Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why should it be that, comrade?
And if you steal from those who produce to give to those who do not, how long would the mean GDP stay at this level? Why would Andrew Gove design chips if he is to be robbed and get the same as a wino rotting in a alley? Why would Bill Gates design marvelous software? Why would Steve Jobs steal what Gates created and market it to drooling sycophants?
What you communists cannot grasp is motivation. Your greed creates nothing. If you succeed in robbing others, what motivation do they have to produce and create?
Typical juvenile idiotic grossly oversimplified black and white non thinking. Probably from the Ayn Rand Classic Comic.
All of those people started with nothing and that's when they did their best work. Anybody who's good works hard because that's who they are. Only people like you believe that only greedy people work hard. It's a myth.
So you think Andy Grove and Bill Gates would have worked just as hard if they knew the government was going to confiscate every dime they had?
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.
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.
Honey, the separation of powers, checks and balances, and protections against conflicts of interest under the Constitution have already been BYPASSED by Corporations that abuse both individual rights and collective influence/authority/resources AT THE SAME TIME.
The legal and legislative systems have been bought out and corrupted because of this monopoly tied in with lawyers/judges that there is not enough check on.
Wake up. We might be able to clarify and add laws to check these Corporations and the legal system by requiring Corporations and large organizations to abide by the same Bill of Rights and Code of Ethics as govt when they apply to be licensed by govt to operate.
If we required the legal system to resolve conflicts by consensus where there was restitution paid to the victims and to taxpayers for the costs of resolving charges and claims, including restitution to taxpayers for govt abuses of authority and resources,
then maybe we could get out of the mess we're in.
Sitting around waiting for other people to fix things is letting Corporations continue to take advantage of the fact we are divided by party. So the first step is to quit that, so these third parties profiting from the conflict don't keep making money off problems and charging taxpayers for the cost.
The Constitution is the bylaws for government. The body of law legislated by Congress over the years is what defines legal behavior for people and organizations.
And people and organizations constantly challenge that law and thats why enforcement is such a huge expense (read big government) for us. The only thing more expensive would be not enforcing our laws.
As I said before, the biggest problems of today are in the business sector achieving growth. They've lost the handle and presently we're losing to global competition.
It will be a race between business finding growth again and our deteriorating society. Every year of deterioration will make the business challenge more difficult.
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.
IOh 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?
The fact that Dumbo Dubya got an MBA from one of the elite colleges proves that it is a diploma for dipshits.
How many years, numbnuts, was the Model T sold? What happened to the old ones when new ones replaced them? What was the impact of the Ford payroll on the rest of the economy? How many employees benefited over the years?
One thing is clear. If you were Henry, Ford would be an unknown name today.
IF an employee bought a new one every year it would have to have been sold for 40 years for the employees to buy the entire stock. The Model 'T' was sold from 1908 to 1926. A its peak of production in 1925 Ford sold 2 million Model 'T's. How many of those do you suppose his work force purchased?
Face it, your story is a fairy tale. It's not true. The impact of the Ford payroll on the economy is irrelevant. The only question here is whether Ford could make a profit by paying his workers enough to buy all his cars. That claim is clearly false. It's a union myth used to justify their extortionist wage demands.
It's a well known fact despite your arithmetic and defense of paying wealth creators as little as possible. I think those facts explain your failure. And the failure of all those who believe that it's possible to shrink to success. Send your jobs and therefore customers to China and wonder where your success went.
I keep hearing liberals say day after day, "the rich need to pay their fair share!"
But when asked how much the "fair share" actually is, they have no idea and never come out with a specific number..
How much money did you make last year?
Mail all of it in - that IS your fair share.
.
Typical juvenile idiotic grossly oversimplified black and white non thinking. Probably from the Ayn Rand Classic Comic.
All of those people started with nothing and that's when they did their best work. Anybody who's good works hard because that's who they are. Only people like you believe that only greedy people work hard. It's a myth.
So you think Andy Grove and Bill Gates would have worked just as hard if they knew the government was going to confiscate every dime they had?
Look at his post. He clearly thinks they were successful because they had nothing, not because they anticipated having something. And he seems to think that being talented and skilled is like being autistic, where you just do whatever it is you do in blissful oblivion to everything around you.
I keep hearing liberals say day after day, "the rich need to pay their fair share!"
But when asked how much the "fair share" actually is, they have no idea and never come out with a specific number..
How much money did you make last year?
Mail all of it in - that IS your fair share.
.
I have said in earlier posts that history shows 45% in times of peace would probably be sufficient. If you have major operations overseas 70% to 90% is justified.
I see. So you are ok with taking 90% of someone else's income so far as it's not your income that about sum up your view here? I think I'm onto something here. Let's take 90% of everyone's 401k assets and eliminate all income taxes. There you go. That's the way to redistribute. Let's do this right. I mean why should you need to have more money in retirement than anyone else? After all any thing you have that made you rich, by your definition, must have been ill-gotten gains. Am I right, or what?Because the people who you're talking about are very fat and comfortable here. They know that there isn't a better deal in the world.
You completely missed most of the questions.
To the one question you did answer... Why do you assume they are comfortable, why do you assume they will report the same income and pay the (90%?) tax, why do you assume we won't just have new loop holes like we did in the past when the rates were high, and why you assume there are and will be no better deals elsewhere?
Do you really think they moved to China because it's a better deal here?
Let's say you have 2mil in the bank right now in your 401k. If the government said they will take 90% of it next year are you gonna be fat and comfortable with that? I mean why do you need more than 200k in savings?
But the government didn't say that, did they. We need to get the revenue to pay Bush's unpaid bills by raising tax revenues until, like a business, we start losing "customers". I predict that's a long way off.
Because the people who you're talking about are very fat and comfortable here. They know that there isn't a better deal in the world.
You completely missed most of the questions.
To the one question you did answer... Why do you assume they are comfortable, why do you assume they will report the same income and pay the (90%?) tax, why do you assume we won't just have new loop holes like we did in the past when the rates were high, and why you assume there are and will be no better deals elsewhere?
Do you really think they moved to China because it's a better deal here?
Let's say you have 2mil in the bank right now in your 401k. If the government said they will take 90% of it next year are you gonna be fat and comfortable with that? I mean why do you need more than 200k in savings?
They sent middle class job to China. "They", those that did that in exchange for mega bonuses, didn't leave. That would be inconvenient. They just harvested their workers careers.
You completely missed most of the questions.
To the one question you did answer... Why do you assume they are comfortable, why do you assume they will report the same income and pay the (90%?) tax, why do you assume we won't just have new loop holes like we did in the past when the rates were high, and why you assume there are and will be no better deals elsewhere?
Do you really think they moved to China because it's a better deal here?
Let's say you have 2mil in the bank right now in your 401k. If the government said they will take 90% of it next year are you gonna be fat and comfortable with that? I mean why do you need more than 200k in savings?
They sent middle class job to China. "They", those that did that in exchange for mega bonuses, didn't leave. That would be inconvenient. They just harvested their workers careers.
Some did, other Executives had to move to China. I know, I was given an offer for promotion to an Executive level position (Distinguished Engineer / Director of a Division in China). The catch was I would have had to move, and become an Ex-Patriot.
I have said in earlier posts that history shows 45% in times of peace would probably be sufficient. If you have major operations overseas 70% to 90% is justified.
"Sufficient" for what? You have to be insane to believe high marginal rates are beneficial for the economy. You picked one period in history when the rest of the world had been bombed into the Stone Age as evidence that high marginal rates are good for the economy. Of course you are ignoring the fact that Hoover jacked up marginal rates to 75% during his administration, and FDR jacked them up to 90%. What was the result? 12 years of unemployment at over 17%.
When Kennedy lowered marginal rates to 70%, the economy boomed. When Reagan lowered them to 28%, the economy boomed even more. When Coolidge lowered them in the 20s, the economy boomed. Prior to 1916 we had no income tax, and the economy boomed from the Civil War to WW I.
There is no theory of economics that would advocate high marginal tax rates as a condition for economic growth.
They sent middle class job to China. "They", those that did that in exchange for mega bonuses, didn't leave. That would be inconvenient. They just harvested their workers careers.
Some did, other Executives had to move to China. I know, I was given an offer for promotion to an Executive level position (Distinguished Engineer / Director of a Division in China). The catch was I would have had to move, and become an Ex-Patriot.
Work the numbers. The present level of unemployment is caused by the consumption loss from all of those workers here who are now unemployed, less the excess government stimulation spending.
Your hero executives, following make more money regardless of the cost to others, shot business in the foot. And they took that shot because it was huge personally rewarding.
Is that a screwed up system or what?
Some did, other Executives had to move to China. I know, I was given an offer for promotion to an Executive level position (Distinguished Engineer / Director of a Division in China). The catch was I would have had to move, and become an Ex-Patriot.
Work the numbers. The present level of unemployment is caused by the consumption loss from all of those workers here who are now unemployed, less the excess government stimulation spending.
Your hero executives, following make more money regardless of the cost to others, shot business in the foot. And they took that shot because it was huge personally rewarding.
Is that a screwed up system or what?
"unemployment" figures are cooked up by politicians as a way to fool you and the dumb masses.
Labor participation rate is the correct gauge and over the last 5 years it has decreased more than at any time in the last 60 years.
Included in that rate are people that do not seek work for various reasons including they do not need to work as they received social security disability, which is very easy to get and has also risen higher over the last 5 years than ever, other forms of government benefits that have them where they do not wish to work, low or no skills for what the market demands which is also rising in America where colleges and universities are issuing degrees in areas where there are no jobs available and where the worker refuses to seek training in an area where there are jobs available.
LPR is now at 62% which is the lowest in 60 years. A Mexican man can come here, barely speak the language and find work and many Americans claim they can not.
Because the people who you're talking about are very fat and comfortable here. They know that there isn't a better deal in the world.
So how does that entitle you or anyone else to any of their stuff? .
They lucked out by being born here. Luck isn't free.
They sent middle class job to China. "They", those that did that in exchange for mega bonuses, didn't leave. That would be inconvenient. They just harvested their workers careers.
Some did, other Executives had to move to China. I know, I was given an offer for promotion to an Executive level position (Distinguished Engineer / Director of a Division in China). The catch was I would have had to move, and become an Ex-Patriot.
Work the numbers. The present level of unemployment is caused by the consumption loss from all of those workers here who are now unemployed, less the excess government stimulation spending.
Your hero executives, following make more money regardless of the cost to others, shot business in the foot. And they took that shot because it was hugely, personally rewarding.
Is that a screwed up system or what?
They sent middle class job to China. "They", those that did that in exchange for mega bonuses, didn't leave. That would be inconvenient. They just harvested their workers careers.
Some did, other Executives had to move to China. I know, I was given an offer for promotion to an Executive level position (Distinguished Engineer / Director of a Division in China). The catch was I would have had to move, and become an Ex-Patriot.
Work the numbers. The present level of unemployment is caused by the consumption loss from all of those workers here who are now unemployed, less the excess government stimulation spending.
Your hero executives, following make more money regardless of the cost to others, shot business in the foot. And they took that shot because it was hugely, personally rewarding.
Is that a screwed up system or what?
I have said in earlier posts that history shows 45% in times of peace would probably be sufficient. If you have major operations overseas 70% to 90% is justified.
"Sufficient" for what? You have to be insane to believe high marginal rates are beneficial for the economy. You picked one period in history when the rest of the world had been bombed into the Stone Age as evidence that high marginal rates are good for the economy. Of course you are ignoring the fact that Hoover jacked up marginal rates to 75% during his administration, and FDR jacked them up to 90%. What was the result? 12 years of unemployment at over 17%.
When Kennedy lowered marginal rates to 70%, the economy boomed. When Reagan lowered them to 28%, the economy boomed even more. When Coolidge lowered them in the 20s, the economy boomed. Prior to 1916 we had no income tax, and the economy boomed from the Civil War to WW I.
There is no theory of economics that would advocate high marginal tax rates as a condition for economic growth.
sufficient to pay for government and to pay down debt.
Of course you can lower rates and the economy booms. But if you are not paying down debt or are in fact accumulating it, as Reagan was, it will eventually catch up to you.
So how does that entitle you or anyone else to any of their stuff? .
They lucked out by being born here. Luck isn't free.
Even if you work your way up the ladder based on your talent, you're lucky to find a company that lets you do that instead of requiring you to sacrifice your personal life and personality by becoming a workoholic bootlicker, which has nothing to do with talent. Only 5% of the people find jobs that reward without crushing the individual. Of course, the Capitaliban preach that the Magic Market rewards practically all jobs rationally under their Greedhead utopia and luck has little to do with it. How can it be rational when it means mindless submission to uncontrollable outside forces?
Another example of luck is that unknowable outside factors create opportunities, making choices into blind guesses. Successful people mostly made their "right" choices purely by accident. A typical example I found out about in 1980 was someone who got into geology when it was just for professors, like anthropology. The oil business suddenly boomed and he became a millionaire, totally unexpectedly. The earliest computer millionaires were just hobbyists who had no idea their playthings would have much practical value.
On the opposite side, someone right after World War II could have plausibly predicted that helicopters would replace trucks and buses. Didn't happen, for reasons too complicated for anyone to understand except by hindsight.
