[POLL] - Liberals, how much is a "fair share?" - Taxes

What's the "fair share?"


  • Total voters
    113
I
An MBA is a degree for dummies. Until we are allowed to question the quality of the human materials that provide the main support for these economic structures, we won't be able to understand why they collapse.

Oh go fuck yourself, you ignorant baboon.

Just because you lack the intellect to earn a degree does not render the degree useless.

" Oh go fuck yourself, you ignorant baboon."

Is this what you learned in MBA school?
 
" Broad brush statements placing blame point to someone that is making up a straw-man to serve an agenda."

Another conservative against accountability.

Private citizens aren't required to be "accountable' to anyone except under a tyranny.

This is plain old irresponsibility. Conservative entitlement thinking. Living in the greatest country in the word for free and without obligation. If it were up to me you'd be on a boat out.


They're all Heirheads or HeirDads, so they should go back to the crumbling castles of Europe where they belong. Let them choke in the dust of the rubble that birth privileges cause all civilizations to turn into.
 
Last edited:
Actually what is forcing deterioration, not unexpectedly, is make more money regardless of the cost to others, as the sole rule of business.

It's extremism which never works.

Businesses have to follow the law like everyone else. What stops you from making money regardless of the cost to anyone else?

The good sense to know that businesses grow best by focusing on employees and customers and products. It's not possible to be successful by cutting costs.

The bottom line is the pace car for the Race to the Bottom.
 
This is plain old irresponsibility. Conservative entitlement thinking. Living in the greatest country in the word for free and without obligation.

You display the totalitarian attitude to a 'T', brainiac. All dictators believe citizens who fail to obey orders are "irresponsible." However, in a free country, citizens only have the responsibilities they agree to. Believe it nor not, starting a business doesn't make you responsible to some blowhard politicians.

If it were up to me you'd be on a boat out.

I'm sure I would be, or better yet sent to a reeducation camp where I'll learn my "responsibilities," eh Colonel Klink?

The prototypical taker.

Who have I taken anything from? What have I taken?
 
Private citizens aren't required to be "accountable' to anyone except under a tyranny.

This is plain old irresponsibility. Conservative entitlement thinking. Living in the greatest country in the word for free and without obligation. If it were up to me you'd be on a boat out.


They're all Heirheads or HeirDads, so they should go back to the crumbling castles of Europe where they belong. Let them choke in the dust of the rubble that birth privileges cause all civilizations to turn into.

The thing that all aristocrats have in common is belief in their superiority.

That’s what the French and American Revolutions, and the Civil War were fought to end, we thought permanently.

But aristocracy is pretty compelling to those whose egos support the idea.
 
" Oh go fuck yourself, you ignorant baboon."

Is this what you learned in MBA school?

One of many important lessons.

Feral baboons should be treated as the shit flinging monkeys that they are....

Care for a banana?

images
 
The good sense to know that businesses grow best by focusing on employees and customers and products. It's not possible to be successful by cutting costs.

I would argue with that. Cutting costs is what mass production is all about.

Why do you think the rules should be any different for a business than they are for you?

Mass production follows mass demand which follows product innovation. Are you sure that you ever worked in business?

You have it precisely backwards. Which came first, Henry Ford's assembly line or the sale of 20 million Model 'T's?

Furthermore, as usual, you haven't answered the question: Why do you think the rules should be any different for a business than they are for you?
 
BriPat loves to show off ignorance. He sees no problem with the one rule, make more money regardless of the cost to others. He thinks that society would be fine with that one rule. One law. Nothing else required. As long as everyone is screwing everyone else, civilization is optimized.

The smallest amount of freedom we have ever experienced was in the cave days. Yet that's what we chose to leave. And what conservatives want to return to.

We have hundreds of thousands of pages of rules called "The Federal Register." But here you are babbling on as if there are no rules. Which rules do you imagine businesses don't follow, the ones actually on the books or the ones you just made up in your head?

No, you are babbling on that there should be no rules.

No, I only said businesses have no obligations they haven't taken on voluntarily. They certainly have no obligation to make the economy grow. When and how did they acquire such an obligation? Can you explain that?
 
These are the same folks that support "health care is a right" as John Lewis stated the other day. Now excuse me John as I respect the hell out of you as a true American hero. You stood face to face with Bull Connor and had your head bashed in, you defeated the liar Julian Bond here years ago in the face of him and his cronies labeling you "Buckwheat" but you are wrong on this.
Forcing others to provide their skill set to others and the tests and procedures that may go along with it for nothing because it is determined that is a right is false.

List again the benefits of an unhealthy population. I keep forgetting them.

Ignoring your the validity of your theory that a population won't be healthy unless productive people are forced to provide health care for parasites, please explain how it proves that health care is a right?
 
I would argue with that. Cutting costs is what mass production is all about.

Why do you think the rules should be any different for a business than they are for you?

Mass production follows mass demand which follows product innovation. Are you sure that you ever worked in business?

You have it precisely backwards. Which came first, Henry Ford's assembly line or the sale of 20 million Model 'T's?

Furthermore, as usual, you haven't answered the question: Why do you think the rules should be any different for a business than they are for you?

The concept of the assembly line was well established in the meat packing industry before Henry started tinkering.

I think that the concept that organizations are the same as individuals is ridiculous. SCOTUS says that it's a Constitutional guarantee, so it must be, but that doesn't make it any less ridiculous.
 
$109,703.86 per year average income.


The gross domestic product for 2012 was $15684.80 billion.

There were 142,974,000 people employed.

So, the average income should be $109,703.86 per year.

That is exactly what it should be.

So, that would be the "fair share" number. $109,703.86 per year average income.

What definition of 'fair' does that fit? That everyone should be alotted the same amount of money regardless of their contribution? That meets no definition of fair I've ever heard.

Did you teach your kids that life is fair?

I don't. Do you? If not, then why are you and your ilk always babbling about it?
 
Did you teach your kids that life is fair?

I don't have children and though life is indeed not fair, that doesn't mean I have to allow or be okay with people taking what I've earned and give it to those that haven't.

There is your answer then. Life is not fair. Stop expecting it to be.

Then it's OK with you if we make blacks use different drinking fountains?
 
The good sense to know that businesses grow best by focusing on employees and customers and products. It's not possible to be successful by cutting costs.

I would argue with that. Cutting costs is what mass production is all about.

Why do you think the rules should be any different for business than they are for you?

Mass production follows mass demand which follows product innovation. Are you sure that you ever worked in business?

A key fallacy that even Marxists try to push on their victims in order to be allowed to create State Capitalism.

Investors are static, inventors are dynamic. So the inventors should be the 1%; they created all the wealth. The dumb jock bully Capitaliban were able to intimidate people into thinking that they are the source of wealth when instead they are nothing but a gang of thieving parasites.
 
You have it precisely backwards. Which came first, Henry Ford's assembly line or the sale of 20 million Model 'T's?

Furthermore, as usual, you haven't answered the question: Why do you think the rules should be any different for a business than they are for you?

Says law is a concept that Communists simply cannot grasp....

I don't know any American Communists. I think that Joseph McCarthy got both of them. Or maybe he didn't, just got scapegoats, and the Communists have since died.

Anyways, if I ever run into one I'll be sure to tell them that you Nazis are still after them.
 
Mass production follows mass demand which follows product innovation. Are you sure that you ever worked in business?

You have it precisely backwards. Which came first, Henry Ford's assembly line or the sale of 20 million Model 'T's?

Furthermore, as usual, you haven't answered the question: Why do you think the rules should be any different for a business than they are for you?

The concept of the assembly line was well established in the meat packing industry before Henry started tinkering.

I think that the concept that organizations are the same as individuals is ridiculous. SCOTUS says that it's a Constitutional guarantee, so it must be, but that doesn't make it any less ridiculous.

What's ridiculous about the concept that collections of individuals have the same rights as single individuals? Do you think the federal government should be able to expropriate the property of the Sierra Club? Should it be able to shut down MediaMatters.org?
 
You display the totalitarian attitude to a 'T', brainiac. All dictators believe citizens who fail to obey orders are "irresponsible." However, in a free country, citizens only have the responsibilities they agree to. Believe it nor not, starting a business doesn't make you responsible to some blowhard politicians.



I'm sure I would be, or better yet sent to a reeducation camp where I'll learn my "responsibilities," eh Colonel Klink?

The prototypical taker.

Who have I taken anything from? What have I taken?

Take is the opposite of give. You are unable to give. Ergo.......
 
Mass production follows mass demand which follows product innovation. Are you sure that you ever worked in business?

You have it precisely backwards. Which came first, Henry Ford's assembly line or the sale of 20 million Model 'T's?

Furthermore, as usual, you haven't answered the question: Why do you think the rules should be any different for a business than they are for you?

The concept of the assembly line was well established in the meat packing industry before Henry started tinkering.

I didn't say "THE assembly line," I said "Henry Ford's assembly line." He's the one who applied the concept to the production of manufactured products.

The indisputable fact is that the assembly line made Model 'T's very cheap and that led to mass sales, not the other way around.
 

Forum List

Back
Top