Class War Illustrated

[JBeukema]

But cuts alone CANNOT balance the budget, period...

If you don't spend money... You don't seem to grasp the basics of what a budget is

If we quit spending money on everything but the salary of one guy to write regular monthly checks out to The Peoples of China, India and Saudi Arabia - we'd still need to raise taxes or file for bankruptcy protection.

If we can't even make our payments based on current revenue with no other expenses, then the nation is already lost and there's no point raising taxes. In that case, our efforts are best spent preparing for the coming war.

Could you source your claims, please?

 

[JBeukema]

The Laffer Curve should not be the reason you raise or lower taxes
-Laffer

 

[Trajan]

So your basic thesis is that the earnings of any person are not theirs, but actually belong to the state and therefore anything not collected by the state is a loss by the state?

How much money is earned by those that are not on your target list that they do not send to the government? Is this money counted as a loss from the government coffers also?

At what point does any person exceed the amount of money that you deem it acceptable for a person to earn? Is any money kept by an individual acceptable? Why not just take it all and give back what ever seems like the right amount according to the intelligencia?

Should any private property be allowed to be held by individuals?

I have another question. How much do any of the programs on the left-hand side (very appropriate placing, by the way) increase the revenue stream for the government? Because history and economics have shown that the items on the right-hand side DO increase the overall tax revenues.

Of course, leftists have never been able to grasp that economics is not a zero-sum game, have they?

And you have never grasped the concept that societies move forward BY INVESTING IN PEOPLE.

so how did this all work out?



The OEO reflected a fragile consensus among policymakers that the best way to deal with poverty was not simply to raise the incomes of the poor but to help them better themselves through education, job training, and community development. Central to its mission was the idea of "community action", the participation of the poor in framing and administering the programs designed to help them.

The War on Poverty began with a $1 billion appropriation in 1964 and spent another $2 billion in the following two years. It spawned dozens of programs, among them the Job Corps, whose purpose was to help disadvantaged youth develop marketable skills; the Neighborhood Youth Corps, established to give poor urban youths work experience and to encourage them to stay in school; Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA), a domestic version of the Peace Corps, which placed concerned citizens with community-based agencies to work towards empowerment of the poor; the Model Cities Program for urban redevelopment; Upward Bound, which assisted poor high school students entering college; legal services for the poor; the Food Stamps program; the Community Action Program, which initiated local Community Action Agencies charged with helping the poor become self-sufficient; and Project Head Start, which offered preschool education for poor children. Major amendments were also made to Social Security in 1965 and 1967 which significantly increased benefits, expanded coverage, and established new programs to combat poverty and raise living standards.[10]

Great Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[AVG-JOE]

In what way has any money been redistributed to the top 2%?

Among others...

It's responses like this that really show how stupid liberals really are. We are redistributing wealth to the rich by taxing them at higher rates then everyone else but not high enough rates for you Marxists. All the money is the people's money, comrade, got it.

No, I don't got it. Explain some more, and be sure to throw more useless labels into the mix. Try 'smart ass' and 'dumb fuck'. Liberals and Libertarians will NEVER see what hit 'em!

 

[Rozman]

So your basic thesis is that the earnings of any person are not theirs, but actually belong to the state and therefore anything not collected by the state is a loss by the state?

How much money is earned by those that are not on your target list that they do not send to the government? Is this money counted as a loss from the government coffers also?

At what point does any person exceed the amount of money that you deem it acceptable for a person to earn? Is any money kept by an individual acceptable? Why not just take it all and give back what ever seems like the right amount according to the intelligencia?

Should any private property be allowed to be held by individuals?

Every dollar that we manage to keep drives liberals out of their friggin minds...After all
money really belongs to government because government knows best how to spend it.
Liberals just love to spend money,other peoples money.

 

[Foxfyre]

So your basic thesis is that the earnings of any person are not theirs, but actually belong to the state and therefore anything not collected by the state is a loss by the state?

How much money is earned by those that are not on your target list that they do not send to the government? Is this money counted as a loss from the government coffers also?

At what point does any person exceed the amount of money that you deem it acceptable for a person to earn? Is any money kept by an individual acceptable? Why not just take it all and give back what ever seems like the right amount according to the intelligencia?

Should any private property be allowed to be held by individuals?

Every dollar that we manage to keep drives liberals out of their friggin minds...After all
money really belongs to government because government knows best how to spend it.
Liberals just love to spend money,other peoples money.

I don't want to characterize it that way because I don't think all liberals are fiscally irresponsible or bad intentioned. But I do think the liberal mindset is that of the collective and they see it all as property of the government that should decide what each citizen should have so that it is fair and that everybody is taken care of. I think somehow liberals missed the whole concept of a people who govern themselves. Evenso, when it comes right down to the nitty gritty, each of us wants that freedom.

 

[AVG-JOE]

In what way has any money been redistributed to the top 2%?

Among others...

It's responses like this that really show how stupid liberals really are. We are redistributing wealth to the rich by taxing them at higher rates then everyone else but not high enough rates for you Marxists. All the money is the people's money, comrade, got it.

If you are really interested in how the top 1% use current law to consolidate their cream at the expense of the rest of us, check out the documentary described in this thread: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/156635-a-strong-case-for-corporate-reform.html

It's by no means comprehensive, but it's a good start. Episode 4 in the YouTube layout shows how the brothers who are raping the Everglades producing sugar are not only using the government to squelch all competition but they're lining their pockets with direct paid tax-payer dollars while spending equal amounts on both political parties. These greedy fuckers are a cancer on the American Economy.

Careful... You may learn something.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Trajan, I like you a lot, but you're starting to irritate me.

Capital gains will still be taxed on the high water mark under the Cuyo plan, same as they are now. The only difference is the table to which they're subject.

edit: Are you just trying to irritate me and laughing at me through that distant computer screen? You bastard!

Do we have to keep all the complicated bullshit?!?

7 + 7 on 3

7% General Sales Tax.
+
7% on Income in excess of $3 Million.

No corporate income tax, no capital gains, no tax return until you earn $3,000,001.00

Buy a Ferrari, pay Ferrari tax - buy a 3-year old Hyundai, pay less.

Do you have a hotkey for the AVG-JOE plan?

It's well intentioned, but it ain't enough money to run this place - Plus it will turn out to be far more complicated than you think.

Oh well, I guess the gig is up and we should all pack our ideas and go home to start a pool betting on which party will be handed the reins just prior to both of them driving our economy completely off a cliff....

Woe is me.

Sorry, pal. Not gonna happen.

A) If 7 + 7 on 3, ALONG WITH CUTS IN SPENDING is not enough money, bump it to 10 + 10 on 3.

B) It can't POSSIBLY be as complicated as the bitch we're dancing with now.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Wealth taxes are the worst taxes because they destroy the capital stock. Its better to tax income.

It's best to tax consumption. Income tax also taps capital - and taxing income changes investment decisions...

Say it with me now: SALES TAX

7 + 7 on 3

Consumption taxes are the most efficient but they are regressive because people with lower incomes spend relatively more of their income than wealthier people, effectively paying a higher rate of tax.

And that's why a 7% sales tax has to be balanced with a 7% tax on income over and above $3 million per year.

 

[AVG-JOE]

If you don't spend money... You don't seem to grasp the basics of what a budget is

If we quit spending money on everything but the salary of one guy to write regular monthly checks out to The Peoples of China, India and Saudi Arabia - we'd still need to raise taxes or file for bankruptcy protection.

If we can't even make our payments based on current revenue with no other expenses, then the nation is already lost and there's no point raising taxes. In that case, our efforts are best spent preparing for the coming war.

Could you source your claims, please?

SOURCE: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/158978-class-war-illustrated-25.html#post3424145

The point being, even if federal spending dropped tomorrow to -0-, we'd still OWE a ship-load of cash.

Just 'cause you cut the VISA card in half doesn't mean you're out of debt.

 

[JBeukema]

Your source for your claim is the post where you made the claim? Seriously?

 

[skookerasbil]

Your source for your claim is the post where you made the claim? Seriously?

Holy MOther of God.......21,000 posts in two years sweetie..............give the PC a rest. Go see a movie.


What the fcukk can make you so miserable that you want to park your fat ass in front of a computer 16 hours a day??!!!

Mama

 

[kiwiman127]

More good news about the assault on the working class,,,,,,,,,,!

[B]GOP to block Commerce nominees until free trade agreements done


Republican senators have just announced that they will block the confirmation of a new Commerce Secretary - or any commerce related positions - until Democrats move on free trade agreements for Columbia and Panama.

Forty-four GOP senators signed on to a letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid Monday, vowing to hold up the nominations until "the President submits both agreements to Congress for approval and commits to signing implementing legislation into law."

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_new...rce-nominees-until-free-trade-agreements-done

As if the jobs market and flat wages weren't enough! Let's have more products that used to be made in the US being shipped in from Columbia and Panama. Some policy makers seemed to conveniently forgotten the end results from NAFTA & CAFTA!

 

[AVG-JOE]

Your source for your claim is the post where you made the claim? Seriously?

It's not a 'claim'. It's a discussion. You asked for the source of my opinion - I gave it.

 

[AVG-JOE]

So your basic thesis is that the earnings of any person are not theirs, but actually belong to the state and therefore anything not collected by the state is a loss by the state?

How much money is earned by those that are not on your target list that they do not send to the government? Is this money counted as a loss from the government coffers also?

At what point does any person exceed the amount of money that you deem it acceptable for a person to earn? Is any money kept by an individual acceptable? Why not just take it all and give back what ever seems like the right amount according to the intelligencia?

Should any private property be allowed to be held by individuals?

Every dollar that we manage to keep drives liberals out of their friggin minds...After all
money really belongs to government because government knows best how to spend it.
Liberals just love to spend money,other peoples money.

I don't want to characterize it that way because I don't think all liberals are fiscally irresponsible or bad intentioned. But I do think the liberal mindset is that of the collective and they see it all as property of the government that should decide what each citizen should have so that it is fair and that everybody is taken care of. I think somehow liberals missed the whole concept of a people who govern themselves. Evenso, when it comes right down to the nitty gritty, each of us wants that freedom.

I really hate to have to beat this horse some more, but Liberals are all about personal responsibility and Liberty.

It's the Social Democrats who believe that there's a bureaucracy for every problem.

If we don't correct the propaganda and mis-information, who will?

 

[jgarden]

It's class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldn't be.
- Warren Buffett (CNN Interview, May 25 2005, in arguing the need to raise taxes on the rich.)

There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning.
- Warren Buffett (New York Times, November 26, 2006.)

The 400 of us pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you're in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.
- Warren Buffett (Speaking at a $4,600-a-seat political fundraiser in New York, as quoted in "Buffett blasts system that lets him pay less tax than secretary", Times Online, June 28, 2007.)

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett

When the 2nd richest man in the country speaks of "class warfare" in America, do we have any reason not to believe him?

 

[georgephillip]

"Now we are (or used to be) a pretty rich country and the median income of the 118M people who earn enough money to pay income taxes is about $50,000 but the cost of living in the same country as people who earn an average of 976 times more than that is pretty high as well (see 'The Dooh Nibor Economy').

"Even worse, The (richest) 10,000 (Americans) paid just $112Bn in taxes last year – that’s just over 20% of their income, while the rest of the country, of course, paid a much higher percentage of their income to make up for the shortfall.

"Warren Buffett, the third richest man in the world (behind Gates and Slim) paid 17.7% tax and made a point of checking and found out his employees paid an average of 32.9%."

Phil's Stock World

Apparently economic conditions in the US haven't deteriorated to the point where many conservatives will admit to being in a class war?

Hopefully Fall 2012 changes that forever.

 

[editec]

So your basic thesis is that the earnings of any person are not theirs, but actually belong to the state and therefore anything not collected by the state is a loss by the state?

How much money is earned by those that are not on your target list that they do not send to the government? Is this money counted as a loss from the government coffers also?

At what point does any person exceed the amount of money that you deem it acceptable for a person to earn? Is any money kept by an individual acceptable? Why not just take it all and give back what ever seems like the right amount according to the intelligencia?

Should any private property be allowed to be held by individuals?

I have another question. How much do any of the programs on the left-hand side (very appropriate placing, by the way) increase the revenue stream for the government? Because history and economics have shown that the items on the right-hand side DO increase the overall tax revenues.

Of course, leftists have never been able to grasp that economics is not a zero-sum game, have they?

Every time?

Is that what you think economic history has shown?

Really?

Suggestion...read more economic history.

Right now you know know jackshit about economic history, that's obvious

 

[skookerasbil]

"Now we are (or used to be) a pretty rich country and the median income of the 118M people who earn enough money to pay income taxes is about $50,000 but the cost of living in the same country as people who earn an average of 976 times more than that is pretty high as well (see 'The Dooh Nibor Economy').

"Even worse, The (richest) 10,000 (Americans) paid just $112Bn in taxes last year – that’s just over 20% of their income, while the rest of the country, of course, paid a much higher percentage of their income to make up for the shortfall.

"Warren Buffett, the third richest man in the world (behind Gates and Slim) paid 17.7% tax and made a point of checking and found out his employees paid an average of 32.9%."

Phil's Stock World

Apparently economic conditions in the US haven't deteriorated to the point where many conservatives will admit to being in a class war?

Hopefully Fall 2012 changes that forever.

Like this moron doesnt have a plate in his head??

Here we have an economy teetering with double dip recession and he is advocating for higher taxes on the rich............

Thankfully.............a vast majority realize the level of fcukkepedness that would cause. Its the lefty glass half full mentality. Corporate America has hundreds of billions sitting on the sidelines and the k00ks cant figure out why that is so................


A total brain fcukk up..........its fascinating.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

So your basic thesis is that the earnings of any person are not theirs, but actually belong to the state and therefore anything not collected by the state is a loss by the state?

How much money is earned by those that are not on your target list that they do not send to the government? Is this money counted as a loss from the government coffers also?

At what point does any person exceed the amount of money that you deem it acceptable for a person to earn? Is any money kept by an individual acceptable? Why not just take it all and give back what ever seems like the right amount according to the intelligencia?

Should any private property be allowed to be held by individuals?

I have another question. How much do any of the programs on the left-hand side (very appropriate placing, by the way) increase the revenue stream for the government? Because history and economics have shown that the items on the right-hand side DO increase the overall tax revenues.

Of course, leftists have never been able to grasp that economics is not a zero-sum game, have they?

And you have never grasped the concept that societies move forward BY INVESTING IN PEOPLE.

Maybe "conservatives" prefer we hold-off investing in jobs....until Big Oil is in better-financial-shape??

"But while Americans continue to pay higher prices for gas, oil-funded Republicans protect generous subsidies to oil companies. And fluctuations in gas prices in the past few years have shown that when gas prices increase, so do Big Oil’s profits."

Haley Barbour Accuses Obama Of Cheering On Higher Gas Prices​