Family net worth retreats to early 1990's levels

wow!

Show me how redistributing wealth can cause all wealth to go up.

:laugh:

It's actually quite simple. The trick is not to overdo it. When you put more money in the hands of lower and middle income workers, which happen to be the bulk of the populace and the ones who actually purchase the bulk of goods and services, you expand the economy. Those at the top reap the benefits as their business increase in revenue and profit. It's win win for everyone. Of course, it is easily possible to take the scenario too far, as in the way of Marxism. That does not work as it just makes everyone poor.

The thing is that there would not have to be any redistribution of wealth if employers spread the wealth a bit themselves through better pay and benefits. Getting super wealthy at the expense of everyone else does not benefit anyone in the long run, yet greed seems to lead us down this path over and over again. It is one of the pitfalls of capitalism. That is not to say we should move away from capitalism, but we should be aware that sometimes constraints are necessary.

Who decides what "enough" is? That's always the rub whenever someone says the rich should just pay more.

3% more on income is all that is required to return to the pre Bush tax-cuts. Also treat all income as income. No special cheap rate for income from long term capital gains.
 
No blaming Bush here.....This is all on Obama's watch..
Family Net Worth Drops to Level of Early

Wait, Now Liberals are bitching about Family Net Worth? Then Perhaps you should stop supporting a FUCKING 55% Death Tax on Peoples Estates. Then Families with Money would Have more to Pass on to the next Generation.

No you rather take it all and give it to some fucking idiots in DC to waste.

Thanks to the generous $5.12 million exemption for individuals who pass away in 2012, the assets of relatively few people in the United States will be exposed to the FUCKING federal estate tax over the next few years.

Currently the rate is 35%. Scheduled to go back to 55% in 2013.
 
So if the policies were already in place, how can Obama be the cause of what has happened?

Thanks for proving my point.

You are the one that claims he changed things,

I certainly didn't. I asked what policies has Obama has enacted that has caused this to happen. My point being that he hasn't implemented anything to cause this, it was already in place. Just as you confirmed for me.

I keep insisting he is doing the same thing Bush did. I am challenging you to defend your man, or admit I am right.
You've decided to change what I said, I'm not going down that path, sorry. Address what I actually said next time. And thanks for proving my point by the way.

You have never claimed that Obama's policies are different than Bush's? Is that your current position? Will it change again when it is convenient?
 
The demise of the middle class began with Reagan.

How so?
Are you that pissed off the Reagan threw Carter's methods out with the trash and got the country moving forward?

Carter was trying to slowly take the needle out of our arm. Raygun jab it back in and hit the plunger. Oil junkies.

:eusa_eh:

WTF? "Oil Junkies?" Cheap energy is probably the best thing that ever happened to ANY socioeconomic class, but most of all the lower class.

Maybe it would help if you slowly took your head from your ass, then jab it back on and hit the plunger.
 
You are the one that claims he changed things,

I certainly didn't. I asked what policies has Obama has enacted that has caused this to happen. My point being that he hasn't implemented anything to cause this, it was already in place. Just as you confirmed for me.

I keep insisting he is doing the same thing Bush did. I am challenging you to defend your man, or admit I am right.
You've decided to change what I said, I'm not going down that path, sorry. Address what I actually said next time. And thanks for proving my point by the way.

You have never claimed that Obama's policies are different than Bush's? Is that your current position? Will it change again when it is convenient?

Funny how you avoid addressing what I actually said. An honest man would address what I asked or just say, sorry I misunderstood. But you're obviously neither honest or any type of real man. Please go play childish games with someone else. If you're ready to answer what I actually said, then let me know.
 
I certainly didn't. I asked what policies has Obama has enacted that has caused this to happen. My point being that he hasn't implemented anything to cause this, it was already in place. Just as you confirmed for me.

You've decided to change what I said, I'm not going down that path, sorry. Address what I actually said next time. And thanks for proving my point by the way.

You have never claimed that Obama's policies are different than Bush's? Is that your current position? Will it change again when it is convenient?

Funny how you avoid addressing what I actually said. An honest man would address what I asked or just say, sorry I misunderstood. But you're obviously neither honest or any type of real man. Please go play childish games with someone else. If you're ready to answer what I actually said, then let me know.

Read my posts, I have said that everyone lies, including me. If that does not make me honest I have no idea what you want.

That said, I am addressing your post by challenging you to either admit that Obama is just like everyone else, or tell me what he did differently. You prefer to try and make that about me, even though I have already said in other places that both parties made things worse, and the only solution is to toss them all out and try something new.

So, once again, either admit that Obama is just like every other president, and his policies, like theirs, made this mess worse, or tell me what he has done differently than anyone else.
 
Just out of curiosity, economically speaking, what is it that conservatives think happens when a hot over priced housing market bubble bursts?

The same thing they predicted way back when Krugman was telling us it was a good thing.
 
Just out of curiosity, economically speaking, what is it that conservatives think happens when a hot over priced housing market bubble bursts?

:eusa_eh:

How is the way anyone interprets the consitution relevent to that question?

One may as well ask what conservatives think happens when a hot appendix bursts.
 
Just out of curiosity, economically speaking, what is it that conservatives think happens when a hot over priced housing market bubble bursts?

:eusa_eh:

How is the way anyone interprets the consitution relevent to that question?

One may as well ask what conservatives think happens when a hot appendix bursts.

How is the way I choose to arrange my sock drawer relevant to that question?
 
Just out of curiosity, economically speaking, what is it that conservatives think happens when a hot over priced housing market bubble bursts?

:eusa_eh:

How is the way anyone interprets the consitution relevent to that question?

One may as well ask what conservatives think happens when a hot appendix bursts.

How is the way I choose to arrange my sock drawer relevant to that question?

:clap2:

Recognizing your own stupidity is the first step to a cure.
 
How so?
Are you that pissed off the Reagan threw Carter's methods out with the trash and got the country moving forward?

Carter was trying to slowly take the needle out of our arm. Raygun jab it back in and hit the plunger. Oil junkies.

:eusa_eh:

WTF? "Oil Junkies?" Cheap energy is probably the best thing that ever happened to ANY socioeconomic class, but most of all the lower class.

Maybe it would help if you slowly took your head from your ass, then jab it back on and hit the plunger.

Yes, Oil Junkies. Didn't stay cheap for long. Like any good dealer as soon as we were hooked the price started jumping didn't it? Rayguns lasting legacy: An oil dependent superpower with no where to turn but their military to keep the owners of the oil in line. But you should be proud, it's only cost a few thousand American Soldiers if you don't count the civilian costs. So what if we've created a new generation of terrorist who hate us with a passion........
 
Carter was trying to slowly take the needle out of our arm. Raygun jab it back in and hit the plunger. Oil junkies.

:eusa_eh:

WTF? "Oil Junkies?" Cheap energy is probably the best thing that ever happened to ANY socioeconomic class, but most of all the lower class.

Maybe it would help if you slowly took your head from your ass, then jab it back on and hit the plunger.

Yes, Oil Junkies. Didn't stay cheap for long. Like any good dealer as soon as we were hooked the price started jumping didn't it? Rayguns lasting legacy: An oil dependent superpower with no where to turn but their military to keep the owners of the oil in line. But you should be proud, it's only cost a few thousand American Soldiers if you don't count the civilian costs. So what if we've created a new generation of terrorist who hate us with a passion........

You obviously haven't walked very far to find and continue work.

By the way, "Rayguns" as Reagan really makes you appear brilliant.

Very impressive.

Yes, indeed.

Genius; Adds so much to your point.

:eusa_clap:
 
Sorry bout that,


1. First year of Obama I lost 20%.
2. Second year it was at 35%.
3. This year it was at 50%.
4. So all in all, I'm losing 15% per year.
5. If he gets another four years, I will likely be making 5% of what I used to earn before he got into office.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

What kind of job do you do that you now make half of what you did 3 years ago?

I think he hunts Negroes.
Why is it you libs believe you can do whatever you want while you pricks hold everyone else to your stupid God Damned rules of political correctness.
Well screw you.
Racist thug.
 
It's actually quite simple. The trick is not to overdo it. When you put more money in the hands of lower and middle income workers, which happen to be the bulk of the populace and the ones who actually purchase the bulk of goods and services, you expand the economy. Those at the top reap the benefits as their business increase in revenue and profit. It's win win for everyone. Of course, it is easily possible to take the scenario too far, as in the way of Marxism. That does not work as it just makes everyone poor.

The thing is that there would not have to be any redistribution of wealth if employers spread the wealth a bit themselves through better pay and benefits. Getting super wealthy at the expense of everyone else does not benefit anyone in the long run, yet greed seems to lead us down this path over and over again. It is one of the pitfalls of capitalism. That is not to say we should move away from capitalism, but we should be aware that sometimes constraints are necessary.

Who decides what "enough" is? That's always the rub whenever someone says the rich should just pay more.

3% more on income is all that is required to return to the pre Bush tax-cuts. Also treat all income as income. No special cheap rate for income from long term capital gains.
A second bite at the apple? No farging way. Once is enough.
If you are so worried about government deficits, write a check.
 
It's actually quite simple. The trick is not to overdo it. When you put more money in the hands of lower and middle income workers, which happen to be the bulk of the populace and the ones who actually purchase the bulk of goods and services, you expand the economy. Those at the top reap the benefits as their business increase in revenue and profit. It's win win for everyone. Of course, it is easily possible to take the scenario too far, as in the way of Marxism. That does not work as it just makes everyone poor.

The thing is that there would not have to be any redistribution of wealth if employers spread the wealth a bit themselves through better pay and benefits. Getting super wealthy at the expense of everyone else does not benefit anyone in the long run, yet greed seems to lead us down this path over and over again. It is one of the pitfalls of capitalism. That is not to say we should move away from capitalism, but we should be aware that sometimes constraints are necessary.

Who decides what "enough" is? That's always the rub whenever someone says the rich should just pay more.

3% more on income is all that is required to return to the pre Bush tax-cuts. Also treat all income as income. No special cheap rate for income from long term capital gains.

THat's not the innocuous 3% you are looking for. It's 100%. Yep. If all income is to be taxed including interest, dividend, property sales as regular income, most if not all would fall into the 39.3% bracket.
This is your idea of economic stimulus? Dumping more money into an already wasteful government which has no fiscal discipline? Giving it to a President that has a socialist agenda? One that believes government deficit spending will create economic growth even in the face of advice to the contrary?
Just admit to the thread your sense of entitlement. That you believe you are entitled to the wealth of others.
You libs are all like. Great spenders of other people's money. However, when your wealth becomes a target for the greedy paws of government, suddenly you're a fiscal conservative.
 
You have never claimed that Obama's policies are different than Bush's? Is that your current position? Will it change again when it is convenient?

Funny how you avoid addressing what I actually said. An honest man would address what I asked or just say, sorry I misunderstood. But you're obviously neither honest or any type of real man. Please go play childish games with someone else. If you're ready to answer what I actually said, then let me know.

Read my posts, I have said that everyone lies, including me. If that does not make me honest I have no idea what you want.

That said, I am addressing your post by challenging you to either admit that Obama is just like everyone else, or tell me what he did differently. You prefer to try and make that about me, even though I have already said in other places that both parties made things worse, and the only solution is to toss them all out and try something new.

So, once again, either admit that Obama is just like every other president, and his policies, like theirs, made this mess worse, or tell me what he has done differently than anyone else.

How fucking dense are you? My original post that you replied to was to point out that Obama did NOTHING different than what was done before him. You proved my point! So the OP's assertion that this was caused by Obama is incorrect since he did not enact any new policies that would have caused what he was claiming.

How fucking dense can you be? I never once claimed he was different, which you agree with. So again, thank you for agreeing with what I said.

You just don't want to ever agree with "a liberal" and your warped mind can't handle that notion. So you compensate by trying to change what I said to fit your agenda. Grow the fuck up.
 

Forum List

Back
Top