestyle. Somehow financial security becomes imbued with moral rectitude????


----------



## rt3 (Aug 10, 2015)

Don't forget that some of the donationsof the rich,  and I'll beat you to the qualification, for taxes or other wise, exceed the welfare budgets of most states. Whether current institutions are able to keep levels of services in pace with needs, not just fed programs, is probably more of an issue. It is unfortunate that the legislative process defines the terms argued about in this forum. The rich have their bases covered, and blaming them is counter productive. Policies trying to get into their pockets will only result in creative plans of capital flight. It's the nature of the beast.


----------



## rt3 (Aug 10, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> Often, "bootstraps psychology," is a foil for avoiding any sense of guilt/compassion/responsibility for those less fortunate than ourselves. This attitude is also prevalent among persons without a wealthy lifestyle. Somehow financial security becomes imbued with moral rectitude????



You assume guilt etc. is part of a specific value system.and that value system is somehow superior. Slippery slope fallacy..
some business models, such as Magellan advising, and other think tanks make just as solid arguements for "Greed is good".


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 10, 2015)

“If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn't help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don't want to do it.”     
―     Stephen Colbert


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 10, 2015)

Speaking as a Celtic poet, words are a slippery slope. A good debater/orator can make a case for BBQing the children of the poor as a combination population control/sustainable food source. I do not espouse that particular model, and feel comfortably superior in my righteousness. Lol.


----------



## Debby (Aug 10, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I would say that ENOUGH is when you have enough money to support yourself and your family without the need of assistance..  Wouldn't you?




Exactly!  I think most people aren't interested in being filthy rich but we want to be able to put money away to help our kids once in a while in a pinch or for helping with the grandkids college fees, or to go shopping for the children's Christmas presents (or whatever your holiday is) without having to feel anxiety over 'having/wanting' to do it and to take a holiday once in while without having to pay it off over the next three years or without having to get panicky when your car suddenly makes a new 'funny' noise.  I can't even picture myself living in a house with more than three smallish bedrooms, one for guests who drop in, one for me and my husband and one so that I don't have to listen to his computer games or look at the wires all over the place.  

But who the hell needs billions?


----------



## Underock1 (Aug 10, 2015)

Debby said:


> Exactly!  I think most people aren't interested in being filthy rich but we want to be able to put money away to help our kids once in a while in a pinch or for helping with the grandkids college fees, or to go shopping for the children's Christmas presents (or whatever your holiday is) without having to feel anxiety over 'having/wanting' to do it and to take a holiday once in while without having to pay it off over the next three years or without having to get panicky when your car suddenly makes a new 'funny' noise.  I can't even picture myself living in a house with more than three smallish bedrooms, one for guests who drop in, one for me and my husband and one so that I don't have to listen to his computer games or look at the wires all over the place.
> 
> But who the hell needs billions?



Absolutely! :applause2:


----------



## rt3 (Aug 10, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> Speaking as a Celtic poet, words are a slippery slope. A good debater/orator can make a case for BBQing the children of the poor as a combination population control/sustainable food source. I do not espouse that particular model, and feel comfortably superior in my righteousness. Lol.



sorry slippery slope won't work


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 10, 2015)

That was once a reality Debby..  A family could get by on one paycheck.. They had money to buy a modest house and a reliable car.  They could feed and clothe their kids... they could put away a little money for a rainy day.. and heck maybe even take a family vacation..   This was he American dream that was lived by a strong middle class fuel by good jobs and living wages..   Those days are long gone..  Unions that helped build that middle class have been maligned and destroyed.  Corporations have moved jobs in search of cheap foreign labor and no regulations..  Families need to have two or three paychecks and still cannot live the kind of life that was possibles in the 50's... 60's or even 70's..    Greed has become good as someone one of these threads said.. and the top 1% now have more wealth than the bottom 99%... and they are STILL not satisfied.   What happens to the country when they have it all.

You are right Debby... people aren't looking to take anyone fortunes away... but looking to be able to live without fear of the other shoe dropping..  AND then they are called envious...   It's a sad country we live in now... and with the Citizen's United ruling.. and the buying our political system by the wealthy.. it doesn't look like it will be changing soon.


----------



## Underock1 (Aug 10, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> Speaking as a Celtic poet, words are a slippery slope. A good debater/orator can make a case for BBQing the children of the poor as a combination population control/sustainable food source. I do not espouse that particular model, and feel comfortably superior in my righteousness. Lol.



I thought I was the only one who could put together a horrific example to make my point!


----------



## Debby (Aug 10, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> That was once a reality Debby..  A family could get by on one paycheck.. They had money to buy a modest house and a reliable car.  They could feed and clothe their kids... they could put away a little money for a rainy day.. and heck maybe even take a family vacation..   This was he American dream that was lived by a strong middle class fuel by good jobs and living wages..   Those days are long gone..  Unions that helped build that middle class have been maligned and destroyed.  Corporations have moved jobs in search of cheap foreign labor and no regulations..  Families need to have two or three paychecks and still cannot live the kind of life that was possibles in the 50's... 60's or even 70's..    Greed has become good as someone one of these threads said.. and the top 1% now have more wealth than the bottom 99%... and they are STILL not satisfied.   What happens to the country when they have it all.
> 
> You are right Debby... people aren't looking to take anyone fortunes away... but looking to be able to live without fear of the other shoe dropping..  AND then they are called envious...   It's a sad country we live in now... and with the Citizen's United ruling.. and the buying our political system by the wealthy.. it doesn't look like it will be changing soon.





All good points you made and the political system is the elephant that we couldn't get out of the room if we wanted to!  I try not to intrude with my opinion (too much) in your political Republican/Democrat discussions too much because I'm not familiar enough with it but in general, I've often wondered to myself how you guys could possibly fix it.  It costs so much money for your elections, you have open lobbyists in the politicians offices and they are handing out big checks to support their interests......and none of those guys seem to want to give up much of anything (regardless of which party).  

Ours isn't quite so bad as we've got much different rules about how much anyone, including corporations can donate to any given party.  I think our politicians are 'managed' by the promise of jobs in corporations afterwards when they leave politics.  But we've got lots of little scandals too that shouldn't happen but they do.

Anyway, my sleeping pill is kicking in and in about five minutes, you may not be able to make sense of any of this so goodnight for tonight (do you know how many times I spelled that before spell check took pity on me?)  Good night!


----------



## Warrigal (Aug 10, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> Ladies, it is definitely time for women to take over the forum. Time for a coup? Lol. Who wants to Empress? I am too small, not enough presence. Lol.



Well, I claim direct descendence from Boudicca, the warrior queen of the Icenii, and I already have a title. I also have a regal backside, good for keeping a firm grip on the throne. I will not be easily deposed. Perhaps I might step into the role of monarch?


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 10, 2015)

Warri,I think you would be an excellent monarch. We need someone suitably grounded.


----------



## mitchezz (Aug 10, 2015)

Lon said:


> You are forgetting that I said some liberals which hardly makes it a blanket.
> 
> I don't live in a cave without contact to the real world. I was making reference in my post to personal contacts that I have made over a period of time in my life with bitter and vocally envious liberals of the type I was referring to. My problem with this whole thing is that I personally find the Hard Core Liberal as Nauseating and Irritating as the Hard Core Conservative. This debate the other night makes me want to puke when they tried to Out Christianize each other which is nothing more than pandering to the FUNDAMENTALS



If I may make an observation....after a number of years on forums I have noticed that often when someone is making sweeping generalisations they use "some" in an effort to appear balanced. I've done it myself but it never fools anyone.


----------



## Ameriscot (Aug 11, 2015)

mitchezz said:


> If I may make an observation....after a number of years on forums I have noticed that often when someone is making sweeping generalisations they use "some" in an effort to appear balanced. I've done it myself but it never fools anyone.



Good point. I've been guilty as well.


----------

