Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The fact that you think of progressive taxation as being "fucked over" demonstrates you are in need of some basic education and strongly suggests you've been brainwashed by such millionaire right-wing propagandists as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, et al. So let's start with a simple example.How about if we make everybody pay the exact same tax rate (percentage) and see what happens.
Or do you think some people should be fucked over simply because they make more money than you?
The super-rich of this Nation have accumulated their fortunes by exploiting the material, administrative, and human resources of this Nation.
Like how the government subsidizes the oil companies? They receive money they didn't earn. Let's give that money back to the people who earned it: the taxpayers.
Stop having donor states give the taxpayer's money to states that receive it. In my state we give some of our hard earned tax dollars to other states, who haven't earned it.
Anybody who doesn't support these two things, isn't really serious about being against the redistribution of wealth.
We sure do here in Louisiana... the Feds rape us for billions and then give it to fuckwad blue states so they can make their transfer payments.
Come on shitstain, let's compare private ownership of homes and automobiles....that is an economic sign of upward mobility.
FYI...most Europeans don't own a car or a home.
Riding public transportation and living in an apartment is the average European's life.
Stupid fuck....I lived in Europe 3 times, shut the fuck up.
They have people living in apartments forever and have zero hope of ever owning a piece of grass.
Care to compare private HOMES here to over there.....
For a guy with a degree, YOU sure act funny to scientific data
Europe has been ruled by the rich for centuries yet liberal scum here point to Europe as the economic model the US should follow....fucking insane.
Economic liberty came from the US, not from Europe.
I sort of get the safety net argument, the notion that we have a moral responsibility to care for those who fall through the cracks. I'd still argue that government isn't the right tool for that job, but at least the idea has merit. But I don't really see moral justification for taking money away from people simply because you think they've accumulated too much. Can someone here advocating "wealth redistribution" address that?
WE TRIED YOUR MODEL BEFORE WE HAD THE PROGRESSIVE PERIOD, REMEMBER THE POOR HOUSES AND ABJECT POVERTY FOR 95% OF US?
Who is "WE"?
What model was that?
.
One answer to that question is if you have children how do you feel about the fact that as a rule (not the exception) they probably will not earn as much as you have, and their children will not earn as much as they did, and so on. But there is a class of Americans who, as a rule, will continue to accumulate greater fortunes than their forebears.Why are liberals/socialists worried about what other people make???
In other words, we are presently witnessing the rise of a financial aristocracy in America, along with the emergence of an accompanying peasant class.
Presuming you are not among the One Percent, do you feel there is nothing wrong with this?
Our children both earn more than twice as much as my husband and I ever earned together. And all their friends that they grew up with almost all also out earn their parents. And my generation and their generation started out without a lot of help from anybody. But now we are fully into the generations indoctrinated with an entitlement mentality. Some are encouraged to NOT do what is necessary to acquire wealth as they don't want to give up any of their government freebies. Still others have bought into the victim mentality that the wealthy are screwing them and they look to unions or government or others for whatever fortune might drop in their lap. And all that screws the numbers and the percentages.
Most of those who ignored and ignore these kinds of phenomena still seem to be doing okay though they are handicapped by the worst economy and the most jobs and business unfriendly administration in my increasingly long memory.
I sort of get the safety net argument, the notion that we have a moral responsibility to care for those who fall through the cracks. I'd still argue that government isn't the right tool for that job, but at least the idea has merit. But I don't really see moral justification for taking money away from people simply because you think they've accumulated too much. Can someone here advocating "wealth redistribution" address that?
WE TRIED YOUR MODEL BEFORE ...
I sort of get the safety net argument, the notion that we have a moral responsibility to care for those who fall through the cracks. I'd still argue that government isn't the right tool for that job, but at least the idea has merit. But I don't really see moral justification for taking money away from people simply because you think they've accumulated too much. Can someone here advocating "wealth redistribution" address that?
WE TRIED YOUR MODEL BEFORE ...
I'll take that as a "no".
WE TRIED YOUR MODEL BEFORE ...
I'll take that as a "no".
I gave it to you, TWICE
I'll take that as a "no".
I gave it to you, TWICE
No, you made some comment about my "model" (what??) and copied and pasted an irrelevant article. Twice.
And you are a new nitwit on my Ignore list....and you're full of shit.
One answer to that question is if you have children how do you feel about the fact that as a rule (not the exception) they probably will not earn as much as you have, and their children will not earn as much as they did, and so on. But there is a class of Americans who, as a rule, will continue to accumulate greater fortunes than their forebears.Why are liberals/socialists worried about what other people make???
In other words, we are presently witnessing the rise of a financial aristocracy in America, along with the emergence of an accompanying peasant class.
Presuming you are not among the One Percent, do you feel there is nothing wrong with this?
Like how the government subsidizes the oil companies? They receive money they didn't earn. Let's give that money back to the people who earned it: the taxpayers.
Stop having donor states give the taxpayer's money to states that receive it. In my state we give some of our hard earned tax dollars to other states, who haven't earned it.
Anybody who doesn't support these two things, isn't really serious about being against the redistribution of wealth.
Are you proud to identify yourself as a moron?
1. Should we go after the owners of Exxon with pitchforks an firebrands?
Better not, after all they is us! Exxon Mobil, in fact, is owned mostly by ordinary Americans. Mutual funds, index funds and pension funds (including union pension funds) own about 52 percent of Exxon Mobils shares. Individual shareholders, about two million or so, own almost all the rest. The pooh-bahs who run Exxon own less than 1 percent of the company.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/business/02every.html
2. And, of course, the antibusiness crowd loves stories about how much Big Oil is stealing from the American people! On the contrary, in 2006, the oil industry paid $81 billion in income tax, and while Exxons earnings increased 89% from 2003 to 2007, their income taxes increased 170%. Businessweek - Business News, Stock market & Financial Advice
3. The non-thinking segment of the public has been conditioned to hate the oil industry. Very few realize the extent to which they are subsidized by this industry.
According to the [Exxon] company's income statement, the amount of taxes it paid in 2008 was 2.5 times as much as its net profit. The $45.2 billion profit figure makes a snappy headline, but the $116.2 billion in taxes that it paid is relegated to a footnoteif that. Exxon's tax bill breaks down like this: income taxes, $36.5 billion; sales-based taxes, $34.5 billion; "all other" taxes, $45.2 billion. Exxon, Big Oil Profits Evil Only Until You Weigh Their Tax Bills - US News
If Exxons 2008 tax bill of $116.2 billion were split equally among all tax filers who pay income tax, each filers share would be $1,259/year. Still hate Exxon? Number of Americans Paying Zero Federal Income Tax Grows to 43.4 Million | Tax Foundation
4. " Taxation Hero: ExxonMobil Pays $3 In Taxes For Every $1 In Profit" Taxation Hero: ExxonMobil Pays $3 In Taxes For Every $1 In Profit - Forbes
No doubt you are the product of government schooling.
Weird, you bring up all the numbers THEN conflate it with individuals who don't pay INCOME taxes that are only 42% of federal revenues? lol
False premises, distortions and lies, the ONLY tool conservatives EVER have
In 2010 Exxon Mobil paid a domestic federal income tax rate of just 17%, based on their U.S. pre-tax income of $7.5 billion. Literally half the standard corporate tax rate. Worse yet, in 2009, Exxon Mobil paid no U.S. federal income taxes. That‟s right, 0%.
This is because they took advantage of the federal subsidy that allows them to take foreign tax credits on royalties disguised as income taxes. These royalties are not taxes but are in exchange for the right to produce oil.
Oil & Gas Subsidies: Myth vs. Fact
Dumbfuck.....there will always be rich/ruling class.
Even socialism/communism the political elites and their friends still hoard all the resources from the masses and the masses have no chance to ever acquire wealth themselves.
In our economic system, someone can grow up in the ghetto and become rich from their talents in the classroom or sports venues.
Idiots like you whining about rich people passing on their wealth to their "family" is ludicrous. Why shouldn't we come take your family's resources under the same premise.....nobody owns anything, oops that is your socialism.
One answer to that question is if you have children how do you feel about the fact that as a rule (not the exception) they probably will not earn as much as you have, and their children will not earn as much as they did, and so on. But there is a class of Americans who, as a rule, will continue to accumulate greater fortunes than their forebears.
In other words, we are presently witnessing the rise of a financial aristocracy in America, along with the emergence of an accompanying peasant class.
Presuming you are not among the One Percent, do you feel there is nothing wrong with this?
Social Immobility: Climbing The Economic Ladder Is Harder In The U.S. Than In Most European Countries
The report finds the U.S. ranking well below Denmark, Australia, Norway, Finland, Canada, Sweden, Germany and Spain in terms of how freely citizens move up or down the social ladder. Only in Italy and Great Britain is the intensity of the relationship between individual and parental earnings even greater.
Social Immobility: Climbing The Economic Ladder Is Harder In The U.S. Than In Most European Countries
The Loss of Upward Mobility in the U.S.
The Loss of Upward Mobility in the U.S. | TIME.com
Mostly because of the misguided opinion that what rich people get is somehow limiting what the less wealth can get. They could not be more wrong.Why are liberals/socialists worried about what other people make???
