Shrink the Rich; Not Government

[The T]

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.

And these types would be so vindictive to craft LAW that prohibits the exodus of the so-called rich...

NOT trying to give them any ideas mind you, but rather trying to follow the natural progression of their predictable, vindictive behaviour.

 

[AVG-JOE]

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

Sorry, Bud... that was impetuous of me. Just 'cause you're the second guy to ask the same question doesn't mean you deserve a flippant response. In fact, it gives credibility to the apparent vagueness of my original post.

I apologize.

 

[daveman]

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.​

No side-step. Who told you life was supposed to be fair?

 

[daveman]

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.

And these types would be so vindictive to craft LAW that prohibits the exodus of the so-called rich...

NOT trying to give them any ideas mind you, but rather trying to follow the natural progression of their predictable, vindictive behaviour.

Progressivism: Ideas so great, they have to be mandated by law!

 

[AVG-JOE]

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.​

No side-step. Who told you life was supposed to be fair?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...d-and-ask-again-three-times-start-a-poll.html

 

[The T]

"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.

And these types would be so vindictive to craft LAW that prohibits the exodus of the so-called rich...

NOT trying to give them any ideas mind you, but rather trying to follow the natural progression of their predictable, vindictive behaviour.

Progressivism: Ideas so great, they have to be mandated by law!

And nevermind that most of it is and always has been UnConstitutional...and unchallanged...until now. Better late than never.

 

[hortysir]

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.

So, basically, punish success and remove the incentive to succeed?

American Dream?


naahhh....too expensive, I'll pass

 

[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 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 have absolutely no problem with wealth accumulation, in fact I celebrate it. I do have a problem with ensconced wealth, as we have here in America, when it gets in the way of long term prosperity and the survival of America. The primary problem is that when too many people believe the system is unfair they want to transform it, and you have social instability and a lack of loyalty to the country. The Democratic party has become radicalized because too many people feel that they are being unfairly left out of the bounty this country has to offer, and to some extent their complaints are not unfounded.

This massive income inequality has little to do with individual choices, and mainly the deck being stacked. The powerful wealthy class selfishly erects the system in a way to perpetuate their position, and stave off potential competition from below. A perfect example is illegal immigration. In 2009 half a million illegals took up residence in America to satisfy the demand for immigrant labor. Demand for immigrant labor? Last time I checked we have almost 10% officially unemployed, and 17% real unemployment, so what do we need to import labor for. If politicians represented middle class interests, they would end illegals working in this country tomorrow, which they could do it if they really wanted to. This would cure the unemployment problem overnight as unemployed Americans would fill those positions. Why does this not happen? Because it would transfer wealth from the aristocracy to the middle class with a sharp rise in the cost of labor. No question, the elites knowingly permit illegal immigration to insure a surplus pool of labor to keep labor costs down and their share of income higher, and screw the middle class.

Making the right choices makes you rich? If this were true tens of millions of middle class would be rich. You cannot reach middle class status without making good decisions. But the vast majority of people cannot become rich for many reasons. Factors such as where they live, opportunities they may or may not have, how much money they start out life with, whether they are attractive ( studies have shown this influences income), and so forth come into play. The biggest factor is the natural distribution of intelligence among the population which relegates the majority to no higher than middle class status because they are not smart enough to invent, manage, or otherwise offer something to society that would bring them riches ( read The Bell Curve).

The picture changes if you are fortunate enough to be born into wealth. George Bush was a bit of a playboy and made many a bad decision in his youth but still became rich and President. I happen to believe that Bush is intelligent, but no one would ever go so far as to say the man is a genius. He never struck me as a workaholic either. The extent of his success is almost entirely attributable to being born into privilege.

I don't see any need for the government to cut taxes for people like the Bushes, and many other family names that could be mentioned who are part of the 6 million wealthiest 2 percent. If it were up to me id take 50% of the wealth of anyone with assets exceeding $5 million upon death and apply it toward the national debt. Two generations ago the average ceo earned 40 times that of the average worker, today its a factor of many hundreds to one. I think we need to get back more to a 40 to 1 ratio so we don't end up looking like Mexico, or worse, 17th century France.

 

[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 have absolutely no problem with wealth accumulation, in fact I celebrate it. I do have a problem with ensconced wealth, as we have here in America, when it gets in the way of long term prosperity and the survival of America. The primary problem is that when too many people believe the system is unfair they want to transform it, and you have social instability and a lack of loyalty to the country. The Democratic party has become radicalized because too many people feel that they are being unfairly left out of the bounty this country has to offer, and to some extent their complaints are not unfounded.

This massive income inequality has little to do with individual choices, and mainly the deck being stacked. The powerful wealthy class selfishly erects the system in a way to perpetuate their position, and stave off potential competition from below. A perfect example is illegal immigration. In 2009 half a million illegals took up residence in America to satisfy the demand for immigrant labor. Demand for immigrant labor? Last time I checked we have almost 10% officially unemployed, and 17% real unemployment, so what do we need to import labor for. If politicians represented middle class interests, they would end illegals working in this country tomorrow, which they could do it if they really wanted to. This would cure the unemployment problem overnight as unemployed Americans would fill those positions. Why does this not happen? Because it would transfer wealth from the aristocracy to the middle class with a sharp rise in the cost of labor. No question, the elites knowingly permit illegal immigration to insure a surplus pool of labor to keep labor costs down and their share of income higher, and screw the middle class.

Making the right choices makes you rich? If this were true tens of millions of middle class would be rich. You cannot reach middle class status without making good decisions. But the vast majority of people cannot become rich for many reasons. Factors such as where they live, opportunities they may or may not have, how much money they start out life with, whether they are attractive ( studies have shown this influences income), and so forth come into play. The biggest factor is the natural distribution of intelligence among the population which relegates the majority to no higher than middle class status because they are not smart enough to invent, manage, or otherwise offer something to society that would bring them riches ( read The Bell Curve).

The picture changes if you are fortunate enough to be born into wealth. George Bush was a bit of a playboy and made many a bad decision in his youth but still became rich and President. I happen to believe that Bush is intelligent, but no one would ever go so far as to say the man is a genius. He never struck me as a workaholic either. The extent of his success is almost entirely attributable to being born into privilege.

I don't see any need for the government to cut taxes for people like the Bushes, and many other family names that could be mentioned who are part of the 6 million wealthiest 2 percent. If it were up to me id take 50% of the wealth of anyone with assets exceeding $5 million upon death and apply it toward the national debt. Two generations ago the average ceo earned 40 times that of the average worker, today its a factor of many hundreds to one. I think we need to get back more to a 40 to 1 ratio so we don't end up looking like Mexico, or worse, 17th century France.

I don't agree with a 50% death tax on estates valued over $5 million - I think that would be unfair. I also think you're wrong about GW Bush - He's a smart son-of-a-bitch... He used the tools at his disposal, including The Presidency, to make his rich friends wealthy and his wealthy friends disgusting; just like he told them he would at various fund raisers back in '98 & '99.

Other than that... nice post, Bud.

 

[georgephillip]

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

Money chooses which candidates we are allowed to vote for.

Most of the time the candidate who raises the most money wins. Not always.
But often enough anyone without ideological blinders on can see it occurring.

As the gap between the rich and the rest of society continues to widen, democracy will fade and fascism will rise.

Which will you choose?

 

[daveman]

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.​

No side-step. Who told you life was supposed to be fair?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...d-and-ask-again-three-times-start-a-poll.html

 

[daveman]

And these types would be so vindictive to craft LAW that prohibits the exodus of the so-called rich...

NOT trying to give them any ideas mind you, but rather trying to follow the natural progression of their predictable, vindictive behaviour.

Progressivism: Ideas so great, they have to be mandated by law!

And nevermind that most of it is and always has been UnConstitutional...and unchallanged...until now. Better late than never.

It's not broken beyond repair.

 

[The T]

Progressivism: Ideas so great, they have to be mandated by law!

And nevermind that most of it is and always has been UnConstitutional...and unchallanged...until now. Better late than never.

It's not broken beyond repair.

Indeed and that's the point. Stopping it before it becomes unrepairable sans scratching it and starting again.

 

[hipeter924]

The government is rich, so good luck with that.

 

[The T]

The government is rich, so good luck with that.

On the backs of those they supposedly represent...and the people have a remedy for that courtesy of the Founders and their wisdom...

 

[daveman]

And nevermind that most of it is and always has been UnConstitutional...and unchallanged...until now. Better late than never.

It's not broken beyond repair.

Indeed and that's the point. Stopping it before it becomes unrepairable sans scratching it and starting again.

They're trying their damnedest, though.

 

[The T]

It's not broken beyond repair.

Indeed and that's the point. Stopping it before it becomes unrepairable sans scratching it and starting again.

They're trying their damnedest, though.

They may think it. The Founders gave us the option of a restart in thier writings regarding tyrants...even domestic ones.

 

[daveman]

Indeed and that's the point. Stopping it before it becomes unrepairable sans scratching it and starting again.

They're trying their damnedest, though.

They may think it. The Founders gave us the option of a restart in thier writings regarding tyrants...even domestic ones.

Yup, that was in my oath of enlistment.

 

[The T]

They're trying their damnedest, though.

They may think it. The Founders gave us the option of a restart in thier writings regarding tyrants...even domestic ones.

Yup, that was in my oath of enlistment.

As it was in mine the same i think. Just because I am not active in the Military any longer does not abridge my responsibility to stay true to it.

(As it should for every citizen worth thier American Salt).

 

[georgephillip]

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.

Extending tax breaks for the rich should not be a priority, I agree: however, the giveaway the Obama has accomplished may well usher in Republican majorities to legislate the Bush cuts permanently in 2012.

At a cost of about $4 trillion over time.

I don't see a solution if voters limit their "choice" to Republican OR Democrat. Both parties serve Wall Street, the Pentagon and Israel, although maybe not in that precise order. Both parties depend on the richest 2% for the lion's share of campaign donations.

It's important to try and get a sense of where the status quo is leading. One possibility is provided by Michael Hudson, a former Wall Street economist and current professor at the University of Missouri KC:

"So the game plan is not merely to free the income of the wealthiest class to 'offshore' itself into assets denominated in harder currencies abroad.

"It is to scrap the progressive tax system altogether.

"The Democratic Congress is making only token handwringing protests against this plan, no doubt with an eye looking forward to the campaign contributors two years down the road.

"Crises usually are orchestrated years in advance. Any economic recovery typically is shaped by the way in which its predecessor economy collapsed. Medieval Europe’s emergence from the Dark Age, for example, was shaped by ancient Rome’s debt crisis caused by its aggressive oligarchy.

"In a similar fashion, the coming epochal tax shift off finance and property onto labor will be introduced in response to the dollar’s crisis, in much the way that we have seen Ireland and Greece tap their pension funds to bail out reckless bankers.

"In America as in Europe, the large 'systemically important banks' that caused the crisis will be given enough money by the government – at the expense of labor ('taxpayers') to step in and 'rescue' the bad debt overhang (i.e., toxic junk).

"The tactics of this fiscal game sequence are so time-tested that there should not be much surprise.

Hudson likes to point out that for thousands of years before anyone coined the word "socialism" all governments served to socialize cost and privatize profit.

I think we are about to see Republicans AND Democrats take that ancient maxim to a level beyond democracy.

Obama's Sellout...