More Free Stuff to run up the debt or taxes.

[Claudette]

You don't understand how the super-rich earn the bulk of their income. (for which they pay little or no taxes).

The super-rich receive their incomes exactly the same way everyone else receives their incomes: People voluntarily give it to them.

Bullshit. Someone in that family earned that money and worked their ass off to get it.

Jealous much??

 

[Flash]

[Q

Bullshit. Someone in that family earned that money and worked their ass off to get it.

Jealous much??

Libtards are consumed with greed and envy.

 

[Centinel]

Bullshit. Someone in that family earned that money and worked their ass off to get it.

Jealous much??

I'm not jealous at all, and I think you're misunderstanding my point. I was responding to JoeB131 who said that incomes are unfairly distributed. My point is that incomes aren't unfairly distributed. In fact they're not "distributed" in the first place. Income is simply what people voluntarily give you.

If you want people to give you more, you have to do more for them. This means you have to offer them a valuable good or service.

Unlike JoeB131, I contend that incomes are what they are, and if someone wants a higher income, he should spend less time on an internet message board and figure out how to provide value to people so they choose to voluntarily give him their money.

 

[Flash]

Bullshit. Someone in that family earned that money and worked their ass off to get it.

Jealous much??

I'm not jealous at all, and I think you're misunderstanding my point. I was responding to JoeB131 who said that incomes are unfairly distributed. My point is that incomes aren't unfairly distributed. In fact they're not "distributed" in the first place. Income is simply what people voluntarily give you.

If you want people to give you more, you have to do more for them. This means you have to offer them a valuable good or service.

Unlike JoeB131, I contend that incomes are what they are, and if someone wants a higher income, he should spend less time on an internet message board and figure out how to provide value to people so they choose to voluntarily give him their money.

Thanks for the clarification. You had us worried.

 

[JoeB131]

People receive the income the the extent and amount that others voluntarily give them

Until they stop waiting.

Hey, let's play a word association game.

France - 1787
Russia - 1917
Cuba - 1959
Iran - 1979
America - 2016? Maybe. 2020? Without a doubt.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm not jealous at all, and I think you're misunderstanding my point. I was responding to JoeB131 who said that incomes are unfairly distributed. My point is that incomes aren't unfairly distributed. In fact they're not "distributed" in the first place. Income is simply what people voluntarily give you.

If you want people to give you more, you have to do more for them. This means you have to offer them a valuable good or service.

Unlike JoeB131, I contend that incomes are what they are, and if someone wants a higher income, he should spend less time on an internet message board and figure out how to provide value to people so they choose to voluntarily give him their money.

I probably make more than you do, Sluggo.

But you miss my point.

the 1% that controls the 43% of the wealth DID NOT DO 43% of the labor to create said wealth.

Meanwhile, the bottom 40% which only controls 0.6% of the wealth does generate much of the labor to create the wealth.

It isn't a matter of who is making the pie, it's a matter of who is dividing the pie.

 

[JoeB131]

Unless you get inherited wealth or win the lottery you pretty much have to earn it.

Of course you can get welfare just by sitting on your fat ass and smoking pot all day long.

Hell if you are a real greedy asshole you can even get somebody else to pay your health care insurance subsidizes just by voting for Democrats once every few years. Easy money, huh?

You see, here's the problem with that argument. It works on the assumption that wealth or even compensation equates to labor expended.

The thing is, 40% of households on food stamps have at least one person who has a job. the same can be said of those getting ObamaCare subsidies, most of them have jobs, just not with companies that provide decent coverage.

I find it amusing that you think that health care is subsidized when the government pays for it but not an employer who got a huge tax break for providing it.

here's the reality - No matter where your insurance comes from, either someone is paying for your health care or you are paying for someone else's... Fair enough.

The question is, does it work better to have a single payer, like the rest of the civilized world does, or to have numerous middle men with their own agendas involved?

Hint- We spend 17% of GDP on health care while most other civilized countries spend 8-11%. They also live longer, have a lower infant mortality rate, fewer bankrruptcies due to medical crisis, and so on.

 

[Centinel]

I probably make more than you do, Sluggo.

But you miss my point.

the 1% that controls the 43% of the wealth DID NOT DO 43% of the labor to create said wealth.

Meanwhile, the bottom 40% which only controls 0.6% of the wealth does generate much of the labor to create the wealth.

It isn't a matter of who is making the pie, it's a matter of who is dividing the pie.

There is no "pie" and there's no "who" dividing the pie.

There are just millions of people each of which is making an income, an income that other people are providing to him via voluntary contract. Are you saying that each of these people is making an "incorrect" income, that people are paying them the wrong amount? If so, how do you know this to be the case?

 

[JoeB131]

There is no "pie" and there's no "who" dividing the pie.

There are just millions of people each of which is making an income, an income that other people are providing to him via voluntary contract. Are you saying that each of these people is making an "incorrect" income, that people are paying them the wrong amount? If so, how do you know this to be the case?

Are you some kind of retard. Because I keep dumbing this down for you, and you keep not getting it.

 

[Centinel]

Are you some kind of retard. Because I keep dumbing this down for you, and you keep not getting it.

Okay, I will try to dumb it down for you, since you are apparently retarded.

You say there is a pie. There is no pie. You're mental model is wrong.

You say the pie is being divided by someone. There is nobody dividing the non-existent pie and giving out pieces. You're mental model is wrong.

Have I lost you yet? No? Good.

The reality is that each of us receives revenue from our trading partner(s). The amount of revenue each of us receives is determined by the contract between us and our trading partner(s).

If you are saying that someone's revenue is not "correct", then you need to try to make an effort to explain why and how it's wrong.

When you say stupid shit, you need to back it up with an explanation.

Are you able to grasp the words I wrote for you?

 

[francoHFW]

When you take it from the bloated rich and giant corps, 30 years of laughing all the way to the bank, and the middle class and the country is a wreck, you're a brainwashed functional gd idiot. Investing in cheaper loans and college is just smart at this point.

Your sympathy for the bloated rich is touching. lol dupe. It's not your taxes that will go up, fool. To the contrary, for a change.

So you're doubling down on your initial claim that taking someone's money and giving it to someone else is investing.

So the mugger who steals your money and then gives the money to a stripper is "investing"? How idiotic.

The greedy idiot GOP rich have been stealing from the middle class and the country for 30 years, dupe.

 

[Centinel]

The greedy idiot GOP rich have been stealing from the middle class and the country for 30 years, dupe.

An accusation of theft?

Okay, please identify the person(s) who committed the theft, the individual victim(s), the date, time, and location of the theft, and the property that was stolen.

 

[francoHFW]

When you take it from the bloated rich and giant corps, 30 years of laughing all the way to the bank, and the middle class and the country is a wreck, you're a brainwashed functional gd idiot. Investing in cheaper loans and college is just smart at this point.

Your sympathy for the bloated rich is touching. lol dupe. It's not your taxes that will go up, fool. To the contrary, for a change.

So you're doubling down on your initial claim that taking someone's money and giving it to someone else is investing.

So the mugger who steals your money and then gives the money to a stripper is "investing"? How idiotic.

We're talking about investment in infrastructure, education, and cutting taxes on the wrecked middle class, dupe. At the moment we basically have a flat tax and all the new wealth going to a bloated megarich, dupe. Listening to Fox, Rush, Heritage etc etc, and GOP pols makes you a brainwashed functional moron.

 

[JoeB131]

You say there is a pie. There is no pie. You're mental model is wrong.

Yes, there is. The Pie is called GDP. It's the sum total value of all goods and services produced in the United States.

If 1% gets 43% of that pie, then it's not because they've created 43% the pie. They merely divided the pie up to favor themselves.

Can't dumb it down for you any more than that.

 

[bripat9643]

Education is an investment in our own best interests.

But Republicans are against both education and investing in the US.

Nothing government does can properly be called an "investment." To actually be an investment, there has to be at least a potential to get back more than you put in. When have government programs ever made money for the government? When politicians use the word "investment," it's a euphemism for pissing money down the sewer.

 

[francoHFW]

The greedy idiot GOP rich have been stealing from the middle class and the country for 30 years, dupe.

An accusation of theft?

Okay, please identify the person(s) who committed the theft, the individual victim(s), the date, time, and location of the theft, and the property that was stolen.

Reaganists who made and defend to the death what is now a flat tax that sends all new wealth to the richest, dupe. Change the channel.

"The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--March 10, 2016
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

 

[bripat9643]

$80 trillion in debt....
And we don't spend enough....

Unbelievable.

You're pointing fingers at education, science and infrastructure that is at the lowest level in decades for spending. They're not causing this massive debt. Why can't you do some research and see for yourself.

Why must the American people take your insane cuts?

Education is at the lowest level in decades? What planet do you live on?

 

[bripat9643]

That idiot Obama doesn't give a crap that we are over $18 trillion debt and will be close to $20 trillion by the time he leaves office now the sonofabitch wants another entitlement; Two years of college free.

He doesn't have a clue on how to pay for something like this. More of taking money from those that earned it and giving it to those that didn't earn it. Government stealing.

The problem is that with students being able to live off the dole for a couple years smoking pot and passing easy classes soon that two year degree won't be worth the diploma it is written on. It will be like high school is now, a worthless "education".


President Barack Obama announced his proposal Thursday to provide two years of free community college tuition to American students who maintain good grades.

“Put simply, what I’d like to do is to see the first two years of community college free for everyone who’s willing to work for it,” Obama said in a video filmed Wednesday aboard Air Force One and posted to Facebook. He made the announcement as part of his pre-State of the Union tour and will formally lay out the proposal Friday in a speech in Tennessee.

The White House estimated it would save the average community college student $3,800 annually and said it could benefit millions.

Obama President Proposes 2 Free Years of Community College

That's nothing compared to what we give the Military Contractors to build planes that don't work and ships we don't need.

Are you that fucking stupid that you can't do the math?

Piss in the ocean compared to what we spend on "defense" and what we give away to Corps.

Get a clue.

Hardly, asshole. As a percentage of GDP, military spending is the lowest it's been since before WW II. We spend trillions on education. We do need those planes and ships.

 

[bripat9643]

Well, those taxes are used by the government that you hate so much to make those things happen. You see, it takes money to run a first world country.

Hong Kong has a much stronger economy than the US and collects a whole less taxes per capita than our bloated filthy ass government.

It is not how much you spend on government that makes it good. It is how you spend the money and the US government and many state governments are very bad at spending it wisely.

We waste tons of money on everything imaginable and that includes education. Education in the US has turned into welfare for the unions in a lot of places.

The worse thing about our government is that money is taken away from the people that earn it and given away to those that didn't earn it in the form of welfare, subsidies and bailouts.

No. Education is never wasted.

You want to see waste?

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute? You're kidding us, right?

 

[Centinel]

Yes, there is. The Pie is called GDP. It's the sum total value of all goods and services produced in the United States.

If 1% gets 43% of that pie, then it's not because they've created 43% the pie. They merely divided the pie up to favor themselves.

Can't dumb it down for you any more than that.

You seem to have dumbed it down pretty well, because apparently you don't know the difference between a pie and a mathematical sum.

GDP is the sum of everyone's incomes. It's not a pie. There is no pie.

GDP is calculated at by adding up everyone's income. It is a sum. If I make $500,000 per year, and you make $20,000 per year, each of our incomes is an addend in the summation.

If one person "gets" X% of GDP it is precisely because his income comprises X% of GDP. Each addend in a sum is some percentage of the sum. That's how math works.

So if the income of the 1% constitutes 43% of GDP it is because their incomes are 43% of the sum of everyone's income.

So if you disapprove of the income someone is receiving and consider it to be incorrect, then you need to try to use your words and try to explain why people are giving this person more income than they ought to give him.