Shrink the Rich; Not Government

[Intense]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJWZ27OT16M&list=PLC508C05C017CEC8E&index=7&playnext=5[/ame]

 

[DiamondDave]

Does your 6 figure chump change ballot effect the same change as Warren Buffett's or the Koch brothers?

Slave.

I will ask the same questions again that relate to your assertion... you fucking idiot

Does every dollar vote? Or does every person?

Because I make 6 figures, is my vote counted more than your minimum wage salary from Burger King?

What my money buys or 'changes' in the private sector where my money is spent is not pertinent to your assertion

One person; one vote becomes meaningless when big money vets the candidates before you and I cast our ballots. When parasites like Buffett or the Koch brothers choose which candidates you or I are allowed to vote for, your six figure income and my $600/month SSA check have exactly the same chance of changing anything fundamental about how the rich rule in the "Land of the Free."

Ok Dorothy Hamill... skate around much??

I don't care if it is Bill Gates or Me or you working as a fry cook... nobody's vote counts for any more than anyone else's... PERIOD...

Buffett nor Kock nor Oprah nor anyone else chooses what candidates we are allowed to vote for.... PERIOD

You are a fucking idiot

 

[Flagwavrusa]

Im no socialist, but I see nothing wrong with tax legislation that addresses extreme wealth polarization. The 2% live lives of unbelievable luxury, raising their top tax rate a few percentage points is not going to crimp their lifestyle all that much. Implementing a death tax on the very wealthiest will hopefully help reduce the deficit (and not simply used by Dems for more spending) as well as alleviate concentration of wealth at the top.

The problem is we have become Mexico. A fabulously wealthy and privileged class uses its immense fortune to protect its place atop the social hierarchy, while the middle class continues to shrink. What we need, in this country that appears to be on the decline in relation to the rest of the world, is more opportunities for the middle class to become rich. The privileged class is primarily interested in maintaining the status quo, I see no redeeming value in any legislation that helps them to achieve this. Politicians should be focused on reducing government spending, getting government off the back of small businesses, paying off the debt, and increasing America's competiveness in that order. Extending tax breaks for the rich should not be a priority. This is an issue the Republicans should be willing to compromise on, the recent victory was not a mandate to enhance the privileged position of the wealthiest.

 

[Sallow]

There is a difference between the military and, day, welfare, which is undeniably socialism.

The military member earns his pay and benefits. The welfare recipient does not.

Doesn't matter. Socialism is not about earning pay or not. It's about who is providing the goods and services. With Socialism..it's the public sector..with Capitalism..it's the private sector.

You're looking at this through a biased lens..instead of squarely.

Well, there's also that Constitutional lens I'm looking through.

Which means what?

 

[Bern80]

How's the US middle class fared since the last Ronny moved into the White House?

You do understand the economic gains seen by the richest Americans since the mid-70s have come at the expense of the US middle class?

PS: Not everybody wants to be rich, but ALL the slaves do.

News to another anti-personal accounability liberal moron (that would be you). The middle class fares how the middle class CHOOSES to fair. Becoming wealthy is not something that just happens to people. Being middle class is not something that just happens to people.

The reason dip shits like you will not achieve wealth is because you don't hold yourself accountable for attaining wealth. You hold other people accountable and blame them for your lack of ability to set and work throught the goals necessary to achieve financial independence.

You can not change what you don't acknowledge and liberals consistently refuse to acknowledge their own role in the wealth they have attained. THAT is why the middle class stays middle class. I wrote this a few pages back that people like you need to wrap their pea brains around:

This class warefare thing is so fucking old. I really dont wonder why the people who piss and moan about the wealthy, aren't wealthy. I wonder why not.

Being wealthy isn't about this politcal advantage or that economic advantage. Attaining wealth takes a mind set that most people simply don't have. It isn't one of greed, or back stabbing or evil. It is about what they want out of life and how to get it. It's about goal setting. I want as much time to do what I want to do on this earth as I can possibly get. There are two other terms synonomous with time; freedom and money. More time equals more freedom. More money equals more freedom. More money equals more time. If I want time to experience all life has to offer that costs money so the goal is how do I acquire money so I have more time so I have more freedom. Isn't that what everyone wants? Life is short. You have to chalk up a third of it to sleeping alone. I would rather not chalk up another quarter to a fifth working 60 hours a week. Now I might earn money doing that, but making money that way doesn't translate into more time. The goal is to earn more money to attain more time. Not to work more time to attain money.

The wealthy understand a couple of things about attaining wealth; It isnt' about working hard. It's about working smart and it isn't about working for money, it's about money working for you. It's about wealth increasing without having to do anything. There is nothing inherently noble or righteous about working your fingers to the bone to earn money. Conversely there is nothing inherently evil about entering into voluntary contracts with people (i.e. being landlord, stock dividends, owning a business) that generate cash flow for you.

THAT is the difference between the haves and the have nots. Robert Kioysaki said the game of money is about who is indebted to whom. If you want to accumulate wealth you have to not only minimize who you are indebted to but also maximize who is indebted to you.

 

[Bern80]

Im no socialist, but I see nothing wrong with tax legislation that addresses extreme wealth polarization. The 2% live lives of unbelievable luxury, raising their top tax rate a few percentage points is not going to crimp their lifestyle all that much. Implementing a death tax on the very wealthiest will hopefully help reduce the deficit (and not simply used by Dems for more spending) as well as alleviate concentration of wealth at the top.

The problem you need to see with that is such a solution assumes that uneven wealth distribution has nothing to do with individual choices and everything to do with a system that somehow arbitrarily hands out varying amounts of money to people. That is simply not reality. Again, you can not come up with a solution if you have not correctly identified the problem.

 

[SuMar]

Im no socialist, but I see nothing wrong with tax legislation that addresses extreme wealth polarization. The 2% live lives of unbelievable luxury, raising their top tax rate a few percentage points is not going to crimp their lifestyle all that much. Implementing a death tax on the very wealthiest will hopefully help reduce the deficit (and not simply used by Dems for more spending) as well as alleviate concentration of wealth at the top.

The problem is we have become Mexico. A fabulously wealthy and privileged class uses its immense fortune to protect its place atop the social hierarchy, while the middle class continues to shrink. What we need, in this country that appears to be on the decline in relation to the rest of the world, is more opportunities for the middle class to become rich. The privileged class is primarily interested in maintaining the status quo, I see no redeeming value in any legislation that helps them to achieve this. Politicians should be focused on reducing government spending, getting government off the back of small businesses, paying off the debt, and increasing America's competiveness in that order. Extending tax breaks for the rich should not be a priority. This is an issue the Republicans should be willing to compromise on, the recent victory was not a mandate to enhance the privileged position of the wealthiest.

And what's wrong with someone of wealth being able to keep what they earn and pay the same tax percentage as anyone else?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Im no socialist, but I see nothing wrong with tax legislation that addresses extreme wealth polarization. The 2% live lives of unbelievable luxury, raising their top tax rate a few percentage points is not going to crimp their lifestyle all that much. Implementing a death tax on the very wealthiest will hopefully help reduce the deficit (and not simply used by Dems for more spending) as well as alleviate concentration of wealth at the top.

The problem you need to see with that is such a solution assumes that uneven wealth distribution has nothing to do with individual choices and everything to do with a system that somehow arbitrarily hands out varying amounts of money to people. That is simply not reality. Again, you can not come up with a solution if you have not correctly identified the problem.

I ask again.

3rd fucking time this thread alone.

Does ANYone think the current tax collection method and results in today's America is fair and/or efficient?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Im no socialist, but I see nothing wrong with tax legislation that addresses extreme wealth polarization. The 2% live lives of unbelievable luxury, raising their top tax rate a few percentage points is not going to crimp their lifestyle all that much. Implementing a death tax on the very wealthiest will hopefully help reduce the deficit (and not simply used by Dems for more spending) as well as alleviate concentration of wealth at the top.

The problem is we have become Mexico. A fabulously wealthy and privileged class uses its immense fortune to protect its place atop the social hierarchy, while the middle class continues to shrink. What we need, in this country that appears to be on the decline in relation to the rest of the world, is more opportunities for the middle class to become rich. The privileged class is primarily interested in maintaining the status quo, I see no redeeming value in any legislation that helps them to achieve this. Politicians should be focused on reducing government spending, getting government off the back of small businesses, paying off the debt, and increasing America's competiveness in that order. Extending tax breaks for the rich should not be a priority. This is an issue the Republicans should be willing to compromise on, the recent victory was not a mandate to enhance the privileged position of the wealthiest.

And what's wrong with someone of wealth being able to keep what they earn and pay the same tax percentage as anyone else?

Nothing.

Currently, the wealthiest 10% pay about 16%, the middle class pays about 32% and the poor pay nothing or get paid to stay on the sidelines.

Patently unfair.

 

[mudwhistle]

Do you find it offensive that the richest 10,000 Americans continue to increase their wealth as the rest of the world's population is sold austerity as the solution to the debt overhang the rich profit from?

No it's not offensive. What difference is it to you anyway? All this class-warfare won't change that. Do you think that raising taxes is gonna change all of that?? If you do you're a fool.

I mean really. In every society there is always gonna be those who have and those who have not. The value of any society is whether you have large numbers of those who can live comfortably or not. In Mexico you basically have two classes. The rich and the poor. There is little in between. Here at least a majority of us can live quality lives and not have to worry about stealing to prevent starvation.

Ever wonder why folks in 3rd world countries have no compunction to breaking our immigration laws? It's because they were born into a society where you had to break the rules in order to survive. Desperation gives you no choice.

Most Americans have never experienced real hunger. We haven't been that way since the 50s but for some strange reason our universities are breeding a pervasive attitude that this country is evil just because there are so many of us who can afford to live well.

Why is this???

Well that's easy; It's because the kids coming out of these liberal institutions have never experienced real hardship yet they swallow the examples presented to them by the elitists in this country hook, line, and sinker.

I fail to see why they're so wrapped around the axle about the rich when many of them are rich themselves or have never been poor. Skipping meals is not starvation. Try going a week without eating like I have. That will open your eyes for sure.

It really tickles me when some millionaire in congress or in Hollywood starts bitching about the rich not paying enough taxes. They're just repeating a popular mantra never thinking of the consequences their silly rhetoric would have on their personal fortunes if it were equally applied to them. Trust me....it will never happen. They may peal off a few bucks to dissuade their guilt but it will never effect them as long as they can pay their lawyer to shelter their assets. On the other hand the person that's living on the edge will always be made to suffer. The person that makes under half a million but is in a state where the value of his or her assets does not exceed their debt. These are the folks that well be hurt the most. Not the extremely wealthy.

Did you find the $13trillion Wall Street bail-out offensive?

What do you think will happen next spring if WikiLeaks FLUSHES Bank of America and/or JP Morgan into the same sewer Enron disappeared into?

While I believe you're correct about most Americans having never experienced hunger, statistics show rising demand for food stamps and food handouts. The American middle class is being told to tighten their belts while the richest 10,000 (0.01%) of the US population continues to prosper at the expense of the middle.

Finally, the way tax brackets are currently drawn, the truly rich will continue to deflect most of the tax pain onto those making $250,000 to $500,000 per year.

It's hard to see how voting for a Republican OR a Democrat will change that.

If you vote for a Republican you may get screwed. If you vote for a Democrat it's a certainty.

 

[mudwhistle]

Im no socialist, but I see nothing wrong with tax legislation that addresses extreme wealth polarization. The 2% live lives of unbelievable luxury, raising their top tax rate a few percentage points is not going to crimp their lifestyle all that much. Implementing a death tax on the very wealthiest will hopefully help reduce the deficit (and not simply used by Dems for more spending) as well as alleviate concentration of wealth at the top.

The problem is we have become Mexico. A fabulously wealthy and privileged class uses its immense fortune to protect its place atop the social hierarchy, while the middle class continues to shrink. What we need, in this country that appears to be on the decline in relation to the rest of the world, is more opportunities for the middle class to become rich. The privileged class is primarily interested in maintaining the status quo, I see no redeeming value in any legislation that helps them to achieve this. Politicians should be focused on reducing government spending, getting government off the back of small businesses, paying off the debt, and increasing America's competiveness in that order. Extending tax breaks for the rich should not be a priority. This is an issue the Republicans should be willing to compromise on, the recent victory was not a mandate to enhance the privileged position of the wealthiest.

And what's wrong with someone of wealth being able to keep what they earn and pay the same tax percentage as anyone else?

Nothing.

Currently, the wealthiest 10% pay about 16%, the middle class pays about 32% and the poor pay nothing or get paid to stay on the sidelines.

Patently unfair.

10 + 16 + 32 = 58%

Who pays the other 42???

 

[daveman]

In reality (something you're obviously not living within) the rich today are investing outside their backyards in "harder" currencies than the US dollar, i. e., in "economies not yet wrecked by neoliberals."

Professor Michael Hudson explains:

"Second, Obama’s Republican act (I hate to call it a compromise) 'frees' income for the wealthiest classes to send abroad, to economies not yet wrecked by neoliberals.

"This paves the way for a foreign-exchange crisis.

"Such crises traditionally fall in the autumn – and as the 2012 election draws near, it will be attributed to 'uncertainty' if voters do not throw the Democrats out.

"So to 'save the dollar' the Republicans will propose to replace progressive income taxation with a uniform flat tax (the old Steve Forbes plan) falling on wage earners, not on wealth or on finance, insurance or real estate (FIRE sector) income.

"A VAT will be added as an excise tax to push up consumer prices."

I'm sure your superiors will explain all this to your full satisfaction should it come to pass.

Slave.

And do you know whose fault it is that people are moving their money offshore?

Yours. You and other idiots who support and enact legislation hostile to business and punishing the successful.

If you want more money, get off your ass and get to work. Don't insist the government steal if for you.

So it's my fault people are moving their money offshore?

I thought it had something to do with comparative wage scales in the US versus Mexico or China.

Give me an example of legislation hostile to business I've supported, and then explain why I pay taxes at a 30% rate while the richest 10,000 Americans pay at about 20%.

That 10% difference in tax rates is the best example I've seen of government stealing money from those who work and giving it to those who invest.

"Tax the rich! Tax the rich!

...hey! Where did the rich people go?"

You really expect them to stick around and gladly let you lazy bastards steal everything they've got?

Yes. You probably do.

I repeat: No one is holding you down but you. Get off your lazy ass and get to work. You don't deserve other people's stuff, no matter how much you whine about how unfair it all is. This isn't kindergarten, Skippy, this is real life. Grow up and get to work.

 

[AVG-JOE]

And what's wrong with someone of wealth being able to keep what they earn and pay the same tax percentage as anyone else?

Nothing.

Currently, the wealthiest 10% pay about 16%, the middle class pays about 32% and the poor pay nothing or get paid to stay on the sidelines.

Patently unfair.

10 + 16 + 32 = 58%

Who pays the other 42???

Not of the total, MW! Pass that this way and put on your thinkin' cap.

The wealthiest 10% of Americans pay 16% of their incomes, the middle class pays 32% of their incomes and the poor pay nothing or get back more than what they pay in during the year via tax credits.

 

[daveman]

Doesn't matter. Socialism is not about earning pay or not. It's about who is providing the goods and services. With Socialism..it's the public sector..with Capitalism..it's the private sector.

You're looking at this through a biased lens..instead of squarely.

Well, there's also that Constitutional lens I'm looking through.

Which means what?

Oh, you know, what kind of stuff is in the Constitution and what isn't.

 

[daveman]

Im no socialist, but I see nothing wrong with tax legislation that addresses extreme wealth polarization. The 2% live lives of unbelievable luxury, raising their top tax rate a few percentage points is not going to crimp their lifestyle all that much. Implementing a death tax on the very wealthiest will hopefully help reduce the deficit (and not simply used by Dems for more spending) as well as alleviate concentration of wealth at the top.

The problem you need to see with that is such a solution assumes that uneven wealth distribution has nothing to do with individual choices and everything to do with a system that somehow arbitrarily hands out varying amounts of money to people. That is simply not reality. Again, you can not come up with a solution if you have not correctly identified the problem.

I ask again.

3rd fucking time this thread alone.

Does ANYone think the current tax collection method and results in today's America is fair and/or efficient?

It's certainly not efficient. But fair? Like I told George, this isn't kindergarten.

 

[mudwhistle]

Nothing.

Currently, the wealthiest 10% pay about 16%, the middle class pays about 32% and the poor pay nothing or get paid to stay on the sidelines.

Patently unfair.

10 + 16 + 32 = 58%

Who pays the other 42???

Not of the total, MW! Pass that this way and put on your thinkin' cap.

The wealthiest 10% of Americans pay 16% of their incomes, the middle class pays 32% of their incomes and the poor pay nothing or get back more than what they pay in during the year via tax credits.

I'm just going by what you said. The second version makes more sense.

 

[AVG-JOE]

The problem you need to see with that is such a solution assumes that uneven wealth distribution has nothing to do with individual choices and everything to do with a system that somehow arbitrarily hands out varying amounts of money to people. That is simply not reality. Again, you can not come up with a solution if you have not correctly identified the problem.

I ask again.

3rd fucking time this thread alone.

Does ANYone think the current tax collection method and results in today's America is fair and/or efficient?

It's certainly not efficient. But fair? Like I told George, this isn't kindergarten.

Nice side-step Daveman.

Obviously most conservatives believe that the poor are not pulling their fair share of the weight of the tax burden in this country so let's leave them out of the equation.

That being said, do you believe that the super wealthy, who pay about 16% of their incomes in taxes, and the middle class, who fork over an average of around 32% of their incomes, are all paying their own FAIR share of the money that must be collected to keep this country running?

Remember... how efficiently the country is running and what the money is being spent on, while a very valid question, is a different question.​

 

[Lasher]

Thanks Comrade!

"Comrade," eh? Why is it that commies are always the big losers in life who covet other peoples' property? Can't you people try harder to succeed instead of asking the government to steal the things that belong to those of us who work hard for our possessions? Is it satisfying to attain the property of others instead of earning your own?

 

[Lasher]

Im no socialist, but I see nothing wrong with tax legislation that addresses extreme wealth polarization. The 2% live lives of unbelievable luxury, raising their top tax rate a few percentage points is not going to crimp their lifestyle all that much. Implementing a death tax on the very wealthiest will hopefully help reduce the deficit (and not simply used by Dems for more spending) as well as alleviate concentration of wealth at the top.

The problem is we have become Mexico. A fabulously wealthy and privileged class uses its immense fortune to protect its place atop the social hierarchy, while the middle class continues to shrink. What we need, in this country that appears to be on the decline in relation to the rest of the world, is more opportunities for the middle class to become rich. The privileged class is primarily interested in maintaining the status quo, I see no redeeming value in any legislation that helps them to achieve this. Politicians should be focused on reducing government spending, getting government off the back of small businesses, paying off the debt, and increasing America's competiveness in that order. Extending tax breaks for the rich should not be a priority. This is an issue the Republicans should be willing to compromise on, the recent victory was not a mandate to enhance the privileged position of the wealthiest.

And what's wrong with someone of wealth being able to keep what they earn and pay the same tax percentage as anyone else?

Nothing.

Currently, the wealthiest 10% pay about 16%, the middle class pays about 32% and the poor pay nothing or get paid to stay on the sidelines.

Patently unfair.

Who pays the other 52%?

 

[AVG-JOE]

And what's wrong with someone of wealth being able to keep what they earn and pay the same tax percentage as anyone else?

Nothing.

Currently, the wealthiest 10% pay about 16%, the middle class pays about 32% and the poor pay nothing or get paid to stay on the sidelines.

Patently unfair.

Who pays the other 52%?

Try to keep up, Newbie.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/146106-shrink-the-rich-not-government-16.html#post3096821