Republicans: why do you ignore the wealth inequality issue?

[Ernie S.]

Republicans: why do you ignore the wealth inequality issue?


I for one don't. I'd love for poor people to have more disposable income. They could afford to buy more of my products. However, their salary is their responsibility, not mine. It's my company. If I hire you, I will pay you what you are worth based on what you produce. I invested years and thousands of my dollars to build the business that employs you. I should be paid more than you. If you have a problem with that, save thousands, come up with a business plan and work 16 hours a day to get it off the ground and then pay your employees as much as you want. Just don't plan on staying in business too long.

 

[francoHFW]

--Exactly why, with Unions busted and the fair and just Greatest Generation no longer in charge, we need a living wage (and health reform-as costs are out of control, and continue to skyrocket).

 

[kwc57]

Sorry, guy, there is a pie.

It's called "The amount of profit an enterprise makes". And back in the 1950's or 60's, it was shared pretty fairly- if you were white and working class.

Hey dumb shit, what do you do when you eat a pie? You bake more. Sheesh! Wealth isn't finite.

 

[thereisnospoon]

If you didn't earn it, its not yours.

I fail to see the issue.

Maybe you could get a better job or go back to school and finish the 5th grade?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71mYgZAVvCU]7 Years of College Down The Drain - YouTube[/ame]

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Republicans: why do you ignore the wealth inequality issue?

Of course there will be more and more inequality of income and more as more Americans are put in entitlement programs and don't need to earn income.

 

[Liability]

Sorry, guy, there is a pie.

It's called "The amount of profit an enterprise makes". And back in the 1950's or 60's, it was shared pretty fairly- if you were white and working class.

Hey dumbs hit, what do you do when you eat a pie? You bake more. Sheesh! Wealth isn't finite.

Bake MORE pie!

Wealth isn't finite!

These notions could be a revelation to the loopy looney lefties IF they'd only open their eyes and ears and minds.

Which means, sadly, that it will not reveal a single thing to them.

Alas.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Why should one work hard and build a resume and profit off of it while another does nothing???

Cafe Hayek suggested the other day that the various welfare entitlements could be ended if each person who received the payments was assigned or matched with the actual person who earned the money that was the source of the payment.

With this level of honesty welfare would be ended and America would again become a very productive nation with everyone making a contribution rather than most becoming liberal leeches.

Like a big brother program.

That wouldn't work............

If they couldn't graduate high school or get a GED (nothing wrong with a GED) what makes anyone think a welfare recipient could follow along with complex ideas?

Many are on welfare because they're too stupid to do anything. Flipping a burger is either a) too difficult or b) not worth the time.

In my free time I like to play with AutoCad and design/improve buildings/parking lots (architecture/civil engineering) - many on social welfare would not be able to understand that program.

I suppose my point is that some just don't have the intelligence to understand some ideas - especially ideas that require higher learning math..

 

[freedombecki]

Republicans: why do you ignore the wealth inequality issue?


I for one don't. I'd love for poor people to have more disposable income. They could afford to buy more of my products. However, their salary is their responsibility, not mine. It's my company. If I hire you, I will pay you what you are worth based on what you produce. I invested years and thousands of my dollars to build the business that employs you. I should be paid more than you. If you have a problem with that, save thousands, come up with a business plan and work 16 hours a day to get it off the ground and then pay your employees as much as you want. Just don't plan on staying in business too long.

True words.

 

[Liability]

IGNORE income inequality?

IGNORE?

Fuck no.

Embrace it.

That's more like it.

 

[Avatar4321]

I still havent seen a good reason why I should hate someone just because he has more money than me.

 

[whitehall]

If you confiscate most of the income of the top 10% and turn it over to the federal government for redistribution there won't be a dime left over. The federal government does not create wealth. It confiscates money and uses it in the least efficient way because it doesn't have to be concerned about budgets. How did the system work out in Russia? Were you lefties in a coma during history class?

 

[Willys]

You seem to cry a great deal about the government.

lets see, what's different.

The rich have no affect on my life beyond providing me with a job and benefits that go to care and feed my family.

The government takes some of that money and removes my Constitutional rights, over spends , making the money I keep worth less, thus making it harder for me to care and feed my family.




Like I said, we, unlike you, are not a bunch of whinny crybabies.

The trickle down is a myth. Corporations are making record profits and taxes are at record lows. Where are the jobs exactly?

What does corporations making record profits and your wondering where the jobs are have to do with one another?

Apparently, some jobs are in the corporations, some in small business, some in government, and a few other options. Corporations are in business to make money and deal with the profits according to their corporate charter, to the satisfaction of the share holders. Small businesses can do with their profits as they choose, as long as legal. The government... well, they just take from the poor and give jobs to the worthless.

The first two are investments, producing rewards. The third is just theft.

 

[Mr.Nick]

If you confiscate most of the income of the top 10% and turn it over to the federal government for redistribution there won't be a dime left over. The federal government does not create wealth. It confiscates money and uses it in the least efficient way because it doesn't have to be concerned about budgets. How did the system work out in Russia? Were you lefties in a coma during history class?

They use money - taxpayer funds - to buy votes..

Look at welfare, unions, stimulus and bailouts..

Then you have programs like cash for clunkers which stimulated a demand for who? oh yeah UAW workers which also happen to be in Obama's pocket..

Obama belongs in prison on charges of treason...

If Bush was a war criminal Obama is one too....

Obama is 10x worse...

The tyrant just resigned the Patriot Act which state and local governments are abusing ..

"Hope and change" my ass - more like "Stalin and Pol Pot."

But hes a "liberal" so he must be good...

 

[Contumacious]

Republicans: why do you ignore the wealth inequality issue?The facts should anger you. .

mr fucktard, sir:

If you --really --hate being poor why the fuck don't you take a bath, learn a marketable skill, then go to work for a living.

.

 

[Willys]

The trickle down is a myth. Corporations are making record profits and taxes are at record lows. Where are the jobs exactly?

That really is a good question... where are the jobs???

The Prez has nixed the XL pipeline and the few jobs that go with that. Not to mention the rising cost of fuel. But consider that Warren Buffett owns himself some railroad... Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC. That railroad is prepared to carry the Canada production that the non-existent pipeline isn't going to carry.

So, where are the jobs? Ask the secretary of Presidential Puppet Master Warren Buffett, sitting in the guest box at the SOTU Tuesday night.

From the SF Gate dot com...

"Whatever people bring to us, we're ready to haul," Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett's Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in an interview. If Keystone XL "doesn't happen, we're here to haul."

Originally published by Bloomberg but mysteriously removed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Oh for criminies sakes, if you're going to opine about this law, Mr Nick, the very least you ought to do is learn what the law really says.

The estate tax is scheduled to a top rate of 35%.

The exemption amount is scheduled to be $5.0 million, or $10 million for married couples.

Not enough free money for you?

Poor little rich boy.

The amount is immaterial. The issue is that the federal government in it's arrogance beleives it is entitled to ANY part of an estate just because a person happens to die.
That money has been taxed many times over and government still wants another bite at the apple.
I once heard an interview of a top level IRS spokes person. She used the words "we let you keep"....I almost wanted to go the radio station and plant my foot in this woman's ass.
That phrase "we let you keep" presupposes the notion that all wealth belongs to government FIRST....Hogwash.
Unfortunately there are many people in this country who believe everything begins and ends with government.

From what I've seen, that's the primary difference between left and right when it comes to property, including the income that we earn from labor or investments. Those on the right, whether they fully think it through or not, embrace the Founderts' understanding that if personal property is not sacred and untouchable by govetrnment, there is no freedom. The government should receive, courtesy of the people, only as much as is necessary to fund the Constitutional functions of government. Those on the right are not given to class envy but see the infinite possibilities in a social contract in which the people are not servants of the government.

The left however, sees everything belonging to the collective and, whether they fully think it through or not, philosophically see the government as the entity that determines what rights, including property, that we will be allowed to have. If you read carefully what they write, the left embraces the concept of a monarchal government with rightful power over the people. They seem unable to conceive of a government as the servant of the people and resist that concept when it is put before them. They see that the duty of the people is to serve the government who then takes care of everybody who isn't rich. Class envy is just one of the phenomenon that helps them justify their ideology in their own minds.

The Founders gave us a Constitution and philosophy of government in which the people can be free, unfettered by whatever circumstances into which they are born, and where opportunity is there for the taking for everybody. It is ever more obvious that we are losing the heart and soul of that Constitution, however, and if we do not constantly defend and fight for it, it will soon be too late to reverse that trend.

They aren't taxing the dead person. They're taxing the recipient of a large sum of money. That's how taxes work.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Republicans don't care about wealth inequality because the people they work for don't want them to.

 

[Foxfyre]

The Republicans don't care about wealth inequality because the people they work for don't want them to.

Sure we do. We just think the way to correct income inequality without violating liberty, t unalienable rights, and self governance is to teach people how to become prosperous rather than make the successful less prosperous. When you have a society that is poorly educated, imbedded and trapped in an entitlement mentality, and that rewards bad choices, single parenthood, etc. etc. etc., you are going to have huge income inequality.

When we as a society once again promote staying in school and getting an education, staying away from illegal activities and substances, apprenticing in McJobs or whatever to develop a work ethic and reference and acquire marketable skills, and be able to support and family and get married before having kids, we will see a resurgence of a strong middle class and far less pronounced income inequality.

 

[Chris]

The Republicans don't care about wealth inequality because the people they work for don't want them to.

Sure we do. We just think the way to correct income inequality without violating liberty, t unalienable rights, and self governance is to teach people how to become prosperous rather than make the successful less prosperous. When you have a society that is poorly educated, imbedded and trapped in an entitlement mentality, and that rewards bad choices, single parenthood, etc. etc. etc., you are going to have huge income inequality.

When we as a society once again promote staying in school and getting an education, staying away from illegal activities and substances, apprenticing in McJobs or whatever to develop a work ethic and reference and acquire marketable skills, and be able to support and family and get married before having kids, we will see a resurgence of a strong middle class and far less pronounced income inequality.

The inequity was caused by the Reagan Bush tax cuts for the rich...

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry, guy, there is a pie.

It's called "The amount of profit an enterprise makes". And back in the 1950's or 60's, it was shared pretty fairly- if you were white and working class.

Oh please. Making up shit along the way does not make it fact.
This issue of alleged income or wealth inequality is based on the so-called "share" of the net wealth of the country. Not one individual firm.
For a moment, I'll play along.
So we have the XYZ corporation. They make widgets.
This is a privately held firm with 5 owners who administer the daily operations of the company.
There are 100 employees.
FY 2010 was a banner year for XYZ as they realized a net profit rise of 15% over the previous year.
All 100 employees are given a bonus of 15% of their weekly salary as a reward for a job well done. The company identified the workers most responsible for the terrific result and offered them 6% wage increases while the rest of the workers got the normal 3%.
In FY 2011, the company did not do as well. It realized a net profit of just 4%.
The owners paid themselves a bonus as well. 20% of their annual salaries.
Because expenses for new equipment were to rise for FY2012, the company offered only the standard increase for the best workers. Others received no increase. The 5 owners continue to draw their salaries in which they paid themselves cost of living increases.
No bonus for FY 2011 because the company under performed.
Do you see anything unjust in this scenario?
Whether you accept this or not, the above is the way a vast majority of businesses operate.

The problem is, the way most businesses work, they pay themselves bonuses whether times are good or not, and they don't really pay employees increases. ON the rare occassions they do, because unemployment is so low they might skip, those are the first guys to go in a recession.

Unions, on the other hand, offered protection from that kind of nonsense. Last hired, first fired, to start with. Layoffs that were exactly that, layoffs, not an excuse to trade down. And if you moved your factory to some third world shithole, you paid a hefty tariff to get it back into this country.