The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Retirement Discussions / Retire Early CampFIRE
|Subject: Re: Why Romney Lost||Date: 12/5/2012 2:14 PM|
|Author: twopairfullhouse||Number: 658417 of 762003|
Anyway, the post was a joke. It goes without saying that if you voted for Obama, it does not mean you don't want to work. But you can bet your britches that the people in America who don't want to work and would rather sit on their butts collecting welfare and unemployment benefits were voting for Obama...not Romney.
Further to decath's point, Gingko:
There's no doubt that the people who could work, but won't, voted overwhelmingly for Obama. There's also no doubt that the Democratic Party doesn't care who these 'takers'* are, as long as they continue to vote Democrat.
Now, you probably don't care what any of us on this board have to say about wealth redistribution by the Government. But if things keep going the way they are, with it becoming easier and easier for people to live off others, and harder and harder for other people to work, save and create wealth, guess what? There will come a time when it's not only the votes of the decath's and twopair's of the world that won't matter. The votes of the Gingko's of the world won't matter, either.
* Note that I am not including those who can't feed themselves as takers, only those that could but won't. Conservatives believe that there is a big distinction between these types of people, but liberals value the votes and power more than the distinction, and use any attempts by conservatives to distinguish between these groups as an attack on the poor.
|Copyright 1996-2015 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|