Please explain why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

Please explain Americans why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

I could never understand why the misguided mouthpieces in the Republican Party continue to make excuses for the top 1% wealthiest while dissing their own in the middle class. Cowards and Traitors, the bunch of ya. While the middle class is trying to unite against the wealthiest, some in the middle class are playing the Benedict Arnold role - all in the name of the Grand Ol' Party. :dunno:

Shameless Cowards - the lot of you:eusa_naughty:

-----

I have news for you -insisting fellow Americans are the "enemy" because they are rich, they work harder than you, they are more successful than you -THAT is being a fucking coward buddy. Sticking up for the rights of others, especially those viewed as easy targets -takes REAL courage. You aren't sticking up for the middle class, what you are doing isn't doing anything FOR the middle class -and if you think you are, you are either deluded or a liar. Your choice but I know which way I'm leaning on that. Seriously, how is it HELPING the middle class by once again targeting a fellow group of Americans and declaring them the enemy? You LIE if you pretend that in ANY way is "sticking up" for the middle class! You can't defend some citizens by declaring other ones are the enemy -you DIVIDE the nation and thereby WEAKEN it - you aren't strengthening it at all. And I suspect you fucking well know that and for many of your ilk, THAT is the real goal. Last I checked, there isn't a single word in the Constitution about how the wealthy are somehow lesser Americans to be considered enemies of the state! YOU are the gutless coward and it takes NO brains to do it either! In fact your handlers count on people like you to not think for yourself -they even have a name for you. Useful idiots -people who are discouraged from thinking for themselves and stupid enough to believe engaging in mob mentality is both brave and intelligent. Mobs are a lot of things, mostly bad -and NEVER intelligent or humane. Which takes more courage? To call those who are more successful at life than you are "enemies" of the state for the "crime" of being successful? Or to defend them from the likes of you who believe in mob rule and people like you who insist that others OWE you the fruits of THEIR labor?

From the very beginning Democrats have ALWAYS targeted others to be singled out as enemies in this country, rejecting our shared citizenship as the ONLY basis for demanding the equal treatment of all by our government. Instead they want a government that at all times discriminates against some of us -for whatever reason they have chosen at the time, insisting those who fall within their currently targeted group are actually "enemies". At all times the left will insist fellow Americans are "enemies" which also says they clearly do not believe those in whatever group they have singled out are their equals. The left will target fellow citizens and demand government adopt a policy of officially discriminating against them as deserving of punishment as little more than THINGS to be reviled and spat upon. One thing the left will NEVER believe in -is having a government that isn't using its power to intimidate and discriminate against some group of fellow Americans. They haven't done it yet and they sure aren't starting now. Listen up bubba -the REAL heroes in this country are those who stand up to the likes of YOU constantly demanding government turn on its own citizens for whatever reason your ILK have chosen that day! Demanding government target different groups of fellow citizens for official discrimination and punitive treatment on whatever basis Democrats have chosen at the time is a LEFTWING "value", not an American one! And it takes COURAGE to stand up against your kind. Calling the people who do "cowards" may make you feel better but in fact your ilk are the real cowards. No kidding there - it is COWARDICE on your part and MINDLESS cowardice at that.

Your very premise is flawed and beyond stupid. What you really want to know is why Republicans refuse to jump on the class warfare train and pretend the wealthy are only wealthy because they must have CHEATED and STOLEN it from us. They didn't steal it from you -therefore it doesn't belong to you. They didn't steal it from ME, so it doesn't belong to ME either. MOST importantly and where the left gets TOTALLY derailed is with their anti-American belief that the fruits of one's own honest work first belongs to government -and not the individual who worked, earned and created it. WRONG -what you work to earn, what I work to earn and yes, what a rich person works to earn -belongs FIRST to the person who worked to earn it. NOT to government which is our SERVANT not our OWNER. Government only exists because of we the people -and NOT the other way around! I am not the slave of government, I am not state owned property of government -and neither is any other American -regardless of their income!

The founding premise in this country is that man has the inherit RIGHT of freedom -the right to make of his life what he will. For better or ill. THAT is what the left rejects. This is what I have said so often now but bears repeating AGAIN. The left HATES freedom, the left REJECTS freedom -because FREEDOM carries a heavy responsibility. The left are for the most part immature people who fear adulthood and believe in a system where they simply exchange their parents for some other entity that will take responsibility for them instead -and protect them from the undesirable consequences of their own poor decisions. Liberalism is about seeking the parental replacement in order to avoid adulthood. Adults love freedom and accept responsibility for themselves. Adolescents still need mommy and daddy to protect them from the consequences of their own stupid decisions - and the left believes in encouraging normal adults to fear adulthood and avoid it at all costs. Even if it means insisting we despise, revile and hate success -and thereby reward and encourage one of the most damaging self-defeating attitudes possible.

The left FIRMLY believes what the RICH earn first belongs to government -or anyone else but those who actually earned it and created it. The problem you have is with people who refuse to accept your basic premise that we are all state owned SLAVES and that government actually owns the fruits of our labor and not the person who busted his ass to create it! Not getting on that train now and never will. If I am not state owned property and the slave of government -then where do I get off insisting others are for the "mistake" of being successful? Are liberals seriously suggesting that wealthy Americans are less "equal" than they are? Have fewer rights? Less right to the fruits of THEIR labor than you have to yours? Less right to have a say about how much they choose to GIVE to government? Liberals are insisting the wealthy have NO right to expect to be treated equally by their own government, but targeted and singled out for onerous taxation liberals would never inflict on themselves!

But consider this -if it isn't YOUR money at stake here, then where do you get off insisting your opinion about how much someone else should pay is more relevant than their own opinion? Apparently liberals are arrogant enough to believe their own opinion carries more weight -even though what they want will not impact THEIR pocketbook. Hmm -what do we call such a system where the most successful are singled out as hateful, despicable, despised people who are somehow "less" than others and we should all view them as ENEMIES? Liberals are CONSTANTLY insisting the real enemies of this country are fellow Americans. It is part of the very foundation of liberalism that I most despise. Liberals act as if the nation belongs only to THEM -all others are "enemies".

I don't understand the belief of leftwingers that if someone busts their ass and earns more than you do, they OWE it to you to fork over a big chunk of it. As if that is "fair". What is fair about taking the fruits of one's labor from the person who busted his ass to earn it -and giving it to someone who didn't? Who got rewarded here and who got punished? Whatever government punishes it will get LESS -whatever it rewards it will get MORE. Does the left SERIOUSLY want fewer people earning great wealth and more people living as parasites who think they are entitled to the fruits of the labor of someone else? REALLY? When did THAT become an American value -and surely you realize that belief is incompatible with freedom and individual rights, correct? I have a RIGHT to what I have worked to earn and it is MY right as well as that of other Americans, to decide how much we CHOOSE to give to government. Government only exists because of we the people -and NOT the other way around!

Our government doesn't create wealth -it can only TAKE it from those who do. The left DESPISES success, they believe it is something that must be discouraged and punished as undesirable. The only rational explanation is to realize the left would rather see millions exist in misery "equally" than have as few as possible at the bottom. But our system was set up to leave as few as possible at the bottom. And it has been so successful those at OUR bottom are actually middle class globally. We have to use our own made-up definition of "poverty" in this country because the international definition doesn't apply at all in this country! And because our definition of poverty is always tied to it being a percentage of those at the very top -we will always have "poor" in this country. And while the word "poor" brings to mind "destitute", in reality in this country they are anything BUT.

The average poor person in the WORLD earns less than $200 a year and their greatest problems are a lack of shelter and calories. Forget access to medical care and an education.

But in this country, any household with an income below $22,000 is considered "poor". But globally this is an income in the middle of the middle class bracket. The average "poor" American has more living space than the average middle class person even among many western nations. The average "poor" American owns a computer, 3 tvs, a microwave, at least one car and has air conditioning. The greatest health problem is the consumption of TOO MANY CALORIES -obesity. The American "poor" are given free medical care and a free education. In other words, they are given advantages denied to the world's REAL poor. The average "poor" person in this country today lives better than all but the very richest person even 100 years ago! Those occupiers on Wall Street? Need to start demanding other countries imitate us, NOT that we imitate the known historical failures in the world instead!

And I think its time we NOT lose sight of this fact. How did that happen that our "poor" have a higher standard of living than even middle class people in most of the world? Its because the US also has the greatest number of wealthy people compared to every other nation. We have more millionaires per capita than other nations -and their very existence puts UPWARD pressure on both the standard of living AND the income for everyone else. When that economic level is decimated, the numbers thinned down and people punished and otherwise discouraged from earning great wealth -it puts DOWNWARD pressure on both income and standard of living.

Why on earth would I be so stupid as to believe discouraging people from earning great wealth by demanding government confiscate it from those who do would in any way benefit either the country or me personally when NEITHER is true? Every time that economic class at the top grows, MY share of the tax burden shrinks at the very same time it increases the pressure on wages for me and everyone else - thereby lifting my standard of living too. Even though I didn't lift a finger to earn great wealth, I still benefit when others do. Even our poor have a standard of living that is the envy of the world -which is why this nation is still among the top draws for those seeking to emigrate to another country! I want MORE people to earn great wealth for themselves, not fewer!

And if you had a shred of intelligence, critical thinking skills or any understanding of the lessons of history - you would too.

Wow.... what an incredibly long and masturbatory post... ya cum yet?

BTW.... I love it when you numbnuts talk about Critical thinking. You are so fucking brainwashed by your Koch sucking media sources that you are completely UNABLE to turn your supposedly "Honed" Critical thinking skills and turn them on your own Party/philosophy.

EDIT: Insisting that fellow Americans who have a more compassionate philosophy than the "CONSERVATIVE" mantra that your side keeps spewing are the enemy.....well.... let's just say that your opening comment is hypocritical. You people are the MASTERS of treating your fellow Americans like dirt.
 
Last edited:
There's only two kinds of Republican loyalists --those who are very well off and those who believe that one day they're going to be invited into the manor by their betters.
 
There's only two kinds of Republican loyalists --those who are very well off and those who believe that one day they're going to be invited into the manor by their betters.

Oh... you betcha. The simple truth is that 99% of them are going to remain exactly where they are... just like the rest of us 99%ers.... in fact, their quality of life will continue to get slowly worse while the 1% keeps gaining money and power... and they still won't realize that they are being scammed.

They will blame Government holding them back, they will blame themselves... (I must not be working hard enough). But never will they blame our fucked up system of Crony Capitalism and Corporatism.
 
My quote is from Smith. This is what he wrote:

That is a different quote from Smith, you're moving the goal posts. (I don't think you realize this, as you are cutting and pasting from Marxist.org)

{The proportion of the expence of house-rent to the whole expence of living is different in the different degrees of fortune. It is perhaps highest in the highest degree, and it diminishes gradually through the inferior degrees, so as in general to be lowest in the lowest degree. The necessaries of life occasion the great expence of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expence of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be any thing very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expence, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.}

Smith: Wealth of Nations, Book V, Chapter 2 | Library of Economics and Liberty (Emphasis added)

So what you claim is false, Smith did not advocate a progressive income tax, but rather was advocating a tax on rents paid that was graduated. Quite a different proposal and principle.

So you're under the impression that we have adequate demand right now in the US?

There is no lack of demand. Many lack the capital to pursue the desires they have, but demand is overwhelming.

Truth. May your head explode.

You have clearly never had a course in economics.

{In economics, Say’s Law or Say’s Law of Markets is a principle attributed to French businessman and economist Jean-Baptiste Say (1767-1832) stating that there can be no demand without supply. A central element of Say's Law is that recession does not occur because of failure in demand or lack of money.

The more goods (for which there is demand) that are produced, the more those goods (supply) can constitute a demand for other goods. For this reason, prosperity should be increased by stimulating production, not consumption. In Say's view, creation of more money simply results in inflation; more money demanding the same quantity of goods does not represent an increase in real demand.}

Say’s law
 
Hey... the System(trickle up) is all Conservatism and Corporatism. So blame your own political philosophy.

So let me get this straight, it's the conservatives pushing the merger of corporations and the federal government? Such as buying GM and Chrysler, merging Blue Cross and Kaiser into FedCare and using the IRS as bill collector and enforcer to ensure all buy the product they sell?

That was the conservatives, huh?

Funny, I thought Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et al were fascist democrats.
 
So you are claiming that the federal government maintained the roads and bridges of America going back to the American revolution? Is that your claim?

Standard Disclaimer: I love leftists, they make up the most amazing "facts."

No, but I will tell you that a Republican (Eisenhower) DID provide for building the road system that we currently enjoy today.....]


Harding had proposed all that more than 30 years before.

And we all know that leftists should get more credit for their good intentions than the right does for actually fulfilling them.
 
Yep... and it put many people to work. Hoover Dam provides electricity to many people, put many people to work. The Intercontinental Railroad did much the same thing... ALL of those and many more were public works project funded by taxpayer dollars.

Yet now our infrastructure is crumbling. Our Bridges, our roads, our water systems, our electrical grid...all are on the verge of failure. But Conservatives don't give a shit. All because it's OBAMA that wants to fix it.

How many times do we have to pay to have a job done???????

Gas taxes were put on gasoline "to maintain the roads". Diesel taxes were put on truckers "to repair the roads". Were the first two stimulus programs from Obama "for the infrastructure" (that went to unions, and pet projects of George Soros)? Just how gullible are you?

ummmm..... proof? methinks your full of shit.

Really? REALLY?! You need MORE proof that the first stimulus went to everything BUT "infrastructure"? How about the fact that he's back repeating the same refrain? There he was, insisting that we needed the first stimulus because "our infrastructure is crumbling". So he gets it, and now he says our infrastructure is STILL crumbling. That doesn't tell you that the first stimulus didn't go to infrastructure? Are you allergic to common sense?

And have you been watching the news AT ALL lately, or have you been hiding under a rock? You haven't heard all the stories - some of which actually get mentioned on the mainstream media - about the first stimulus being funneled to Obama contributors?
 
Please explain Americans why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

I could never understand why the misguided mouthpieces in the Republican Party continue to make excuses for the top 1% wealthiest while dissing their own in the middle class. Cowards and Traitors, the bunch of ya. While the middle class is trying to unite against the wealthiest, some in the middle class are playing the Benedict Arnold role - all in the name of the Grand Ol' Party. :dunno:

Shameless Cowards - the lot of you:eusa_naughty:

-----

I have news for you -insisting fellow Americans are the "enemy" because they are rich, they work harder than you, they are more successful than you -THAT is being a fucking coward buddy. Sticking up for the rights of others, especially those viewed as easy targets -takes REAL courage. You aren't sticking up for the middle class, what you are doing isn't doing anything FOR the middle class -and if you think you are, you are either deluded or a liar. Your choice but I know which way I'm leaning on that. Seriously, how is it HELPING the middle class by once again targeting a fellow group of Americans and declaring them the enemy? You LIE if you pretend that in ANY way is "sticking up" for the middle class! You can't defend some citizens by declaring other ones are the enemy -you DIVIDE the nation and thereby WEAKEN it - you aren't strengthening it at all. And I suspect you fucking well know that and for many of your ilk, THAT is the real goal. Last I checked, there isn't a single word in the Constitution about how the wealthy are somehow lesser Americans to be considered enemies of the state! YOU are the gutless coward and it takes NO brains to do it either! In fact your handlers count on people like you to not think for yourself -they even have a name for you. Useful idiots -people who are discouraged from thinking for themselves and stupid enough to believe engaging in mob mentality is both brave and intelligent. Mobs are a lot of things, mostly bad -and NEVER intelligent or humane. Which takes more courage? To call those who are more successful at life than you are "enemies" of the state for the "crime" of being successful? Or to defend them from the likes of you who believe in mob rule and people like you who insist that others OWE you the fruits of THEIR labor?

From the very beginning Democrats have ALWAYS targeted others to be singled out as enemies in this country, rejecting our shared citizenship as the ONLY basis for demanding the equal treatment of all by our government. Instead they want a government that at all times discriminates against some of us -for whatever reason they have chosen at the time, insisting those who fall within their currently targeted group are actually "enemies". At all times the left will insist fellow Americans are "enemies" which also says they clearly do not believe those in whatever group they have singled out are their equals. The left will target fellow citizens and demand government adopt a policy of officially discriminating against them as deserving of punishment as little more than THINGS to be reviled and spat upon. One thing the left will NEVER believe in -is having a government that isn't using its power to intimidate and discriminate against some group of fellow Americans. They haven't done it yet and they sure aren't starting now. Listen up bubba -the REAL heroes in this country are those who stand up to the likes of YOU constantly demanding government turn on its own citizens for whatever reason your ILK have chosen that day! Demanding government target different groups of fellow citizens for official discrimination and punitive treatment on whatever basis Democrats have chosen at the time is a LEFTWING "value", not an American one! And it takes COURAGE to stand up against your kind. Calling the people who do "cowards" may make you feel better but in fact your ilk are the real cowards. No kidding there - it is COWARDICE on your part and MINDLESS cowardice at that.

Your very premise is flawed and beyond stupid. What you really want to know is why Republicans refuse to jump on the class warfare train and pretend the wealthy are only wealthy because they must have CHEATED and STOLEN it from us. They didn't steal it from you -therefore it doesn't belong to you. They didn't steal it from ME, so it doesn't belong to ME either. MOST importantly and where the left gets TOTALLY derailed is with their anti-American belief that the fruits of one's own honest work first belongs to government -and not the individual who worked, earned and created it. WRONG -what you work to earn, what I work to earn and yes, what a rich person works to earn -belongs FIRST to the person who worked to earn it. NOT to government which is our SERVANT not our OWNER. Government only exists because of we the people -and NOT the other way around! I am not the slave of government, I am not state owned property of government -and neither is any other American -regardless of their income!

The founding premise in this country is that man has the inherit RIGHT of freedom -the right to make of his life what he will. For better or ill. THAT is what the left rejects. This is what I have said so often now but bears repeating AGAIN. The left HATES freedom, the left REJECTS freedom -because FREEDOM carries a heavy responsibility. The left are for the most part immature people who fear adulthood and believe in a system where they simply exchange their parents for some other entity that will take responsibility for them instead -and protect them from the undesirable consequences of their own poor decisions. Liberalism is about seeking the parental replacement in order to avoid adulthood. Adults love freedom and accept responsibility for themselves. Adolescents still need mommy and daddy to protect them from the consequences of their own stupid decisions - and the left believes in encouraging normal adults to fear adulthood and avoid it at all costs. Even if it means insisting we despise, revile and hate success -and thereby reward and encourage one of the most damaging self-defeating attitudes possible.

The left FIRMLY believes what the RICH earn first belongs to government -or anyone else but those who actually earned it and created it. The problem you have is with people who refuse to accept your basic premise that we are all state owned SLAVES and that government actually owns the fruits of our labor and not the person who busted his ass to create it! Not getting on that train now and never will. If I am not state owned property and the slave of government -then where do I get off insisting others are for the "mistake" of being successful? Are liberals seriously suggesting that wealthy Americans are less "equal" than they are? Have fewer rights? Less right to the fruits of THEIR labor than you have to yours? Less right to have a say about how much they choose to GIVE to government? Liberals are insisting the wealthy have NO right to expect to be treated equally by their own government, but targeted and singled out for onerous taxation liberals would never inflict on themselves!

But consider this -if it isn't YOUR money at stake here, then where do you get off insisting your opinion about how much someone else should pay is more relevant than their own opinion? Apparently liberals are arrogant enough to believe their own opinion carries more weight -even though what they want will not impact THEIR pocketbook. Hmm -what do we call such a system where the most successful are singled out as hateful, despicable, despised people who are somehow "less" than others and we should all view them as ENEMIES? Liberals are CONSTANTLY insisting the real enemies of this country are fellow Americans. It is part of the very foundation of liberalism that I most despise. Liberals act as if the nation belongs only to THEM -all others are "enemies".

I don't understand the belief of leftwingers that if someone busts their ass and earns more than you do, they OWE it to you to fork over a big chunk of it. As if that is "fair". What is fair about taking the fruits of one's labor from the person who busted his ass to earn it -and giving it to someone who didn't? Who got rewarded here and who got punished? Whatever government punishes it will get LESS -whatever it rewards it will get MORE. Does the left SERIOUSLY want fewer people earning great wealth and more people living as parasites who think they are entitled to the fruits of the labor of someone else? REALLY? When did THAT become an American value -and surely you realize that belief is incompatible with freedom and individual rights, correct? I have a RIGHT to what I have worked to earn and it is MY right as well as that of other Americans, to decide how much we CHOOSE to give to government. Government only exists because of we the people -and NOT the other way around!

Our government doesn't create wealth -it can only TAKE it from those who do. The left DESPISES success, they believe it is something that must be discouraged and punished as undesirable. The only rational explanation is to realize the left would rather see millions exist in misery "equally" than have as few as possible at the bottom. But our system was set up to leave as few as possible at the bottom. And it has been so successful those at OUR bottom are actually middle class globally. We have to use our own made-up definition of "poverty" in this country because the international definition doesn't apply at all in this country! And because our definition of poverty is always tied to it being a percentage of those at the very top -we will always have "poor" in this country. And while the word "poor" brings to mind "destitute", in reality in this country they are anything BUT.

The average poor person in the WORLD earns less than $200 a year and their greatest problems are a lack of shelter and calories. Forget access to medical care and an education.

But in this country, any household with an income below $22,000 is considered "poor". But globally this is an income in the middle of the middle class bracket. The average "poor" American has more living space than the average middle class person even among many western nations. The average "poor" American owns a computer, 3 tvs, a microwave, at least one car and has air conditioning. The greatest health problem is the consumption of TOO MANY CALORIES -obesity. The American "poor" are given free medical care and a free education. In other words, they are given advantages denied to the world's REAL poor. The average "poor" person in this country today lives better than all but the very richest person even 100 years ago! Those occupiers on Wall Street? Need to start demanding other countries imitate us, NOT that we imitate the known historical failures in the world instead!

And I think its time we NOT lose sight of this fact. How did that happen that our "poor" have a higher standard of living than even middle class people in most of the world? Its because the US also has the greatest number of wealthy people compared to every other nation. We have more millionaires per capita than other nations -and their very existence puts UPWARD pressure on both the standard of living AND the income for everyone else. When that economic level is decimated, the numbers thinned down and people punished and otherwise discouraged from earning great wealth -it puts DOWNWARD pressure on both income and standard of living.

Why on earth would I be so stupid as to believe discouraging people from earning great wealth by demanding government confiscate it from those who do would in any way benefit either the country or me personally when NEITHER is true? Every time that economic class at the top grows, MY share of the tax burden shrinks at the very same time it increases the pressure on wages for me and everyone else - thereby lifting my standard of living too. Even though I didn't lift a finger to earn great wealth, I still benefit when others do. Even our poor have a standard of living that is the envy of the world -which is why this nation is still among the top draws for those seeking to emigrate to another country! I want MORE people to earn great wealth for themselves, not fewer!

And if you had a shred of intelligence, critical thinking skills or any understanding of the lessons of history - you would too.

Wow.... what an incredibly long and masturbatory post... ya cum yet?

BTW.... I love it when you numbnuts talk about Critical thinking. You are so fucking brainwashed by your Koch sucking media sources that you are completely UNABLE to turn your supposedly "Honed" Critical thinking skills and turn them on your own Party/philosophy.

EDIT: Insisting that fellow Americans who have a more compassionate philosophy than the "CONSERVATIVE" mantra that your side keeps spewing are the enemy.....well.... let's just say that your opening comment is hypocritical. You people are the MASTERS of treating your fellow Americans like dirt.

Liberal logic: Long posts mean you're stupid. Smart people talk in soundbytes.
 
There was infrastructure money in the '09 stimulus bill.

However, there are still more infrastructure jobs to be done.

This is, and has always been, the role of federal government.

We live in the 21st century, not the 18th. The founders left us a framework, not a straight jacket. Decades of legislation and legal rulings have expanded the role of the federal government, which is a good thing, because under your right wing, regressive, anti-freedom unfettered market ideas, we'd have been conquered long ago.
 
My quote is from Smith. This is what he wrote:

That is a different quote from Smith, you're moving the goal posts. (I don't think you realize this, as you are cutting and pasting from Marxist.org)

I am quoting Adam Smith. I downloaded "The Wealth of Nations" and verified the Wikipedia quote.

{The proportion of the expence of house-rent to the whole expence of living is different in the different degrees of fortune. It is perhaps highest in the highest degree, and it diminishes gradually through the inferior degrees, so as in general to be lowest in the lowest degree. The necessaries of life occasion the great expence of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expence of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be any thing very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expence, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.}

Smith: Wealth of Nations, Book V, Chapter 2 | Library of Economics and Liberty (Emphasis added)

So what you claim is false, Smith did not advocate a progressive income tax, but rather was advocating a tax on rents paid that was graduated. Quite a different proposal and principle.

Not really the point-the point is that he advocated taxing the rich disproportionately.

So you're under the impression that we have adequate demand right now in the US?

There is no lack of demand. Many lack the capital to pursue the desires they have, but demand is overwhelming.

WSJ Survey: Lack of Demand, Not Uncertainty, Keeps Hiring Down - Catherine Hollander - NationalJournal.com

Truth. May your head explode.

You have clearly never had a course in economics.

I'm reading a book called "Debt-The First Five Thousand Years"-he pokes a bit of fun at those who make such comments. :eusa_angel:

{In economics, Say’s Law or Say’s Law of Markets is a principle attributed to French businessman and economist Jean-Baptiste Say (1767-1832) stating that there can be no demand without supply. A central element of Say's Law is that recession does not occur because of failure in demand or lack of money.

The more goods (for which there is demand) that are produced, the more those goods (supply) can constitute a demand for other goods. For this reason, prosperity should be increased by stimulating production, not consumption. In Say's view, creation of more money simply results in inflation; more money demanding the same quantity of goods does not represent an increase in real demand.}

Say’s law

WSJ Survey: Lack of Demand, Not Uncertainty, Keeps Hiring Down - Catherine Hollander - NationalJournal.com
 
You're still misinterpreting what Adam Smith was saying though. Not only did he advocate a flat tax but he was also pointing out that the tax would be 'disproportionate' on the rich BECAUSE it was the rich that would be taxed on rents etc. and that was okay. The poor do not have property to rent to others so wouldn't be subject to that kind of tax.

The leftist tendency to justify making the rich support the poor continues.

The true American Conservative wants everybody to be treated the same--no dictated winners and losers--as the best remedy for the plight of the poor. As long as we keep the poor entrapped in a sense of entitlement that they deserve for the rich to share with them, we keep people trapped in poverty.
 
You're still misinterpreting what Adam Smith was saying though. Not only did he advocate a flat tax but he was also pointing out that the tax would be 'disproportionate' on the rich BECAUSE it was the rich that would be taxed on rents etc. and that was okay. The poor do not have property to rent to others so wouldn't be subject to that kind of tax.

The leftist tendency to justify making the rich support the poor continues.

The true American Conservative wants everybody to be treated the same--no dictated winners and losers--as the best remedy for the plight of the poor. As long as we keep the poor entrapped in a sense of entitlement that they deserve for the rich to share with them, we keep people trapped in poverty.

No, I'm just reading what he said. The idea that he meant that it's disproportionate because the poor have no rent income sounds like something the true American Conservative would say. :cuckoo:

The rich dictate policies that keep the rich at the top. Even in this free society, they have tremendous political power.

People working for minimum wage do not have a sense of entitlement nearly like that of the rich.
 
You're still misinterpreting what Adam Smith was saying though. Not only did he advocate a flat tax but he was also pointing out that the tax would be 'disproportionate' on the rich BECAUSE it was the rich that would be taxed on rents etc. and that was okay. The poor do not have property to rent to others so wouldn't be subject to that kind of tax.

The leftist tendency to justify making the rich support the poor continues.

The true American Conservative wants everybody to be treated the same--no dictated winners and losers--as the best remedy for the plight of the poor. As long as we keep the poor entrapped in a sense of entitlement that they deserve for the rich to share with them, we keep people trapped in poverty.

No, I'm just reading what he said. The idea that he meant that it's disproportionate because the poor have no rent income sounds like something the true American Conservative would say. :cuckoo:

The rich dictate policies that keep the rich at the top. Even in this free society, they have tremendous political power.

People working for minimum wage do not have a sense of entitlement nearly like that of the rich.

Adam Smith and entitlement are two separate issues and two separate subjects.

The point is that Adam Smith understood that proportionate taxation would cost the rich far more than it would cost the poor because 10% of a million for instance, is far more than 10% of one thousand. And Smith had no problem with the rich paying proportionately more than the poor in that manner. Nor does any modern American conservative.

Then you get into the separate issue of taxes on rents and property and here again the rich will pay far more than the poor because it is the rich who have the property to tax. And Smith and modern American conservatives had no problem with that either so long as nobody with property is exempt from the tax.

People working for minimum wage almost always do so voluntarily or because that is all the skills and experience they have to offer - or - as a stopgap measure until they can find something better. I have done it many times and never once thought my employer was obligated to pay me a penny more than minimum wage for a minimum wage job. Just as soon as I could find a job that fit my particular experience and skill set, I would no longer need to work for minimum wage, but meanwhile, I was happy to get it.

The blessings of liberty allowed for a classless society in which people could move up and down the prosperity ladder depending on what ability they could offer and how much effort they were willing to put in it. The rich have established no rules or policy that inhibit that process.

The government, however, by enslaving or addicting people to entitlements, DOES inhibit people from taking advantage of the blessings of liberty. Rather than risk what they get for free, they get to the point they don't aspire for anything better. They may demonstrate, riot, and protest for more entitlements, and they may accuse the rich as the reason they are poor, but too many don't see it as their responsibility to work for what they get.
 
Last edited:
Adam Smith and entitlement are two separate issues and two separate subjects.

Yeah, that's why I didn't bring up entitlements. I only responded to the hate-the-poor rhetoric.

The point is that Adam Smith understood that proportionate taxation would cost the rich far more than it would cost the poor because 10% of a million for instance, is far more than 10% of one thousand. And Smith had no problem with the rich paying proportionately more than the poor in that manner. Nor does any modern American conservative.

You folks evidently cannot read works that you don't wish to read:

A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be any thing very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expence, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.}

The pertinent part is embiggened.

Then you get into the separate issue of taxes on rents and property and here again the rich will pay far more than the poor because it is the rich who have the property to tax. And Smith and modern American conservatives had no problem with that either so long as nobody with property is exempt from the tax.

People working for minimum wage almost always do so voluntarily or because that is all the skills and experience they have to offer - or - as a stopgap measure until they can find something better. I have done it many times and never once thought my employer was obligated to pay me a penny more than minimum wage for a minimum wage job. Just as soon as I could find a job that fit my particular experience and skill set, I would no longer need to work for minimum wage, but meanwhile, I was happy to get it.

Wonderful analysis! People work for minimum wage either because they want to or they have to. Just like everything else people do. :rofl:

The blessings of liberty allowed for a classless society in which people could move up and down the prosperity ladder depending on what ability they could offer and how much effort they were willing to put in it. The rich have established no rules or policy that inhibit that process.

Bullshit. When investment is taxed less than wages, when everything from safety to education is different depending on where you live, when corporations can spend unlimited amounts to publish lies, then the rich inhibit that process.

The government, however, by enslaving or addicting people to entitlements, DOES inhibit people from taking advantage of the blessings of liberty. Rather than risk what they get for free, they get to the point they don't aspire for anything better. They may demonstrate, riot, and protest for more entitlements, and they may accuse the rich as the reason they are poor, but too many don't see it as their responsibility to work for what they get.

Get in the real world.
 
QUOTE=frazzledgear;4378230]
Please explain Americans why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

I could never understand why the misguided mouthpieces in the Republican Party continue to make excuses for the top 1% wealthiest while dissing their own in the middle class. Cowards and Traitors, the bunch of ya. While the middle class is trying to unite against the wealthiest, some in the middle class are playing the Benedict Arnold role - all in the name of the Grand Ol' Party. :dunno:

Shameless Cowards - the lot of you:eusa_naughty:

-----

I have news for you -insisting fellow Americans are the "enemy" because they are rich, they work harder than you, they are more successful than you -THAT is being a fucking coward buddy. Sticking up for the rights of others, especially those viewed as easy targets -takes REAL courage. You aren't sticking up for the middle class, what you are doing isn't doing anything FOR the middle class -and if you think you are, you are either deluded or a liar. Your choice but I know which way I'm leaning on that. Seriously, how is it HELPING the middle class by once again targeting a fellow group of Americans and declaring them the enemy? You LIE if you pretend that in ANY way is "sticking up" for the middle class! You can't defend some citizens by declaring other ones are the enemy -you DIVIDE the nation and thereby WEAKEN it - you aren't strengthening it at all. And I suspect you fucking well know that and for many of your ilk, THAT is the real goal. Last I checked, there isn't a single word in the Constitution about how the wealthy are somehow lesser Americans to be considered enemies of the state! YOU are the gutless coward and it takes NO brains to do it either! In fact your handlers count on people like you to not think for yourself -they even have a name for you. Useful idiots -people who are discouraged from thinking for themselves and stupid enough to believe engaging in mob mentality is both brave and intelligent. Mobs are a lot of things, mostly bad -and NEVER intelligent or humane. Which takes more courage? To call those who are more successful at life than you are "enemies" of the state for the "crime" of being successful? Or to defend them from the likes of you who believe in mob rule and people like you who insist that others OWE you the fruits of THEIR labor?

From the very beginning Democrats have ALWAYS targeted others to be singled out as enemies in this country, rejecting our shared citizenship as the ONLY basis for demanding the equal treatment of all by our government. Instead they want a government that at all times discriminates against some of us -for whatever reason they have chosen at the time, insisting those who fall within their currently targeted group are actually "enemies". At all times the left will insist fellow Americans are "enemies" which also says they clearly do not believe those in whatever group they have singled out are their equals. The left will target fellow citizens and demand government adopt a policy of officially discriminating against them as deserving of punishment as little more than THINGS to be reviled and spat upon. One thing the left will NEVER believe in -is having a government that isn't using its power to intimidate and discriminate against some group of fellow Americans. They haven't done it yet and they sure aren't starting now. Listen up bubba -the REAL heroes in this country are those who stand up to the likes of YOU constantly demanding government turn on its own citizens for whatever reason your ILK have chosen that day! Demanding government target different groups of fellow citizens for official discrimination and punitive treatment on whatever basis Democrats have chosen at the time is a LEFTWING "value", not an American one! And it takes COURAGE to stand up against your kind. Calling the people who do "cowards" may make you feel better but in fact your ilk are the real cowards. No kidding there - it is COWARDICE on your part and MINDLESS cowardice at that.

Your very premise is flawed and beyond stupid. What you really want to know is why Republicans refuse to jump on the class warfare train and pretend the wealthy are only wealthy because they must have CHEATED and STOLEN it from us. They didn't steal it from you -therefore it doesn't belong to you. They didn't steal it from ME, so it doesn't belong to ME either. MOST importantly and where the left gets TOTALLY derailed is with their anti-American belief that the fruits of one's own honest work first belongs to government -and not the individual who worked, earned and created it. WRONG -what you work to earn, what I work to earn and yes, what a rich person works to earn -belongs FIRST to the person who worked to earn it. NOT to government which is our SERVANT not our OWNER. Government only exists because of we the people -and NOT the other way around! I am not the slave of government, I am not state owned property of government -and neither is any other American -regardless of their income!

The founding premise in this country is that man has the inherit RIGHT of freedom -the right to make of his life what he will. For better or ill. THAT is what the left rejects. This is what I have said so often now but bears repeating AGAIN. The left HATES freedom, the left REJECTS freedom -because FREEDOM carries a heavy responsibility. The left are for the most part immature people who fear adulthood and believe in a system where they simply exchange their parents for some other entity that will take responsibility for them instead -and protect them from the undesirable consequences of their own poor decisions. Liberalism is about seeking the parental replacement in order to avoid adulthood. Adults love freedom and accept responsibility for themselves. Adolescents still need mommy and daddy to protect them from the consequences of their own stupid decisions - and the left believes in encouraging normal adults to fear adulthood and avoid it at all costs. Even if it means insisting we despise, revile and hate success -and thereby reward and encourage one of the most damaging self-defeating attitudes possible.

The left FIRMLY believes what the RICH earn first belongs to government -or anyone else but those who actually earned it and created it. The problem you have is with people who refuse to accept your basic premise that we are all state owned SLAVES and that government actually owns the fruits of our labor and not the person who busted his ass to create it! Not getting on that train now and never will. If I am not state owned property and the slave of government -then where do I get off insisting others are for the "mistake" of being successful? Are liberals seriously suggesting that wealthy Americans are less "equal" than they are? Have fewer rights? Less right to the fruits of THEIR labor than you have to yours? Less right to have a say about how much they choose to GIVE to government? Liberals are insisting the wealthy have NO right to expect to be treated equally by their own government, but targeted and singled out for onerous taxation liberals would never inflict on themselves!

But consider this -if it isn't YOUR money at stake here, then where do you get off insisting your opinion about how much someone else should pay is more relevant than their own opinion? Apparently liberals are arrogant enough to believe their own opinion carries more weight -even though what they want will not impact THEIR pocketbook. Hmm -what do we call such a system where the most successful are singled out as hateful, despicable, despised people who are somehow "less" than others and we should all view them as ENEMIES? Liberals are CONSTANTLY insisting the real enemies of this country are fellow Americans. It is part of the very foundation of liberalism that I most despise. Liberals act as if the nation belongs only to THEM -all others are "enemies".

I don't understand the belief of leftwingers that if someone busts their ass and earns more than you do, they OWE it to you to fork over a big chunk of it. As if that is "fair". What is fair about taking the fruits of one's labor from the person who busted his ass to earn it -and giving it to someone who didn't? Who got rewarded here and who got punished? Whatever government punishes it will get LESS -whatever it rewards it will get MORE. Does the left SERIOUSLY want fewer people earning great wealth and more people living as parasites who think they are entitled to the fruits of the labor of someone else? REALLY? When did THAT become an American value -and surely you realize that belief is incompatible with freedom and individual rights, correct? I have a RIGHT to what I have worked to earn and it is MY right as well as that of other Americans, to decide how much we CHOOSE to give to government. Government only exists because of we the people -and NOT the other way around!

Our government doesn't create wealth -it can only TAKE it from those who do. The left DESPISES success, they believe it is something that must be discouraged and punished as undesirable. The only rational explanation is to realize the left would rather see millions exist in misery "equally" than have as few as possible at the bottom. But our system was set up to leave as few as possible at the bottom. And it has been so successful those at OUR bottom are actually middle class globally. We have to use our own made-up definition of "poverty" in this country because the international definition doesn't apply at all in this country! And because our definition of poverty is always tied to it being a percentage of those at the very top -we will always have "poor" in this country. And while the word "poor" brings to mind "destitute", in reality in this country they are anything BUT.

The average poor person in the WORLD earns less than $200 a year and their greatest problems are a lack of shelter and calories. Forget access to medical care and an education.

But in this country, any household with an income below $22,000 is considered "poor". But globally this is an income in the middle of the middle class bracket. The average "poor" American has more living space than the average middle class person even among many western nations. The average "poor" American owns a computer, 3 tvs, a microwave, at least one car and has air conditioning. The greatest health problem is the consumption of TOO MANY CALORIES -obesity. The American "poor" are given free medical care and a free education. In other words, they are given advantages denied to the world's REAL poor. The average "poor" person in this country today lives better than all but the very richest person even 100 years ago! Those occupiers on Wall Street? Need to start demanding other countries imitate us, NOT that we imitate the known historical failures in the world instead!

And I think its time we NOT lose sight of this fact. How did that happen that our "poor" have a higher standard of living than even middle class people in most of the world? Its because the US also has the greatest number of wealthy people compared to every other nation. We have more millionaires per capita than other nations -and their very existence puts UPWARD pressure on both the standard of living AND the income for everyone else. When that economic level is decimated, the numbers thinned down and people punished and otherwise discouraged from earning great wealth -it puts DOWNWARD pressure on both income and standard of living.

Why on earth would I be so stupid as to believe discouraging people from earning great wealth by demanding government confiscate it from those who do would in any way benefit either the country or me personally when NEITHER is true? Every time that economic class at the top grows, MY share of the tax burden shrinks at the very same time it increases the pressure on wages for me and everyone else - thereby lifting my standard of living too. Even though I didn't lift a finger to earn great wealth, I still benefit when others do. Even our poor have a standard of living that is the envy of the world -which is why this nation is still among the top draws for those seeking to emigrate to another country! I want MORE people to earn great wealth for themselves, not fewer!

And if you had a shred of intelligence, critical thinking skills or any understanding of the lessons of history - you would too.[/QUOTE]

:clap2::clap2::clap2:
 
Please explain Americans why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

I could never understand why the misguided mouthpieces in the Republican Party continue to make excuses for the top 1% wealthiest while dissing their own in the middle class. Cowards and Traitors, the bunch of ya. While the middle class is trying to unite against the wealthiest, some in the middle class are playing the Benedict Arnold role - all in the name of the Grand Ol' Party. :dunno:

Shameless Cowards - the lot of you:eusa_naughty:

-----
I guess the same reason you dumb asses vote democratic because they are for the working class when most off the rich are democrats.> :cuckoo:
 
Please explain Americans why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

I could never understand why the misguided mouthpieces in the Republican Party continue to make excuses for the top 1% wealthiest while dissing their own in the middle class. Cowards and Traitors, the bunch of ya. While the middle class is trying to unite against the wealthiest, some in the middle class are playing the Benedict Arnold role - all in the name of the Grand Ol' Party. :dunno:

Shameless Cowards - the lot of you:eusa_naughty:

-----
I guess the same reason you dumb asses vote democratic because they are for the working class when most off the rich are democrats.> :cuckoo:

Even if that were true, why would it matter?
 
Even if that were true, why would it matter?

It goes to the hypocrisy of your rulers and the ignorance of those who follow in a sheep-like daze.

The Hollywood elite tell you "You need to get those rich Republicans" and y'all storm off "Bah, bah wee doo - rich republicans bahhhhhd."
 

Forum List

Back
Top