Liberals: If "steal more from the wealthy" wasn't an option. How would you resolve mass dependency?

[Markle]

An earned income tax credit for working would help. You can also raise the minimum wage. You could also allow her to take free job training courses at her local community college. Of course, this woman likely has a job since many adults on food stamps are working. They just make peanuts and can't support their kids on their income alone.

Replace all the programs for the poor/low income Americans with a universal basic income. That eliminates the problem of being penalized for getting a job.

and eliminates the need to get a job so more people will decide not to work and a smaller and smaller percentage of the population will have to pay for everything

It eliminates the disincentive to get a job if the income from the job is canceled out by the loss of income related benefits.

No it eliminates the need to get a job in the first place so more people will choose to go on the dole

We already have people 'on the dole'.

Yes, MILLIONS to many!

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

The Left Is an Aristocratic Fraud, So They Have a Mental Block Against This

Confiscate inheritance, which is unearned and goes to mostly mediocre recipient. Use it to pay the most intelligent of the next generation for their grades. A society won't grow unless its most valuable human resources are paid up front instead of depressing and discouraging them by mandating that they have to sacrifice their personal lives and personalities to develop themselves unaided before getting rewarded. A seed doesn't grow in sand.

An analogy would be that Larry Bird brought millions of dollars into the NBA by being the first White superstar in decades. That money didn't go to Larry Bird's heirs, it didn't even go to the next White superstar. It went to the whole next generation of stars and even to the other players.

What gives you the right to seize assets that someone DID earn and would like to have their children inherit? That isn't YOUR money! It belongs to the person who worked to make it in the first place.

"Paid up front"? What does that mean exactly? You get paid before you accomplish something of value to society just because you're potentially a valuable human resource? I don't think it's possible to come up with something that would encourage people NOT to contribute to society than what your proposing here!

As for people being forced to "sacrifice their personal lives and personalities"?

Blowhards Are Your Tailwind

The heirs didn't earn a dime, so you've started out with a well-financed lie and you know it. If the rich are so foaming-at-the-mouth insistent on their right to pick winners and losers in the next generation, they must have grabbed their own wealth through luck or cheating. If you want to be a loyal serf groveling before his lord, go back to the crumbling castles of Europe where you belong. This country was built by pioneers escaping from hereditary totalitarianism.

As for it being the decedent's money and he can do anything he wants with it, that's another fair-sounding statement that is not what that is all about in reality. It's the same as bribing the referees at his kid's team's game "with his own money." No one has the right to tilt the playing field; the next generation owns that and certainly does have the right to outlaw anti-competitive birth privileges. If we have to do it on our own, so must the spoiled brats. Only then will the best win and produce the best society. Your days are numbered because only now at unearned privileges' terminal stage, not even brownnoses can get ahead. All the good jobs are pre-assigned to HeirHeads. After all your unrealistic statements, you still feel smart and important because of the loudmouths who are paid millions to bombard you with unAmerican aristocratic propaganda.

You won't pay college students for their grades, yet you're all in favor of giving the fatcats' fatkittens allowances there. That is living-inheritance freeloading, and it's invested in birth, not worth.. All investment in resources is paid up front before production, but you won't apply that rule to the most naturally talented human resources because you jealously need to humiliate them. You not only show ingratitude to the creative; you show a slavish preference for the Nobility With No Ability. This will lead to a stagnant economy, just like hereditary political power has led to a government incapable of doing its job.

College is work without pay; that's all it means. It is an obsolete aristocratic institution, designed predominately for rich kids of no special talent living off an allowance. As long as you're preaching that it's not a sacrifice for the rest of us and intended to humiliate the talented so they'll meekly make the rich richer, you're ranting from a pulpit for bullies. This dysfunctional "education" is not about brains, it's about birth and brownnosing. So until it is replaced by highly paid professional training, it will continue to put inferior people in superior positions.

 

[JBond]

If we don't stop the bleeding of our middle class we won't have one...

The rich are destroying it with their greed.

Matthew continues to prove he is the dim bulb. The middle class moved up. The dependency class has stayed about the same. We take a trillion dollars a year away from people that earn it and give it to those that do not. That trillion does not include Medicare or SS. I'm talking about pure redistribution and handouts. A trillion a year isn't enough for far left nut jobs. They know the only way to stay relevant is to keep people dumb, poor, and dependent on government handouts.

 

[JBond]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

The Left Is an Aristocratic Fraud, So They Have a Mental Block Against This

Confiscate inheritance, which is unearned and goes to mostly mediocre recipient. Use it to pay the most intelligent of the next generation for their grades. A society won't grow unless its most valuable human resources are paid up front instead of depressing and discouraging them by mandating that they have to sacrifice their personal lives and personalities to develop themselves unaided before getting rewarded. A seed doesn't grow in sand.

An analogy would be that Larry Bird brought millions of dollars into the NBA by being the first White superstar in decades. That money didn't go to Larry Bird's heirs, it didn't even go to the next White superstar. It went to the whole next generation of stars and even to the other players.

What gives you the right to seize assets that someone DID earn and would like to have their children inherit? That isn't YOUR money! It belongs to the person who worked to make it in the first place.

"Paid up front"? What does that mean exactly? You get paid before you accomplish something of value to society just because you're potentially a valuable human resource? I don't think it's possible to come up with something that would encourage people NOT to contribute to society than what your proposing here!

As for people being forced to "sacrifice their personal lives and personalities"?

Blowhards Are Your Tailwind

The heirs didn't earn a dime, so you've started out with a well-financed lie and you know it. If the rich are so foaming-at-the-mouth insistent on their right to pick winners and losers in the next generation, they must have grabbed their own wealth through luck or cheating. If you want to be a loyal serf groveling before his lord, go back to the crumbling castles of Europe where you belong. This country was built by pioneers escaping from hereditary totalitarianism.

As for it being the decedent's money and he can do anything he wants with it, that's another fair-sounding statement that is not what that is all about in reality. It's the same as bribing the referees at his kid's team's game "with his own money." No one has the right to tilt the playing field; the next generation owns that and certainly does have the right to outlaw anti-competitive birth privileges. If we have to do it on our own, so must the spoiled brats. Only then will the best win and produce the best society. Your days are numbered because only now at unearned privileges' terminal stage, not even brownnoses can get ahead. All the good jobs are pre-assigned to HeirHeads. After all your unrealistic statements, you still feel smart and important because of the loudmouths who are paid millions to bombard you with unAmerican aristocratic propaganda.

You won't pay college students for their grades, yet you're all in favor of giving the fatcats' fatkittens allowances there. That is living-inheritance freeloading, and it's invested in birth, not worth.. All investment in resources is paid up front before production, but you won't apply that rule to the most naturally talented human resources because you jealously need to humiliate them. You not only show ingratitude to the creative; you show a slavish preference for the Nobility With No Ability. This will lead to a stagnant economy, just like hereditary political power has led to a government incapable of doing its job.

College is work without pay; that's all it means. It is an obsolete aristocratic institution, designed predominately for rich kids of no special talent living off an allowance. As long as you're preaching that it's not a sacrifice for the rest of us and intended to humiliate the talented so they'll meekly make the rich richer, you're ranting from a pulpit for bullies. This dysfunctional "education" is not about brains, it's about birth and brownnosing. So until it is replaced by highly paid professional training, it will continue to put inferior people in superior positions.

Lol. Someone got cut out of Daddy's will.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

If "steal more from the wealthy" wasn't an option. How would you resolve mass dependency?

Well, now that I think of it, perhaps I should correct myself. I may have done one unusual thing: I focused my youthful thoughts and energies on becoming, among other things, wealthy rather than on discovering and complaining about all the things that may be impediments to my doing so. That's something that, save perhaps for lottery winners, all wealthy people do or did.

Hiding in Plain Sight

"All" wealthy people do that? Sperm-lottery winners don't scratch and claw to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. They have plutestraps to make all their pre-ordained success easy. Twenty percent of the 1% were born in the 1%. That lopsided statistic falsifies the whole glorification of success in this New Medievalism.

The other 80% have to get ahead in a way that doesn't threaten the HeirHeads, so they don't deserve it either. Your omission of that dominant anointed sector of the rich proves that you have nothing to be proud of or you'd want to confiscate inheritance and trust funds and outlaw the preppies' overwhelming advantage of living off an allowance with paid-up tuition in college. You have nothing to say worth listening to about contemporary American society if you try to ignore the regime's illegitimate justification of its existence. That is the key hidden issue that unlocks everything that goes on under this united Left/Right "Born Rich, Born to Rule" axis.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

Since you believe that democratic government is 'stealing', what form of government would you replace it with that would NOT steal?

Tax collection is not stealing.
Bottom feeders giving birth to pet humans knowing that someone else will fund them IS stealing.
Rather than hijack this thread perhaps you should start another and seek more answers to your question? I'll play along in it.

Then if taxes levied by the will of the people go to help the poor,

where is the stealing?

Start your own thread bud....I already said I'll play along in it.
How would you help solve mass dependency without taking more from the wealthy?
Any ideas?

A Seed Doesn't Grow by Being Spit On

Create more wealth by giving immediate incentives to the highly intelligent from childhood on. They should get the same rewards that rich kids and superior athletes get now as they are growing up, including peer-group respect and their pick of the prettiest girls. That's referring to real-life incentives, not the incentives that economists use when they think of people as impersonal objects on some inanimate graph.

Preparation is the most important part of production, yet smart kids are expected to spend 5 to 25 years in unrewarded misery before getting paid for their brains. A selfish and malignant force is behind all that humiliation. But the result of investing up-front in this human gold mine will be that we'll have so much money that we'll be able to pay the lowly talented $20 an hour for menial work, just as long as they're doing something minimally useful. Otherwise, they get nothing. If they try to extort us by threatening to turn to crime, we either execute them on the spot or put them on a chain gang.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

The Left Is an Aristocratic Fraud, So They Have a Mental Block Against This

Confiscate inheritance, which is unearned and goes to mostly mediocre recipient. Use it to pay the most intelligent of the next generation for their grades. A society won't grow unless its most valuable human resources are paid up front instead of depressing and discouraging them by mandating that they have to sacrifice their personal lives and personalities to develop themselves unaided before getting rewarded. A seed doesn't grow in sand.

An analogy would be that Larry Bird brought millions of dollars into the NBA by being the first White superstar in decades. That money didn't go to Larry Bird's heirs, it didn't even go to the next White superstar. It went to the whole next generation of stars and even to the other players.

What gives you the right to seize assets that someone DID earn and would like to have their children inherit? That isn't YOUR money! It belongs to the person who worked to make it in the first place.

"Paid up front"? What does that mean exactly? You get paid before you accomplish something of value to society just because you're potentially a valuable human resource? I don't think it's possible to come up with something that would encourage people NOT to contribute to society than what your proposing here!

As for people being forced to "sacrifice their personal lives and personalities"?

Blowhards Are Your Tailwind

The heirs didn't earn a dime, so you've started out with a well-financed lie and you know it. If the rich are so foaming-at-the-mouth insistent on their right to pick winners and losers in the next generation, they must have grabbed their own wealth through luck or cheating. If you want to be a loyal serf groveling before his lord, go back to the crumbling castles of Europe where you belong. This country was built by pioneers escaping from hereditary totalitarianism.

As for it being the decedent's money and he can do anything he wants with it, that's another fair-sounding statement that is not what that is all about in reality. It's the same as bribing the referees at his kid's team's game "with his own money." No one has the right to tilt the playing field; the next generation owns that and certainly does have the right to outlaw anti-competitive birth privileges. If we have to do it on our own, so must the spoiled brats. Only then will the best win and produce the best society. Your days are numbered because only now at unearned privileges' terminal stage, not even brownnoses can get ahead. All the good jobs are pre-assigned to HeirHeads. After all your unrealistic statements, you still feel smart and important because of the loudmouths who are paid millions to bombard you with unAmerican aristocratic propaganda.

You won't pay college students for their grades, yet you're all in favor of giving the fatcats' fatkittens allowances there. That is living-inheritance freeloading, and it's invested in birth, not worth.. All investment in resources is paid up front before production, but you won't apply that rule to the most naturally talented human resources because you jealously need to humiliate them. You not only show ingratitude to the creative; you show a slavish preference for the Nobility With No Ability. This will lead to a stagnant economy, just like hereditary political power has led to a government incapable of doing its job.

College is work without pay; that's all it means. It is an obsolete aristocratic institution, designed predominately for rich kids of no special talent living off an allowance. As long as you're preaching that it's not a sacrifice for the rest of us and intended to humiliate the talented so they'll meekly make the rich richer, you're ranting from a pulpit for bullies. This dysfunctional "education" is not about brains, it's about birth and brownnosing. So until it is replaced by highly paid professional training, it will continue to put inferior people in superior positions.

Lol. Someone got cut out of Daddy's will.

The Spoiled Have No Real Self-Identity

And someone would be a nobody without Daddy's Money and knows deep down inside that he is worthless. Unprivileged Americans should drive that into the HeirHead guillotine fodder and make them drop out of society. I'm sure their doting Daddy will finance their hermit's lifestyle.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

The tax code has been rigged since the mid-1980s allowing the wealthy and super wealthy, as well as corps, to siphon money out of the country.

These are people who got rich off the American worker and the U.S. economic system and market.

Wealth is not "redistributed" -- crumbs are tossed out to the lower classes to keep them complacent.

You Loons just can't help yourselves can you? Funny shit. "The tax code is rigged" yet it's the wealthy who cover all your government funded shit. While the bottom 20% don't pay shit or pull their weight. You confused much?
Top 20% of Earners Pay 84% of Income Tax
It's the rich standing in the doorways of classrooms all across America stopping all low iQ barely humans from entering...haha
It's the rich forcing 15 year old DaNika to slide down that baby daddy penis and impregnate herself....haha
It's the rich stopping Guadalupe, Pedro, DaNika and DaShawn from learning to speak English clearly and articulately...haha
It's the rich preventing lowlifes from becoming driven to achieve success...haha
AWESOME stuff here...but one of us is retarded and I'm thinking it isn't me.
Can you explain further...please?
Also, how would you help solve mass dependency without robbing anyone?

In order to make the plutocratic parasites look good by comparison, you're dishonestly and illogically defining the stupid, lazy, and violent mooching races as the opposite of the rich. You know perfectly well that if we had had a majoritarian democracy when this Civil Rights for the Uncivilized poison started, the minorities' unearned right to vote, which led to this freeloading, would have been overruled by a national referendum.

The enemies of democracy claim that it inevitably leads to the non-productive freeloading off taxes paid by the rest. Yet what they define as "tyranny of majority" would have prevented that from ever happening, because the majority of Americans who could vote at that time saw that minority dependency and extortion coming and would have to pay more than they could afford, whereas the plutocracy could afford what they paid to hire this decoy.

 

[Richard-H]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

While I have no qualms about taking from the wealthy, it is not the best answer to the huge and grossly unfair wealth distribution.

First, the wealthy have a whole lot more money than they deserve. They are de facto thieves - so I have no qualms about taxing the daylights out of them.

However, the real problem is that the vast majority of non-wealthy people are dumb asses. That's why the wealthy are able to take so much.

The American people allow themselves to be ripped off each and every minute of each and every day of their lives. They just accept that that's the way things are. Most are fanatic consumers that live at or beyond their means. They don't know or care about the difference between an appreciable and a non-appreciable asset. They allow mortgage and car loan terms that are blatant thievery At least some have the brains to be fighting against a health care industry that routinely extorts people for all they can.

The American people have stopped demanding wage and salary increases. They are better educated, more skilled and more productive than ever, but they earn less and less every year. They are collectively a bunch of dumb asses for accepting this.

As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%.

On one hand I don't blame the uber-wealthy for being smart - they owe their wealth to the stupidity of working Americans. On the other hand I am 100% O.K. with super high taxes on the wealthy since they do not earn their wealth.

I just wish the American people would wake the fuck up!

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The biggest moronic talking point vomited by far-rights and libertarians -- Taxes = stealing.

These are usually poor or moderate income types who don't know that their billionaire overloads pay a lower percentage than they do and have been siphoning money out of the U.S. economy for decades.

In the same way that Souther Plantation owners tricked the lower class men into going to fight their rebellion to maintain their slave labor economy, today's wealthy conservative manipulate their lower counterparts into believing Tax policy is unfair and "stealing"....

Try to follow...nobody said tax collection is stealing.
Bottom feeders giving birth to pet humans knowing that someone else will fund them IS stealing.

Liberals Are a Hallucination, the Best Friends the Far Right Has Ever Had

Preppy Progressives (all other Liberals, like class-climber Joe Biden, are insignificant flunkies) don't have minds of their own; everything they do is to promote the supremacy of the class they were born in. So they were the ones who turned loose the moochers on us and then said they hated the rich. The purpose of that false flag was to trick us into voting for the rich against our economic interests. Proof is the widening disparity between the top and the middle ever since this anti-majority Liberalism started in the 1960s. Another example is that they purposely insulted working-class soldiers in Vietnam back then so we'd support Chickenhawks in a pathetic reaction to that.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

If you can't even define what you mean by "mass dependency", your topic is useless. What programs? How much?

Come on bud...stop with the semantics. It's a slightly vague question...surely you have some slightly vague yet sensible answers ...no?

Okay, sure. Every citizen in the US is dependent on a government program. I'm glad I could make this easy for you.

If you could not steal from anyone to help ShaQuita, DaShawn and their six money trees (children) who are sucking the welfare tit for all it's worth what would you propose we do to help?

Inglorious Bastards

Bring back orphanages. Take the illegitimate child away at birth; the mother is unfit and the child will grow up to be a gangbanger. The preached ethics come from irrational and unrealistic absolutist rules, that the child belongs to the mother absolutely, even if she is a lazy, drug-addicted slut.

Another, and cheaper, option is mandatory abortion in this case. God wouldn't want an unwanted child to be born. God wouldn't want to turn loose a natural-born killer on society.

 

[BlueGin]

53 posts...and not a single suggestion from a Lefty?...WOW

Looting the wealthy is the ultimate goal of liberalism, not a means to an end, so it's not surprising they couldn't come up with anything. That's like asking a heroin addict if they can think of something pleasant to do that doesn't involve heroin.

Notice how them donating their own money is never an option.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Come on bud...stop with the semantics. It's a slightly vague question...surely you have some slightly vague yet sensible answers ...no?

Okay, sure. Every citizen in the US is dependent on a government program. I'm glad I could make this easy for you.

NEGATIVE.
You guys are so entertaining...HAHA
Let me spell this out for the elementary minded Loons trying desperately to deflect and spin shit.
If you could not steal from anyone to help ShaQuita, DaShawn and their six money trees (children) who are sucking the welfare tit for all it's worth what would you propose we do to help?

See this welfare queen myth of yours is why you sound like an idiot. I know it makes you feel superior and manly to degrade people on welfare, but you are just willfully ignorant on the facts.

1) Programs like food stamps are a fraction of the overall welfare budget.

2) Most people on food stamps are white.

3) On average, a food stamps recipient gets about $133 a month. Their income qualifications is per household - not per person. These people are the poorest of the poor.

4) Drug use and fraud of the food stamps program are statistically rare.

5) 2/3 of those on food stamps are kids, the disabled, and the elderly.

Whoa...easy there bud. This thread is not about and was never about food stamps. You're losing yourself in the simplicity of it all.
"Myth"?
"Ignorant on the facts?"
You sure about that smart guy?
Not to worry, I aim to enlighten the confused, uninformed and self manipulated. You're welcome in advance.
Who Participated in Welfare?
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.
21.3% of US Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month

That stat refers to the amount on food stamps per race. It doesn't change the fact that most people on food stamps are white.

Sorry but you're bad at this.

We how could that be?


Since 58% of the prision population is blacks and don't need food stamps in the joint because the government is already paying for there food and housing




.

 

[kiwiman127]

The below graph clearly shows that there has already been a huge transfer of wealth upwards.

 

[Oldstyle]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

The Left Is an Aristocratic Fraud, So They Have a Mental Block Against This

Confiscate inheritance, which is unearned and goes to mostly mediocre recipient. Use it to pay the most intelligent of the next generation for their grades. A society won't grow unless its most valuable human resources are paid up front instead of depressing and discouraging them by mandating that they have to sacrifice their personal lives and personalities to develop themselves unaided before getting rewarded. A seed doesn't grow in sand.

An analogy would be that Larry Bird brought millions of dollars into the NBA by being the first White superstar in decades. That money didn't go to Larry Bird's heirs, it didn't even go to the next White superstar. It went to the whole next generation of stars and even to the other players.

What gives you the right to seize assets that someone DID earn and would like to have their children inherit? That isn't YOUR money! It belongs to the person who worked to make it in the first place.

"Paid up front"? What does that mean exactly? You get paid before you accomplish something of value to society just because you're potentially a valuable human resource? I don't think it's possible to come up with something that would encourage people NOT to contribute to society than what your proposing here!

As for people being forced to "sacrifice their personal lives and personalities"?

Blowhards Are Your Tailwind

The heirs didn't earn a dime, so you've started out with a well-financed lie and you know it. If the rich are so foaming-at-the-mouth insistent on their right to pick winners and losers in the next generation, they must have grabbed their own wealth through luck or cheating. If you want to be a loyal serf groveling before his lord, go back to the crumbling castles of Europe where you belong. This country was built by pioneers escaping from hereditary totalitarianism.

As for it being the decedent's money and he can do anything he wants with it, that's another fair-sounding statement that is not what that is all about in reality. It's the same as bribing the referees at his kid's team's game "with his own money." No one has the right to tilt the playing field; the next generation owns that and certainly does have the right to outlaw anti-competitive birth privileges. If we have to do it on our own, so must the spoiled brats. Only then will the best win and produce the best society. Your days are numbered because only now at unearned privileges' terminal stage, not even brownnoses can get ahead. All the good jobs are pre-assigned to HeirHeads. After all your unrealistic statements, you still feel smart and important because of the loudmouths who are paid millions to bombard you with unAmerican aristocratic propaganda.

You won't pay college students for their grades, yet you're all in favor of giving the fatcats' fatkittens allowances there. That is living-inheritance freeloading, and it's invested in birth, not worth.. All investment in resources is paid up front before production, but you won't apply that rule to the most naturally talented human resources because you jealously need to humiliate them. You not only show ingratitude to the creative; you show a slavish preference for the Nobility With No Ability. This will lead to a stagnant economy, just like hereditary political power has led to a government incapable of doing its job.

College is work without pay; that's all it means. It is an obsolete aristocratic institution, designed predominately for rich kids of no special talent living off an allowance. As long as you're preaching that it's not a sacrifice for the rest of us and intended to humiliate the talented so they'll meekly make the rich richer, you're ranting from a pulpit for bullies. This dysfunctional "education" is not about brains, it's about birth and brownnosing. So until it is replaced by highly paid professional training, it will continue to put inferior people in superior positions.

It's not that the heirs have earned their inheritance...it's that their parents have earned the right to give that inheritance to ANYONE they deem worthy! It's not society's money! It belongs to the people who have worked hard to earn it...paying taxes while they are doing so!

As for what built this country? It sure as hell wasn't the entitlement society that we have now! America prospered because this was the land of opportunity where through the sweat of your brow and your own ingenuity...you could become well off!

All the good jobs are "pre-assigned" to "HeirHeads"? Really? So the Dot Com billionaires only succeeded because they inherited great wealth? Your premise is laughable, Sage! I have no idea who you are or what has happened to you in your lifetime that makes you think America only works for the rich but it's still one of the few places on earth where people with very little can become fabulously rich.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The below graph clearly shows that there has already been a huge transfer of wealth upwards.
View attachment 129747

Very well. If what you say is true (and I"m not questioning you about that) then somebody or some people would have to be in charge of this transfer of wealth? Wouldn't you agree? And if so, who are these people?

Before you reply, I already know the answer.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

While I have no qualms about taking from the wealthy, it is not the best answer to the huge and grossly unfair wealth distribution.

First, the wealthy have a whole lot more money than they deserve. They are de facto thieves - so I have no qualms about taxing the daylights out of them.

However, the real problem is that the vast majority of non-wealthy people are dumb asses. That's why the wealthy are able to take so much.

The American people allow themselves to be ripped off each and every minute of each and every day of their lives. They just accept that that's the way things are. Most are fanatic consumers that live at or beyond their means. They don't know or care about the difference between an appreciable and a non-appreciable asset. They allow mortgage and car loan terms that are blatant thievery At least some have the brains to be fighting against a health care industry that routinely extorts people for all they can.

The American people have stopped demanding wage and salary increases. They are better educated, more skilled and more productive than ever, but they earn less and less every year. They are collectively a bunch of dumb asses for accepting this.

As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%.

On one hand I don't blame the uber-wealthy for being smart - they owe their wealth to the stupidity of working Americans. On the other hand I am 100% O.K. with super high taxes on the wealthy since they do not earn their wealth.

I just wish the American people would wake the fuck up!

By "not earn their wealth" you mean they are not carrying 2X4s to the job site; they are not running a lathe; they are not climbing up a ladder with heavy roof shingles over their shoulders?

Anybody who works earns their money. You don't have to be hands-on to say somebody is worth paying. The wealthy have more money than they deserve? By who's standards--yours? And if they have more money than you judge they deserve, government deserves it more???

If anybody is not working for their money, it's government. Second in line are government dependents that take that money from them.

If taking money away from people because they have too much is a good idea, then why not extrapolate that to other things?

Maybe you have a dozen beautiful bushes in front of your home. Would it not be right for government to come along and talk half of your bushes to give to your neighbor down the street that doesn't have any? Or maybe you have three cars in your family. That's not fair, the lady on the next street only has one. Wouldn't it be fair for government to take one of your cars so that you each have two of them? You have three big screens in your home. That's not right. Not everybody has a big screen. So maybe government should take one of your big screens and give it to somebody hat has a 19 inch screen.

If taking other people's money makes a good society, wouldn't taking people's other property away make it a great one? After all, that's what money is. It's property.

"How much is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That stat refers to the amount on food stamps per race. It doesn't change the fact that most people on food stamps are white.

Sorry but you're bad at this.

Haha...You koooks are so predictable.
Per capita factoring is only used by smart people seeking TRUE data. You definitely wouldn't want to use this method as WHOLE TRUTH hurts your little feelings...come to think of it you hate the truth and facts...haha

Actually it was me who offered you a full run down of the program. You just choose not to believe those facts so you can freely talk shit about whoever is on it. Deep down you're an insecure little girl who is trying to feel manly.

Yeah, yeah...let's go with that.
So Billy, you're a super bright guy; you can't play Robin Hood and rob others...how would you take ShaQuita from pet human to self funded?

An earned income tax credit for working would help. You can also raise the minimum wage. You could also allow her to take free job training courses at her local community college. Of course, this woman likely has a job since many adults on food stamps are working. They just make peanuts and can't support their kids on their income alone.

Replace all the programs for the poor/low income Americans with a universal basic income. That eliminates the problem of being penalized for getting a job.

And where would that money come from?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Whoa...easy there bud. This thread is not about and was never about food stamps. You're losing yourself in the simplicity of it all.
"Myth"?
"Ignorant on the facts?"
You sure about that smart guy?
Not to worry, I aim to enlighten the confused, uninformed and self manipulated. You're welcome in advance.
Who Participated in Welfare?
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.
21.3% of US Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month

That stat refers to the amount on food stamps per race. It doesn't change the fact that most people on food stamps are white.

Sorry but you're bad at this.

Haha...You koooks are so predictable.
Per capita factoring is only used by smart people seeking TRUE data. You definitely wouldn't want to use this method as WHOLE TRUTH hurts your little feelings...come to think of it you hate the truth and facts...haha

Actually it was me who offered you a full run down of the program. You just choose not to believe those facts so you can freely talk shit about whoever is on it. Deep down you're an insecure little girl who is trying to feel manly.

Yeah, yeah...let's go with that.
So Billy, you're a super bright guy; you can't play Robin Hood and rob others...how would you take ShaQuita from pet human to self funded?

An earned income tax credit for working would help. You can also raise the minimum wage. You could also allow her to take free job training courses at her local community college. Of course, this woman likely has a job since many adults on food stamps are working. They just make peanuts and can't support their kids on their income alone.

Then why did they have kids in the first place?

 

[Billy000]

That stat refers to the amount on food stamps per race. It doesn't change the fact that most people on food stamps are white.

Sorry but you're bad at this.

Haha...You koooks are so predictable.
Per capita factoring is only used by smart people seeking TRUE data. You definitely wouldn't want to use this method as WHOLE TRUTH hurts your little feelings...come to think of it you hate the truth and facts...haha

Actually it was me who offered you a full run down of the program. You just choose not to believe those facts so you can freely talk shit about whoever is on it. Deep down you're an insecure little girl who is trying to feel manly.

Yeah, yeah...let's go with that.
So Billy, you're a super bright guy; you can't play Robin Hood and rob others...how would you take ShaQuita from pet human to self funded?

An earned income tax credit for working would help. You can also raise the minimum wage. You could also allow her to take free job training courses at her local community college. Of course, this woman likely has a job since many adults on food stamps are working. They just make peanuts and can't support their kids on their income alone.

Then why did they have kids in the first place?

It really does not matter. Kids receiving food stamps isn't about the mother whatsoever. That money doesn't at all benefit the mom. She isn't profiting off of having kids on food stamps. I know you cons like to pretend she is, but that's just stupid. You know nothing about how the program works. Stop pretending you do.