Ocasio-Cortez: “A System That Allows Billionaires” Is Immoral

[francoHFW]

Letting Sandy Alex Cortez define "socialism" or "communism" ignores the fact Donkey Face Cortez has no fucking idea how to make a drink or taco.

Another terminally confused misinformed GOP dunce. Communism is a dictatorship, socialism is a democracy. Everywhere but in your ridiculous GOP dupe world.

 

[boedicca]

A system in which people gain power by promoting the concept of taking from one person to give to another is what's actually immoral.

 

[Asclepias]

A system in which people gain power by promoting the concept of taking from one person to give to another is what's actually immoral.

If you dont want to pay taxes then move to another country where that doesnt happen.

 

[boedicca]

A system in which people gain power by promoting the concept of taking from one person to give to another is what's actually immoral.

If you dont want to pay taxes then move to another country where that doesnt happen.

Translation: If you don't like being mugged/raped/robbed, then move.

What a sad worldview to hold.

 

[Asclepias]

A system in which people gain power by promoting the concept of taking from one person to give to another is what's actually immoral.

If you dont want to pay taxes then move to another country where that doesnt happen.

Translation: If you don't like being mugged/raped/robbed, then move.

What a sad worldview to hold.

You dont get to be part of a society unless you adhere to that societys rules. Stop translating and stop whining.

 

[Yarddog]

Because socialist governments keeping people from becoming wealthy is moral!

View attachment 241705

Ocasio-Cortez: ‘A System That Allows Billionaires’ is Immoral

I'm beginning to agree. A billionaire is basically a king that just kicks back and siphons off the top. We dont need or want that, regardless of any fail argument from the right about jealousy, theft, w/e. We should stop feeding their money supply with so much of our economic output. Our dependence on them will only get worse, never better, while we continue with brain dead trickle down policy that subsidizes them.

I'm 100% correct when I say this, continued economic favor of billionaires is awful tragic stupid policy for our country. No conservative bullshit line can prove otherwise, and I've heard them all.

OK, so then the tax becomes purely a punitive measure. And who gets to decide who is too rich or not rich enough?
It's easy to pick on Billionaires because most of us arn't. But that appeals to a base instinct that because one person has so much, others don't. That's not even true. Its just n excuse to tax where there is money.
WHo's to say a Billionaire didnt make his money Internationally? How did that take away money from someone driving a bus for a living? It didnt but to a lot of people and like Ms Cortez it feels immoral. Once the government is allowed to say there is a limit on what is moral for a citizen to earn, we will eventually get used to that because most of us dont make over 10 mil a year.
Then one day down the road after more bloated spending like you see in the education system, it will be determined perhaps that the limit really should be 5 million a year and so on and so on. Thats called being a frog in a pan of soon to be boiling water and thats pretty much what progressive socialists bring you with a happy face and a sweet smile. Who can really say no?

First of all, we are not as concerned with their wealth. they will have some of it invested here generating more wealth but this is the true area where theft needs to be avoided. If they've already earned it fair and square, we shouldnt take just take it.

New income is an area to look at and raising a rate on just the highest .01% of earners is reasonable. 70% seems much. This isnt theft. It can be justified in one way by considering all economic output as a derived and composite consumption. In a snapshot, only so much to go around, so those grabbing 10-20% of it need to pay accordingly for costs that facilitated that pie slice. Idk what that would be, but my hunch is that it's more than the capital gains or income tax the higher it goes. Negative externalities of business need to be paid for by those winning the windfall, rather than becoming distributed cost elsewhere shouldered by others.

If you think about it, there shouldn't be windfall profits except for in high high stakes risk taking. It's a sign that something is broken or someone is cheating. So, Laws should be enforced. Tax dodgers should be pursued. Competition and other free market concepts need to be emphasized. Anti trust, particularly for these mega tech giants needs to be enforced. Competition should be tight enough that profits are in check for the less risky endeavors.



This is all I have right now. going to bed.

Taxes are not meant to be a punishment, but when you look at the rhetoric from people like Cortez whos only experience in the real working world has been a waitress, it's not hard to understand why they would have such a simplistic view.

She claims to not be a Communist, not a Socialist but a Democratic socialist. She makes it clear she is all for the little guy and that the rich are getting more than their fair share. Her solution? take 70 % of the wealth government determines to be excess .... and give it back to the government to redistribute to someone else.
Her sentiments towards the rich are coming from a place where she looks at them as being immoral...They had that same type of thinking in Cambodia. It was all about right and wrong, the haves vs the halve nots and immorality of the rich.... we can all see now that was bullshit, right? because the solution of the righteous- 'for the people' crowd in Cambodia morphed itself into something else more hideous.

Obviously you cant compare the Democrats to the fascists who killed millions in Cambodia. But they seem to have the same mental disorder when it comes to where it all starts.
Again, taxes IMHO are not meant to be a punishment, but in a Communist or socialist system, or when you just let your government tell you how much you are allowed to make before you become immoral, thats what it becomes.

Do you think Cortez is factoring in charitable acts by these billionaires she sees as immoral? You know that much of that would all end if she had her way. Figure this. When the government goes to do something "charitable" It happens extremely ineficiently...and the money has to pass through different hands and most of the time only a small portion goes where it was intended because with them so many criteria have to be met.

Look at the richest 400 billionaires in the US and you can see they have donated tens, and hundreds of million and even donated billions of dollars towards charity.
Not to mention, wealthy people like this buy houses, cars, boats , planes,... they hire people to maintain their residences, and vehicles., their money gets spread right back into the economy supporting secondary industries... they in reality are a healthy thing for the economy.

Now you take someone from Washington who doesn't live in the real world, or someone like Cortez straight out of college and what do you think they see? all they can see is Billionaires make all this money that they wish they had their hands on. Because in their minds they THINK they know what can be better done with it.
Well how did that all work out with the billions sent to Haiti that just up and disappeared?
The problem with government people is they don't really need to be accountable for all that money because they didn't earn it

 

[francoHFW]

A system in which people gain power by promoting the concept of taking from one person to give to another is what's actually immoral.

If you dont want to pay taxes then move to another country where that doesnt happen.

Translation: If you don't like being mugged/raped/robbed, then move.

What a sad worldview to hold.

Turn around is fair play, back to nature GOP chump. That's what you idiots tell Democrats anytime We complain about your garbage giveaway to the rich screw the rest policies. What you don't even know about, Dupe.

 

[francoHFW]

Because socialist governments keeping people from becoming wealthy is moral!

View attachment 241705

Ocasio-Cortez: ‘A System That Allows Billionaires’ is Immoral

I'm beginning to agree. A billionaire is basically a king that just kicks back and siphons off the top. We dont need or want that, regardless of any fail argument from the right about jealousy, theft, w/e. We should stop feeding their money supply with so much of our economic output. Our dependence on them will only get worse, never better, while we continue with brain dead trickle down policy that subsidizes them.

I'm 100% correct when I say this, continued economic favor of billionaires is awful tragic stupid policy for our country. No conservative bullshit line can prove otherwise, and I've heard them all.

OK, so then the tax becomes purely a punitive measure. And who gets to decide who is too rich or not rich enough?
It's easy to pick on Billionaires because most of us arn't. But that appeals to a base instinct that because one person has so much, others don't. That's not even true. Its just n excuse to tax where there is money.
WHo's to say a Billionaire didnt make his money Internationally? How did that take away money from someone driving a bus for a living? It didnt but to a lot of people and like Ms Cortez it feels immoral. Once the government is allowed to say there is a limit on what is moral for a citizen to earn, we will eventually get used to that because most of us dont make over 10 mil a year.
Then one day down the road after more bloated spending like you see in the education system, it will be determined perhaps that the limit really should be 5 million a year and so on and so on. Thats called being a frog in a pan of soon to be boiling water and thats pretty much what progressive socialists bring you with a happy face and a sweet smile. Who can really say no?

First of all, we are not as concerned with their wealth. they will have some of it invested here generating more wealth but this is the true area where theft needs to be avoided. If they've already earned it fair and square, we shouldnt take just take it.

New income is an area to look at and raising a rate on just the highest .01% of earners is reasonable. 70% seems much. This isnt theft. It can be justified in one way by considering all economic output as a derived and composite consumption. In a snapshot, only so much to go around, so those grabbing 10-20% of it need to pay accordingly for costs that facilitated that pie slice. Idk what that would be, but my hunch is that it's more than the capital gains or income tax the higher it goes. Negative externalities of business need to be paid for by those winning the windfall, rather than becoming distributed cost elsewhere shouldered by others.

If you think about it, there shouldn't be windfall profits except for in high high stakes risk taking. It's a sign that something is broken or someone is cheating. So, Laws should be enforced. Tax dodgers should be pursued. Competition and other free market concepts need to be emphasized. Anti trust, particularly for these mega tech giants needs to be enforced. Competition should be tight enough that profits are in check for the less risky endeavors.



This is all I have right now. going to bed.

Taxes are not meant to be a punishment, but when you look at the rhetoric from people like Cortez whos only experience in the real working world has been a waitress, it's not hard to understand why they would have such a simplistic view.

She claims to not be a Communist, not a Socialist but a Democratic socialist. She makes it clear she is all for the little guy and that the rich are getting more than their fair share. Her solution? take 70 % of the wealth government determines to be excess .... and give it back to the government to redistribute to someone else.
Her sentiments towards the rich are coming from a place where she looks at them as being immoral...They had that same type of thinking in Cambodia. It was all about right and wrong, the haves vs the halve nots and immorality of the rich.... we can all see now that was bullshit, right? because the solution of the righteous- 'for the people' crowd in Cambodia morphed itself into something else more hideous.

Obviously you cant compare the Democrats to the fascists who killed millions in Cambodia. But they seem to have the same mental disorder when it comes to where it all starts.
Again, taxes IMHO are not meant to be a punishment, but in a Communist or socialist system, or when you just let your government tell you how much you are allowed to make before you become immoral, thats what it becomes.

Do you think Cortez is factoring in charitable acts by these billionaires she sees as immoral? You know that much of that would all end if she had her way. Figure this. When the government goes to do something "charitable" It happens extremely ineficiently...and the money has to pass through different hands and most of the time only a small portion goes where it was intended because with them so many criteria have to be met.

Look at the richest 400 billionaires in the US and you can see they have donated tens, and hundreds of million and even donated billions of dollars towards charity.
Not to mention, wealthy people like this buy houses, cars, boats , planes,... they hire people to maintain their residences, and vehicles., their money gets spread right back into the economy supporting secondary industries... they in reality are a healthy thing for the economy.

Now you take someone from Washington who doesn't live in the real world, or someone like Cortez straight out of college and what do you think they see? all they can see is Billionaires make all this money that they wish they had their hands on. Because in their minds they THINK they know what can be better done with it.
Well how did that all work out with the billions sent to Haiti that just up and disappeared?
The problem with government people is they don't really need to be accountable for all that money because they didn't earn it

After 35 years of GOP giveaway to the rich tax rates, we have the worst inequality and upward Mobility ever and anywhere. You are a brainwashed functional moron who knows nothing factual.

 

[Yarddog]

Because socialist governments keeping people from becoming wealthy is moral!

View attachment 241705

Ocasio-Cortez: ‘A System That Allows Billionaires’ is Immoral

I'm beginning to agree. A billionaire is basically a king that just kicks back and siphons off the top. We dont need or want that, regardless of any fail argument from the right about jealousy, theft, w/e. We should stop feeding their money supply with so much of our economic output. Our dependence on them will only get worse, never better, while we continue with brain dead trickle down policy that subsidizes them.

I'm 100% correct when I say this, continued economic favor of billionaires is awful tragic stupid policy for our country. No conservative bullshit line can prove otherwise, and I've heard them all.

OK, so then the tax becomes purely a punitive measure. And who gets to decide who is too rich or not rich enough?
It's easy to pick on Billionaires because most of us arn't. But that appeals to a base instinct that because one person has so much, others don't. That's not even true. Its just n excuse to tax where there is money.
WHo's to say a Billionaire didnt make his money Internationally? How did that take away money from someone driving a bus for a living? It didnt but to a lot of people and like Ms Cortez it feels immoral. Once the government is allowed to say there is a limit on what is moral for a citizen to earn, we will eventually get used to that because most of us dont make over 10 mil a year.
Then one day down the road after more bloated spending like you see in the education system, it will be determined perhaps that the limit really should be 5 million a year and so on and so on. Thats called being a frog in a pan of soon to be boiling water and thats pretty much what progressive socialists bring you with a happy face and a sweet smile. Who can really say no?

First of all, we are not as concerned with their wealth. they will have some of it invested here generating more wealth but this is the true area where theft needs to be avoided. If they've already earned it fair and square, we shouldnt take just take it.

New income is an area to look at and raising a rate on just the highest .01% of earners is reasonable. 70% seems much. This isnt theft. It can be justified in one way by considering all economic output as a derived and composite consumption. In a snapshot, only so much to go around, so those grabbing 10-20% of it need to pay accordingly for costs that facilitated that pie slice. Idk what that would be, but my hunch is that it's more than the capital gains or income tax the higher it goes. Negative externalities of business need to be paid for by those winning the windfall, rather than becoming distributed cost elsewhere shouldered by others.

If you think about it, there shouldn't be windfall profits except for in high high stakes risk taking. It's a sign that something is broken or someone is cheating. So, Laws should be enforced. Tax dodgers should be pursued. Competition and other free market concepts need to be emphasized. Anti trust, particularly for these mega tech giants needs to be enforced. Competition should be tight enough that profits are in check for the less risky endeavors.



This is all I have right now. going to bed.

Taxes are not meant to be a punishment, but when you look at the rhetoric from people like Cortez whos only experience in the real working world has been a waitress, it's not hard to understand why they would have such a simplistic view.

She claims to not be a Communist, not a Socialist but a Democratic socialist. She makes it clear she is all for the little guy and that the rich are getting more than their fair share. Her solution? take 70 % of the wealth government determines to be excess .... and give it back to the government to redistribute to someone else.
Her sentiments towards the rich are coming from a place where she looks at them as being immoral...They had that same type of thinking in Cambodia. It was all about right and wrong, the haves vs the halve nots and immorality of the rich.... we can all see now that was bullshit, right? because the solution of the righteous- 'for the people' crowd in Cambodia morphed itself into something else more hideous.

Obviously you cant compare the Democrats to the fascists who killed millions in Cambodia. But they seem to have the same mental disorder when it comes to where it all starts.
Again, taxes IMHO are not meant to be a punishment, but in a Communist or socialist system, or when you just let your government tell you how much you are allowed to make before you become immoral, thats what it becomes.

Do you think Cortez is factoring in charitable acts by these billionaires she sees as immoral? You know that much of that would all end if she had her way. Figure this. When the government goes to do something "charitable" It happens extremely ineficiently...and the money has to pass through different hands and most of the time only a small portion goes where it was intended because with them so many criteria have to be met.

Look at the richest 400 billionaires in the US and you can see they have donated tens, and hundreds of million and even donated billions of dollars towards charity.
Not to mention, wealthy people like this buy houses, cars, boats , planes,... they hire people to maintain their residences, and vehicles., their money gets spread right back into the economy supporting secondary industries... they in reality are a healthy thing for the economy.

Now you take someone from Washington who doesn't live in the real world, or someone like Cortez straight out of college and what do you think they see? all they can see is Billionaires make all this money that they wish they had their hands on. Because in their minds they THINK they know what can be better done with it.
Well how did that all work out with the billions sent to Haiti that just up and disappeared?
The problem with government people is they don't really need to be accountable for all that money because they didn't earn it

After 35 years of GOP giveaway to the rich tax rates, we have the worst inequality and upward Mobility ever and anywhere. You are a brainwashed functional moron who knows nothing factual.

Yet 35 of the Americas richest 400 have given away (besides taxes at least 1 billion or more) yet you would say they are immoral because they might own a helicopter pad. Sounds to me your the functional moron.
the next 50 down have given away between 300 million and a billion (besides taxes)
Only a deranged liberal would have a problem with that and thinks they need to tax someone 70%. If people want to give away their money willingly than just let them.
Why do you desire centralized government power so much? Your putting money into the hands of the most inefficient people on planet earth.

 

[danielpalos]

A system in which people gain power by promoting the concept of taking from one person to give to another is what's actually immoral.

Providing for the general malfare is immoral with a general welfare clause.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Translation: If you don't like being mugged/raped/robbed, then move.

What an absurd thing to say. Taxes are none of those things.

 

[francoHFW]

I'm beginning to agree. A billionaire is basically a king that just kicks back and siphons off the top. We dont need or want that, regardless of any fail argument from the right about jealousy, theft, w/e. We should stop feeding their money supply with so much of our economic output. Our dependence on them will only get worse, never better, while we continue with brain dead trickle down policy that subsidizes them.

I'm 100% correct when I say this, continued economic favor of billionaires is awful tragic stupid policy for our country. No conservative bullshit line can prove otherwise, and I've heard them all.

OK, so then the tax becomes purely a punitive measure. And who gets to decide who is too rich or not rich enough?
It's easy to pick on Billionaires because most of us arn't. But that appeals to a base instinct that because one person has so much, others don't. That's not even true. Its just n excuse to tax where there is money.
WHo's to say a Billionaire didnt make his money Internationally? How did that take away money from someone driving a bus for a living? It didnt but to a lot of people and like Ms Cortez it feels immoral. Once the government is allowed to say there is a limit on what is moral for a citizen to earn, we will eventually get used to that because most of us dont make over 10 mil a year.
Then one day down the road after more bloated spending like you see in the education system, it will be determined perhaps that the limit really should be 5 million a year and so on and so on. Thats called being a frog in a pan of soon to be boiling water and thats pretty much what progressive socialists bring you with a happy face and a sweet smile. Who can really say no?

First of all, we are not as concerned with their wealth. they will have some of it invested here generating more wealth but this is the true area where theft needs to be avoided. If they've already earned it fair and square, we shouldnt take just take it.

New income is an area to look at and raising a rate on just the highest .01% of earners is reasonable. 70% seems much. This isnt theft. It can be justified in one way by considering all economic output as a derived and composite consumption. In a snapshot, only so much to go around, so those grabbing 10-20% of it need to pay accordingly for costs that facilitated that pie slice. Idk what that would be, but my hunch is that it's more than the capital gains or income tax the higher it goes. Negative externalities of business need to be paid for by those winning the windfall, rather than becoming distributed cost elsewhere shouldered by others.

If you think about it, there shouldn't be windfall profits except for in high high stakes risk taking. It's a sign that something is broken or someone is cheating. So, Laws should be enforced. Tax dodgers should be pursued. Competition and other free market concepts need to be emphasized. Anti trust, particularly for these mega tech giants needs to be enforced. Competition should be tight enough that profits are in check for the less risky endeavors.



This is all I have right now. going to bed.

Taxes are not meant to be a punishment, but when you look at the rhetoric from people like Cortez whos only experience in the real working world has been a waitress, it's not hard to understand why they would have such a simplistic view.

She claims to not be a Communist, not a Socialist but a Democratic socialist. She makes it clear she is all for the little guy and that the rich are getting more than their fair share. Her solution? take 70 % of the wealth government determines to be excess .... and give it back to the government to redistribute to someone else.
Her sentiments towards the rich are coming from a place where she looks at them as being immoral...They had that same type of thinking in Cambodia. It was all about right and wrong, the haves vs the halve nots and immorality of the rich.... we can all see now that was bullshit, right? because the solution of the righteous- 'for the people' crowd in Cambodia morphed itself into something else more hideous.

Obviously you cant compare the Democrats to the fascists who killed millions in Cambodia. But they seem to have the same mental disorder when it comes to where it all starts.
Again, taxes IMHO are not meant to be a punishment, but in a Communist or socialist system, or when you just let your government tell you how much you are allowed to make before you become immoral, thats what it becomes.

Do you think Cortez is factoring in charitable acts by these billionaires she sees as immoral? You know that much of that would all end if she had her way. Figure this. When the government goes to do something "charitable" It happens extremely ineficiently...and the money has to pass through different hands and most of the time only a small portion goes where it was intended because with them so many criteria have to be met.

Look at the richest 400 billionaires in the US and you can see they have donated tens, and hundreds of million and even donated billions of dollars towards charity.
Not to mention, wealthy people like this buy houses, cars, boats , planes,... they hire people to maintain their residences, and vehicles., their money gets spread right back into the economy supporting secondary industries... they in reality are a healthy thing for the economy.

Now you take someone from Washington who doesn't live in the real world, or someone like Cortez straight out of college and what do you think they see? all they can see is Billionaires make all this money that they wish they had their hands on. Because in their minds they THINK they know what can be better done with it.
Well how did that all work out with the billions sent to Haiti that just up and disappeared?
The problem with government people is they don't really need to be accountable for all that money because they didn't earn it

After 35 years of GOP giveaway to the rich tax rates, we have the worst inequality and upward Mobility ever and anywhere. You are a brainwashed functional moron who knows nothing factual.

Yet 35 of the Americas richest 400 have given away (besides taxes at least 1 billion or more) yet you would say they are immoral because they might own a helicopter pad. Sounds to me your the functional moron.
the next 50 down have given away between 300 million and a billion (besides taxes)
Only a deranged liberal would have a problem with that and thinks they need to tax someone 70%. If people want to give away their money willingly than just let them.
Why do you desire centralized government power so much? Your putting money into the hands of the most inefficient people on planet earth.

70% was good enough for JFK, and the middle class and the country have only gone to hell under Reagan's tax rates. The greedy idiot rich and silly dupes like you are fine with it...

 

[Yarddog]

OK, so then the tax becomes purely a punitive measure. And who gets to decide who is too rich or not rich enough?
It's easy to pick on Billionaires because most of us arn't. But that appeals to a base instinct that because one person has so much, others don't. That's not even true. Its just n excuse to tax where there is money.
WHo's to say a Billionaire didnt make his money Internationally? How did that take away money from someone driving a bus for a living? It didnt but to a lot of people and like Ms Cortez it feels immoral. Once the government is allowed to say there is a limit on what is moral for a citizen to earn, we will eventually get used to that because most of us dont make over 10 mil a year.
Then one day down the road after more bloated spending like you see in the education system, it will be determined perhaps that the limit really should be 5 million a year and so on and so on. Thats called being a frog in a pan of soon to be boiling water and thats pretty much what progressive socialists bring you with a happy face and a sweet smile. Who can really say no?

First of all, we are not as concerned with their wealth. they will have some of it invested here generating more wealth but this is the true area where theft needs to be avoided. If they've already earned it fair and square, we shouldnt take just take it.

New income is an area to look at and raising a rate on just the highest .01% of earners is reasonable. 70% seems much. This isnt theft. It can be justified in one way by considering all economic output as a derived and composite consumption. In a snapshot, only so much to go around, so those grabbing 10-20% of it need to pay accordingly for costs that facilitated that pie slice. Idk what that would be, but my hunch is that it's more than the capital gains or income tax the higher it goes. Negative externalities of business need to be paid for by those winning the windfall, rather than becoming distributed cost elsewhere shouldered by others.

If you think about it, there shouldn't be windfall profits except for in high high stakes risk taking. It's a sign that something is broken or someone is cheating. So, Laws should be enforced. Tax dodgers should be pursued. Competition and other free market concepts need to be emphasized. Anti trust, particularly for these mega tech giants needs to be enforced. Competition should be tight enough that profits are in check for the less risky endeavors.



This is all I have right now. going to bed.

Taxes are not meant to be a punishment, but when you look at the rhetoric from people like Cortez whos only experience in the real working world has been a waitress, it's not hard to understand why they would have such a simplistic view.

She claims to not be a Communist, not a Socialist but a Democratic socialist. She makes it clear she is all for the little guy and that the rich are getting more than their fair share. Her solution? take 70 % of the wealth government determines to be excess .... and give it back to the government to redistribute to someone else.
Her sentiments towards the rich are coming from a place where she looks at them as being immoral...They had that same type of thinking in Cambodia. It was all about right and wrong, the haves vs the halve nots and immorality of the rich.... we can all see now that was bullshit, right? because the solution of the righteous- 'for the people' crowd in Cambodia morphed itself into something else more hideous.

Obviously you cant compare the Democrats to the fascists who killed millions in Cambodia. But they seem to have the same mental disorder when it comes to where it all starts.
Again, taxes IMHO are not meant to be a punishment, but in a Communist or socialist system, or when you just let your government tell you how much you are allowed to make before you become immoral, thats what it becomes.

Do you think Cortez is factoring in charitable acts by these billionaires she sees as immoral? You know that much of that would all end if she had her way. Figure this. When the government goes to do something "charitable" It happens extremely ineficiently...and the money has to pass through different hands and most of the time only a small portion goes where it was intended because with them so many criteria have to be met.

Look at the richest 400 billionaires in the US and you can see they have donated tens, and hundreds of million and even donated billions of dollars towards charity.
Not to mention, wealthy people like this buy houses, cars, boats , planes,... they hire people to maintain their residences, and vehicles., their money gets spread right back into the economy supporting secondary industries... they in reality are a healthy thing for the economy.

Now you take someone from Washington who doesn't live in the real world, or someone like Cortez straight out of college and what do you think they see? all they can see is Billionaires make all this money that they wish they had their hands on. Because in their minds they THINK they know what can be better done with it.
Well how did that all work out with the billions sent to Haiti that just up and disappeared?
The problem with government people is they don't really need to be accountable for all that money because they didn't earn it

After 35 years of GOP giveaway to the rich tax rates, we have the worst inequality and upward Mobility ever and anywhere. You are a brainwashed functional moron who knows nothing factual.

Yet 35 of the Americas richest 400 have given away (besides taxes at least 1 billion or more) yet you would say they are immoral because they might own a helicopter pad. Sounds to me your the functional moron.
the next 50 down have given away between 300 million and a billion (besides taxes)
Only a deranged liberal would have a problem with that and thinks they need to tax someone 70%. If people want to give away their money willingly than just let them.
Why do you desire centralized government power so much? Your putting money into the hands of the most inefficient people on planet earth.

70% was good enough for JFK, and the middle class and the country have only gone to hell under Reagan's tax rates. The greedy idiot rich and silly dupes like you are fine with it...

The problem isn't with the amount of taxes the government has received. The problem is with their cost of doing business.

 

[Ambivalent1]

Because socialist governments keeping people from becoming wealthy is moral!

View attachment 241705

Ocasio-Cortez: ‘A System That Allows Billionaires’ is Immoral

You are really retarded. I was wondering why you didnt print the entire quote.

You are as retarded as she is.

 

[francoHFW]

Yes it is,

First of all, we are not as concerned with their wealth. they will have some of it invested here generating more wealth but this is the true area where theft needs to be avoided. If they've already earned it fair and square, we shouldnt take just take it.

New income is an area to look at and raising a rate on just the highest .01% of earners is reasonable. 70% seems much. This isnt theft. It can be justified in one way by considering all economic output as a derived and composite consumption. In a snapshot, only so much to go around, so those grabbing 10-20% of it need to pay accordingly for costs that facilitated that pie slice. Idk what that would be, but my hunch is that it's more than the capital gains or income tax the higher it goes. Negative externalities of business need to be paid for by those winning the windfall, rather than becoming distributed cost elsewhere shouldered by others.

If you think about it, there shouldn't be windfall profits except for in high high stakes risk taking. It's a sign that something is broken or someone is cheating. So, Laws should be enforced. Tax dodgers should be pursued. Competition and other free market concepts need to be emphasized. Anti trust, particularly for these mega tech giants needs to be enforced. Competition should be tight enough that profits are in check for the less risky endeavors.



This is all I have right now. going to bed.

Taxes are not meant to be a punishment, but when you look at the rhetoric from people like Cortez whos only experience in the real working world has been a waitress, it's not hard to understand why they would have such a simplistic view.

She claims to not be a Communist, not a Socialist but a Democratic socialist. She makes it clear she is all for the little guy and that the rich are getting more than their fair share. Her solution? take 70 % of the wealth government determines to be excess .... and give it back to the government to redistribute to someone else.
Her sentiments towards the rich are coming from a place where she looks at them as being immoral...They had that same type of thinking in Cambodia. It was all about right and wrong, the haves vs the halve nots and immorality of the rich.... we can all see now that was bullshit, right? because the solution of the righteous- 'for the people' crowd in Cambodia morphed itself into something else more hideous.

Obviously you cant compare the Democrats to the fascists who killed millions in Cambodia. But they seem to have the same mental disorder when it comes to where it all starts.
Again, taxes IMHO are not meant to be a punishment, but in a Communist or socialist system, or when you just let your government tell you how much you are allowed to make before you become immoral, thats what it becomes.

Do you think Cortez is factoring in charitable acts by these billionaires she sees as immoral? You know that much of that would all end if she had her way. Figure this. When the government goes to do something "charitable" It happens extremely ineficiently...and the money has to pass through different hands and most of the time only a small portion goes where it was intended because with them so many criteria have to be met.

Look at the richest 400 billionaires in the US and you can see they have donated tens, and hundreds of million and even donated billions of dollars towards charity.
Not to mention, wealthy people like this buy houses, cars, boats , planes,... they hire people to maintain their residences, and vehicles., their money gets spread right back into the economy supporting secondary industries... they in reality are a healthy thing for the economy.

Now you take someone from Washington who doesn't live in the real world, or someone like Cortez straight out of college and what do you think they see? all they can see is Billionaires make all this money that they wish they had their hands on. Because in their minds they THINK they know what can be better done with it.
Well how did that all work out with the billions sent to Haiti that just up and disappeared?
The problem with government people is they don't really need to be accountable for all that money because they didn't earn it

After 35 years of GOP giveaway to the rich tax rates, we have the worst inequality and upward Mobility ever and anywhere. You are a brainwashed functional moron who knows nothing factual.

Yet 35 of the Americas richest 400 have given away (besides taxes at least 1 billion or more) yet you would say they are immoral because they might own a helicopter pad. Sounds to me your the functional moron.
the next 50 down have given away between 300 million and a billion (besides taxes)
Only a deranged liberal would have a problem with that and thinks they need to tax someone 70%. If people want to give away their money willingly than just let them.
Why do you desire centralized government power so much? Your putting money into the hands of the most inefficient people on planet earth.

70% was good enough for JFK, and the middle class and the country have only gone to hell under Reagan's tax rates. The greedy idiot rich and silly dupes like you are fine with it...

The problem isn't with the amount of taxes the government has received. The problem is with their cost of doing business.

Of course it is, we don't have enough money to invest in America and Americans when the rich pay the same percentage as the rest, the only country that they ever tried this. So now we have the worst inequality and upward Mobility anywhere and ever. Great job scumbag GOP and silly dukes like you. Read something instead of being acoustically brainwashed.... Growing wages are only an average and the rich are getting it all...

 

[Weatherman2020]

OK, so then the tax becomes purely a punitive measure. And who gets to decide who is too rich or not rich enough?
It's easy to pick on Billionaires because most of us arn't. But that appeals to a base instinct that because one person has so much, others don't. That's not even true. Its just n excuse to tax where there is money.
WHo's to say a Billionaire didnt make his money Internationally? How did that take away money from someone driving a bus for a living? It didnt but to a lot of people and like Ms Cortez it feels immoral. Once the government is allowed to say there is a limit on what is moral for a citizen to earn, we will eventually get used to that because most of us dont make over 10 mil a year.
Then one day down the road after more bloated spending like you see in the education system, it will be determined perhaps that the limit really should be 5 million a year and so on and so on. Thats called being a frog in a pan of soon to be boiling water and thats pretty much what progressive socialists bring you with a happy face and a sweet smile. Who can really say no?

First of all, we are not as concerned with their wealth. they will have some of it invested here generating more wealth but this is the true area where theft needs to be avoided. If they've already earned it fair and square, we shouldnt take just take it.

New income is an area to look at and raising a rate on just the highest .01% of earners is reasonable. 70% seems much. This isnt theft. It can be justified in one way by considering all economic output as a derived and composite consumption. In a snapshot, only so much to go around, so those grabbing 10-20% of it need to pay accordingly for costs that facilitated that pie slice. Idk what that would be, but my hunch is that it's more than the capital gains or income tax the higher it goes. Negative externalities of business need to be paid for by those winning the windfall, rather than becoming distributed cost elsewhere shouldered by others.

If you think about it, there shouldn't be windfall profits except for in high high stakes risk taking. It's a sign that something is broken or someone is cheating. So, Laws should be enforced. Tax dodgers should be pursued. Competition and other free market concepts need to be emphasized. Anti trust, particularly for these mega tech giants needs to be enforced. Competition should be tight enough that profits are in check for the less risky endeavors.



This is all I have right now. going to bed.

Taxes are not meant to be a punishment, but when you look at the rhetoric from people like Cortez whos only experience in the real working world has been a waitress, it's not hard to understand why they would have such a simplistic view.

She claims to not be a Communist, not a Socialist but a Democratic socialist. She makes it clear she is all for the little guy and that the rich are getting more than their fair share. Her solution? take 70 % of the wealth government determines to be excess .... and give it back to the government to redistribute to someone else.
Her sentiments towards the rich are coming from a place where she looks at them as being immoral...They had that same type of thinking in Cambodia. It was all about right and wrong, the haves vs the halve nots and immorality of the rich.... we can all see now that was bullshit, right? because the solution of the righteous- 'for the people' crowd in Cambodia morphed itself into something else more hideous.

Obviously you cant compare the Democrats to the fascists who killed millions in Cambodia. But they seem to have the same mental disorder when it comes to where it all starts.
Again, taxes IMHO are not meant to be a punishment, but in a Communist or socialist system, or when you just let your government tell you how much you are allowed to make before you become immoral, thats what it becomes.

Do you think Cortez is factoring in charitable acts by these billionaires she sees as immoral? You know that much of that would all end if she had her way. Figure this. When the government goes to do something "charitable" It happens extremely ineficiently...and the money has to pass through different hands and most of the time only a small portion goes where it was intended because with them so many criteria have to be met.

Look at the richest 400 billionaires in the US and you can see they have donated tens, and hundreds of million and even donated billions of dollars towards charity.
Not to mention, wealthy people like this buy houses, cars, boats , planes,... they hire people to maintain their residences, and vehicles., their money gets spread right back into the economy supporting secondary industries... they in reality are a healthy thing for the economy.

Now you take someone from Washington who doesn't live in the real world, or someone like Cortez straight out of college and what do you think they see? all they can see is Billionaires make all this money that they wish they had their hands on. Because in their minds they THINK they know what can be better done with it.
Well how did that all work out with the billions sent to Haiti that just up and disappeared?
The problem with government people is they don't really need to be accountable for all that money because they didn't earn it

After 35 years of GOP giveaway to the rich tax rates, we have the worst inequality and upward Mobility ever and anywhere. You are a brainwashed functional moron who knows nothing factual.

Yet 35 of the Americas richest 400 have given away (besides taxes at least 1 billion or more) yet you would say they are immoral because they might own a helicopter pad. Sounds to me your the functional moron.
the next 50 down have given away between 300 million and a billion (besides taxes)
Only a deranged liberal would have a problem with that and thinks they need to tax someone 70%. If people want to give away their money willingly than just let them.
Why do you desire centralized government power so much? Your putting money into the hands of the most inefficient people on planet earth.

70% was good enough for JFK, and the middle class and the country have only gone to hell under Reagan's tax rates. The greedy idiot rich and silly dupes like you are fine with it...

Shitforbrains thinks the rich paid 70% in taxes during the 60’s.

Lucky if they paid anything.

 

[boedicca]

A system in which people gain power by promoting the concept of taking from one person to give to another is what's actually immoral.

If you dont want to pay taxes then move to another country where that doesnt happen.

Translation: If you don't like being mugged/raped/robbed, then move.

What a sad worldview to hold.

Turn around is fair play, back to nature GOP chump. That's what you idiots tell Democrats anytime We complain about your garbage giveaway to the rich screw the rest policies. What you don't even know about, Dupe.

You can spin in in whatever way gives you comfort.

What you are supporting is legalized theft...but it's still theft.

 

[francoHFW]

Hey are called taxes and civilized countries need them,

A system in which people gain power by promoting the concept of taking from one person to give to another is what's actually immoral.

If you dont want to pay taxes then move to another country where that doesnt happen.

Translation: If you don't like being mugged/raped/robbed, then move.

What a sad worldview to hold.

Turn around is fair play, back to nature GOP chump. That's what you idiots tell Democrats anytime We complain about your garbage giveaway to the rich screw the rest policies. What you don't even know about, Dupe.

You can spin in in whatever way gives you comfort.

What you are supporting is legalized theft...but it's still theft.

They are called taxes and civilized countries need them, and more than we get under GOP giveaway to the rich tax rates. Without propaganda no one would vote for them....

 

[francoHFW]

They wouldn't pay 70% now either, but more than they do now, dumbass.

 

[francoHFW]

A system in which people gain power by promoting the concept of taking from one person to give to another is what's actually immoral.

If you dont want to pay taxes then move to another country where that doesnt happen.

Translation: If you don't like being mugged/raped/robbed, then move.

What a sad worldview to hold.

Turn around is fair play, back to nature GOP chump. That's what you idiots tell Democrats anytime We complain about your garbage giveaway to the rich screw the rest policies. What you don't even know about, Dupe.

You can spin in in whatever way gives you comfort.

What you are supporting is legalized theft...but it's still theft.

The hell it is don't be ridiculous. You get what you pay for.