Happy 4th of July......Dont forget to thank a Liberal

[rightwinger]

what exactly does "redistribute the wealth" mean then?

Good question

Income EQUALITY means everyone makes the same income. Nobody but NOBODY is suggesting that all income should be equal

Redistribution of wealth looks at where our money is going. Right now, one percent of the population controls 35 percent of the wealth. 40 percent of the population controls four tenths of a percent of the wealth

The question is....why do we continue programs that help the one percent?

Actually accepting your premise, the question would be how do YOU propose redistribution should be apportioned?

I don't propose a Robin Hood rob from the rich and give to the poor

I do, however propose we look at future wealth and how our laws affect its distribution. For 30 years we have bought in to "Trickle Down" and "Job Creator" mythologies being pushed by the right. The promise of more jobs and prosperity for all never materialized.

I propose we look at our laws and ask....Who is helped the most by this legislation, the rich, the poor or working Americans?

 

[jon_berzerk]

Good question

Income EQUALITY means everyone makes the same income. Nobody but NOBODY is suggesting that all income should be equal

Redistribution of wealth looks at where our money is going. Right now, one percent of the population controls 35 percent of the wealth. 40 percent of the population controls four tenths of a percent of the wealth

The question is....why do we continue programs that help the one percent?

Actually accepting your premise, the question would be how do YOU propose redistribution should be apportioned?

I don't propose a Robin Hood rob from the rich and give to the poor

I do, however propose we look at future wealth and how our laws affect its distribution. For 30 years we have bought in to "Trickle Down" and "Job Creator" mythologies being pushed by the right. The promise of more jobs and prosperity for all never materialized.

I propose we look at our laws and ask....Who is helped the most by this legislation, the rich, the poor or working Americans?

income taxes should be the same rate across the board

from the poorest to the richest

to include those on cash assistance

that way everyone has a stake in the game

 

[rightwinger]

Actually accepting your premise, the question would be how do YOU propose redistribution should be apportioned?

I don't propose a Robin Hood rob from the rich and give to the poor

I do, however propose we look at future wealth and how our laws affect its distribution. For 30 years we have bought in to "Trickle Down" and "Job Creator" mythologies being pushed by the right. The promise of more jobs and prosperity for all never materialized.

I propose we look at our laws and ask....Who is helped the most by this legislation, the rich, the poor or working Americans?

income taxes should be the same rate across the board

from the poorest to the richest

to include those on cash assistance

that way everyone has a stake in the game

Can you provide a single flat tax proposal that does not result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

 

[jon_berzerk]

I don't propose a Robin Hood rob from the rich and give to the poor

I do, however propose we look at future wealth and how our laws affect its distribution. For 30 years we have bought in to "Trickle Down" and "Job Creator" mythologies being pushed by the right. The promise of more jobs and prosperity for all never materialized.

I propose we look at our laws and ask....Who is helped the most by this legislation, the rich, the poor or working Americans?

income taxes should be the same rate across the board

from the poorest to the richest

to include those on cash assistance

that way everyone has a stake in the game

Can you provide a single flat tax proposal that does not result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

do away with that

one simple tax rate that all pay

 

[rightwinger]

income taxes should be the same rate across the board

from the poorest to the richest

to include those on cash assistance

that way everyone has a stake in the game

Can you provide a single flat tax proposal that does not result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

do away with that

one simple tax rate that all pay

Can I take that as a concession on your part that the end result of any flat tax would result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

 

[jon_berzerk]

Can you provide a single flat tax proposal that does not result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

do away with that

one simple tax rate that all pay

Can I take that as a concession on your part that the end result of any flat tax would result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

no you cant

the rate would be the same across the board

as for volume so what

 

[Freewill]

Consumption tax with some means to help the working poor. Oops I said working poor, should have just said poor.

It would be the fairest of all.

 

[mudwhistle]

Good question

Income EQUALITY means everyone makes the same income. Nobody but NOBODY is suggesting that all income should be equal

Redistribution of wealth looks at where our money is going. Right now, one percent of the population controls 35 percent of the wealth. 40 percent of the population controls four tenths of a percent of the wealth

The question is....why do we continue programs that help the one percent?

Actually accepting your premise, the question would be how do YOU propose redistribution should be apportioned?

I don't propose a Robin Hood rob from the rich and give to the poor

I do, however propose we look at future wealth and how our laws affect its distribution. For 30 years we have bought in to "Trickle Down" and "Job Creator" mythologies being pushed by the right. The promise of more jobs and prosperity for all never materialized.

I propose we look at our laws and ask....Who is helped the most by this legislation, the rich, the poor or working Americans?

We don't need millionaires in America anymore.

We need more marginally poor people.

That way maybe some of the things that makes us special will go away.


By the way, if you make it easy to be poor nobody will want to get out of poverty. Production goes down and the economy stagnates. The only people that will be rich is folks in Washington.

 

[mudwhistle]

Can you provide a single flat tax proposal that does not result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

do away with that

one simple tax rate that all pay

Can I take that as a concession on your part that the end result of any flat tax would result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

Working poor?

Used to be that meant barely making ends meet. Now it's an oxymoron.

 

[rightwinger]

Actually accepting your premise, the question would be how do YOU propose redistribution should be apportioned?

I don't propose a Robin Hood rob from the rich and give to the poor

I do, however propose we look at future wealth and how our laws affect its distribution. For 30 years we have bought in to "Trickle Down" and "Job Creator" mythologies being pushed by the right. The promise of more jobs and prosperity for all never materialized.

I propose we look at our laws and ask....Who is helped the most by this legislation, the rich, the poor or working Americans?

We don't need millionaires in America anymore.

We need more marginally poor people.

That way maybe some of the things that makes us special will go away.


By the way, if you make it easy to be poor nobody will want to get out of poverty. Production goes down and the economy stagnates. The only people that will be rich is folks in Washington.

No poor person ever did better by receiving less

Show me anywhere in the US or anywhere in the world where poor people have become more successful by cutting their benefits

 

[rightwinger]

Consumption tax with some means to help the working poor. Oops I said working poor, should have just said poor.

It would be the fairest of all.

Who pays a higher percentage of their income in a consumption tax?

The wealthy or the poor?

 

[Freewill]

Consumption tax with some means to help the working poor. Oops I said working poor, should have just said poor.

It would be the fairest of all.

Who pays a higher percentage of their income in a consumption tax?

The wealthy or the poor?

What makes percentage of income the rule? Isn't it more fair for those who use the most pay the most?

 

[Oldstyle]

Consumption tax with some means to help the working poor. Oops I said working poor, should have just said poor.

It would be the fairest of all.

Who pays a higher percentage of their income in a consumption tax?

The wealthy or the poor?

The point that's being made is that with our current "progressive" tax system...over 40% of Americans don't pay Federal income tax yet they can vote for additional benefits for themselves from the people that DO. So what incentive do they have for government spending that's fiscally responsible? They have ZERO skin in the game! They don't really CARE if Washington is efficient because it's not money that's coming out of their pocket.

What proponents of a flat tax or a consumption tax are saying is that our current system is a recipe for disaster.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Good question

Income EQUALITY means everyone makes the same income. Nobody but NOBODY is suggesting that all income should be equal

Redistribution of wealth looks at where our money is going. Right now, one percent of the population controls 35 percent of the wealth. 40 percent of the population controls four tenths of a percent of the wealth

The question is....why do we continue programs that help the one percent?

Why don't you answer that question and provide an example of how we do continue such programs.

I agree it happens and I would like to see it end.

But the 1% like Harry Reid, use their positions to obtain more wealth....

Reid Got $1.1M In Shady NV Land Deals | Sweetness & Light

How Did Harry Reid Get Rich? | National Review Online

And there are members of the GOP who do the same.....

But, you'll keep Harry in there at all costs.

There's a popular misconception that Harry Reid has spent his entire life on the taxpayer's dole, so it would be impossible for him to become rich on his own.

The Senate majority leader has been a full-time officeholder since he was first elected to the House in 1982, but many forget he practiced law for 18 years before that. He passed the bar at the end of 1964 and was in private practice even when he held other part-time jobs, including lieutenant governor and chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission. He said he had more than 100 jury trials when he was practicing.



Even before he went to Congress, Reid bought real estate and held onto it. One example: In 1979 he and law partner Bruce Alverson bought a building at 428 S. Fourth St. in Las Vegas for $89,500. In 2000, it sold for $716,000.


....Reid's net worth was about $5.4 million in 1995 and by 2006 had dropped to about $3.3 million. The reason: Reid sold much of his land to put his five children through college.




..Way back in 1982, the year he was elected to the House, Reid filed a report saying his net worth was between $1 million and $1.5 million "or more."


It gets complicated adding up what politicians are worth | Las Vegas Review-Journal

Harry Reid is a drug mule for the Mafia

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You can tell someone has no understanding of the US economy and is only parroting Marxist talking points as soon as you hear the word plutocrat

 

[mudwhistle]

I don't propose a Robin Hood rob from the rich and give to the poor

I do, however propose we look at future wealth and how our laws affect its distribution. For 30 years we have bought in to "Trickle Down" and "Job Creator" mythologies being pushed by the right. The promise of more jobs and prosperity for all never materialized.

I propose we look at our laws and ask....Who is helped the most by this legislation, the rich, the poor or working Americans?

We don't need millionaires in America anymore.

We need more marginally poor people.

That way maybe some of the things that makes us special will go away.


By the way, if you make it easy to be poor nobody will want to get out of poverty. Production goes down and the economy stagnates. The only people that will be rich is folks in Washington.

No poor person ever did better by receiving less

Show me anywhere in the US or anywhere in the world where poor people have become more successful by cutting their benefits

Show me examples of people that sit on their asses watching TV and drinking beer accomplishing great things.

Your problem is whenever someone offers to increase their benefits and one of us objects, you think we want to cut benefits.

 

[rightwinger]

do away with that

one simple tax rate that all pay

Can I take that as a concession on your part that the end result of any flat tax would result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

Working poor?

Used to be that meant barely making ends meet. Now it's an oxymoron.

What it means today is that you work full time and still need government assistance to "make ends meet"

 

[Contumacious]

Consumption tax with some means to help the working poor. Oops I said working poor, should have just said poor.

It would be the fairest of all.

Who pays a higher percentage of their income in a consumption tax?

The wealthy or the poor?

The point that's being made is that with our current "progressive" tax system...over 40% of Americans don't pay Federal income tax yet they can vote for additional benefits for themselves from the people that DO. So what incentive do they have for government spending that's fiscally responsible? They have ZERO skin in the game! They don't really CARE if Washington is efficient because it's not money that's coming out of their pocket.

What proponents of a flat tax or a consumption tax are saying is that our current system is a recipe for disaster.

Don't sweat it.

Janet Yellen will be inflating the fuck out of the currency. And there is nothing she has to worry about since the congresscritters refuse to audit the federal reserve board.

.

 

[mudwhistle]

Can I take that as a concession on your part that the end result of any flat tax would result in the wealthy paying less and the working poor paying more?

Working poor?

Used to be that meant barely making ends meet. Now it's an oxymoron.

What it means today is that you work full time and still need government assistance to "make ends meet"

That is by design.

Why did Obama raise excise taxes on booze, tobacco, and fatty foods?

To curb consumption.

Why is his policies costing billions to businesses? Because he says he wants to punish the rush. Instead he ends up jacking up the cost of living for the 'poor' workers that still have jobs. Raising the cost of electricity, water, food, fuel, and everything else. Blame that prick in the Whitehouse for the increase in poverty since he got into office.

 

[rightwinger]

Working poor?

Used to be that meant barely making ends meet. Now it's an oxymoron.

What it means today is that you work full time and still need government assistance to "make ends meet"

That is by design.

Why did Obama raise excise taxes on booze, tobacco, and fatty foods?

To curb consumption.

Why is his policies costing billions to businesses? Because he says he wants to punish the rush. Instead he ends up jacking up the cost of living for the 'poor' workers that still have jobs. Raising the cost of electricity, water, food, fuel, and everything else. Blame that prick in the Whitehouse for the increase in poverty since he got into office.

Nice try.....Fox would be proud

But we can really thank the Reagan Revolution and its resulting destruction of the American Middle Class