The Question Conservatives Can't Answer

[yidnar]

Conservatives can answer it. The federal government doesn't generate income.

Sure it does. NASA has over two thousand patents that generate hundreds of billions of dollars from both patent sales and licensing. Everyone knows that.

they get most of their funding from private companies to test,and develop new technology.

 

[yidnar]

Hmmm. It seems that you guys don't want to discuss anything that doesn't demonize or blame "the other side" completely. The points below don't point the finger at the rich but on the other side, they do legitimately criticize certain policies which are currently backed by the GOP. But nah. Keep on talking about why none of those points are relevant and it's the "the danm Socialist Dems fault" or that people who don't take the risk to start their own business, are "victimized". Okay, if that's your cup of tea. But neither ConservaRepubs nor LibDems seem to be posting much that is based on more than emotion or the talking points fed by the pundits. Just an observation...

I'm not a "Con" (although I've been called it a few times) but I'll offer a few ideas.
1. Technology. It has had the same effect on wealth creation as on many other things: acceleration. While technology has contributed to the decline of income from all those people who used to work at say, printing shops or travel agencies, it has increased the amount and rate at which the rich can leverage their specialized knowledge (i.e. how to get rich or richer) into even more wealth.
2. Globalization. We can monitor the NIKKEI in real time, send and receive contracts, orders etc... across the globe in seconds. So people who have the ability to get rich, have certain skills. Now they can leverage them even more efficiently and in more places.
3. In one respect you're right - but not when it comes to personal tax breaks. Where you're right is Corps. Corporations have been given BILLIONS is special tax breaks, subsidies etc... since the 80's, that they never used to get. It used to be, these tax breaks and subsidies were reserved only for businesses that were helping the public good (like phone companies putting phone lines in rural areas that wouldn't be profitible to them, because of the low number of customers) but now? Big Oil? Other Multi-National companies? They are not providing some new technology or service that Americans wouldn't otherwise have. They aren't building bridges or infrastructure. They haven't been for decades. But they still get our money. This defnitely helps the rich get richer and faster.

So I'm not demonizing the rich. I don't fault them their success and I feel blessed to have mine. I'm just making an Independent's observations.

hey man pick a side or SHUT THE HELL UP!!

 

[skookerasbil]

"The following fact was sent to numerous conservative pundits, politicians, and profit-seekers:

"Based on Tax Foundation figures, the richest 1% has TRIPLED its share of America's income over the past 30 years. Much of the gain came from tax cuts and minimally taxed financial instruments.

"If their income had increased only at the pace of American productivity (80%), they would be taking about a TRILLION DOLLARS LESS out of our economy.

"And a question was posed:

"In what way do the richest 1% deserve these extraordinary gains?

"This question was not posed in sarcasm.

"A factual answer is genuinely sought.

"It seems unlikely that 1% of the population worked three times harder than the rest of us, or contributed three times as much to American productivity.

"Money earned from tax cuts and minimally taxed financial instruments is not productive income."

Any takers, Cons?

The Question Conservatives Can't Answer | Common Dreams

C'mon s0n.........."CommonDreams" is a hyper-far left website like all the k00k left websites you post up.

The class warfare crap is an excercise in epic fAiL in 2011. Taxes aint going up s0n = 100% certainty. Whine like a limpwrister all you want........I'll be sitting here on the sidelines laughing my balls off. Just like the president.......9 months have gone by since the political map of the country went deep red..............and they still havent figured out what hit them. Its fcukking fascinating.


Anyway......the fact is, the wealthy have paid 11 trillion in taxes over the last 40 years to help the plight of the poor and nothing has changed........in fact, its gotten progressively worse for these people as theyve morped into a mindset of dependency. These people are walking around with better cell phones than I have and having their food paid for by others........with many out there taking in money off the books from someplace else. BS to that s0n............

Anyway.......the whole thread is a moot point. Higher taxes arent happening. Time to accept and move on s0n..........because elections have consequences!!

 

[IndependntLogic]

Hmmm. It seems that you guys don't want to discuss anything that doesn't demonize or blame "the other side" completely. The points below don't point the finger at the rich but on the other side, they do legitimately criticize certain policies which are currently backed by the GOP. But nah. Keep on talking about why none of those points are relevant and it's the "the danm Socialist Dems fault" or that people who don't take the risk to start their own business, are "victimized". Okay, if that's your cup of tea. But neither ConservaRepubs nor LibDems seem to be posting much that is based on more than emotion or the talking points fed by the pundits. Just an observation...

I'm not a "Con" (although I've been called it a few times) but I'll offer a few ideas.
1. Technology. It has had the same effect on wealth creation as on many other things: acceleration. While technology has contributed to the decline of income from all those people who used to work at say, printing shops or travel agencies, it has increased the amount and rate at which the rich can leverage their specialized knowledge (i.e. how to get rich or richer) into even more wealth.
2. Globalization. We can monitor the NIKKEI in real time, send and receive contracts, orders etc... across the globe in seconds. So people who have the ability to get rich, have certain skills. Now they can leverage them even more efficiently and in more places.
3. In one respect you're right - but not when it comes to personal tax breaks. Where you're right is Corps. Corporations have been given BILLIONS is special tax breaks, subsidies etc... since the 80's, that they never used to get. It used to be, these tax breaks and subsidies were reserved only for businesses that were helping the public good (like phone companies putting phone lines in rural areas that wouldn't be profitible to them, because of the low number of customers) but now? Big Oil? Other Multi-National companies? They are not providing some new technology or service that Americans wouldn't otherwise have. They aren't building bridges or infrastructure. They haven't been for decades. But they still get our money. This defnitely helps the rich get richer and faster.

So I'm not demonizing the rich. I don't fault them their success and I feel blessed to have mine. I'm just making an Independent's observations.

hey man pick a side or SHUT THE HELL UP!!

LOL! I assume that was in jest. It's funny that those watching MSNBC and FOX never stop to think that maybe some things just aren't entirely "the other guys fault!!!". Sometimes the world just changes.
But then, that's reasonable and would take away all the fun they get out of blaming, name-calling etc...

 

[P@triot]

"The following fact was sent to numerous conservative pundits, politicians, and profit-seekers:

"Based on Tax Foundation figures, the richest 1% has TRIPLED its share of America's income over the past 30 years. Much of the gain came from tax cuts and minimally taxed financial instruments.

"If their income had increased only at the pace of American productivity (80%), they would be taking about a TRILLION DOLLARS LESS out of our economy.

"And a question was posed:

"In what way do the richest 1% deserve these extraordinary gains?

"This question was not posed in sarcasm.

"A factual answer is genuinely sought.

"It seems unlikely that 1% of the population worked three times harder than the rest of us, or contributed three times as much to American productivity.

"Money earned from tax cuts and minimally taxed financial instruments is not productive income."

Any takers, Cons?

The Question Conservatives Can't Answer | Common Dreams

I can answer that! The top 1% earned their wealth. They create jobs, they work much harder than the other 99% (Bill Gates routinely did 18 hour days my friend), and what they earned is not the US government's to take. Sorry.

They tripled their wealth because they earned it. Had you spent half as much time working as you do advocating taking from others (ie Communism), you would have tripled your wealth as well.

 

[yidnar]

Hmmm. It seems that you guys don't want to discuss anything that doesn't demonize or blame "the other side" completely. The points below don't point the finger at the rich but on the other side, they do legitimately criticize certain policies which are currently backed by the GOP. But nah. Keep on talking about why none of those points are relevant and it's the "the danm Socialist Dems fault" or that people who don't take the risk to start their own business, are "victimized". Okay, if that's your cup of tea. But neither ConservaRepubs nor LibDems seem to be posting much that is based on more than emotion or the talking points fed by the pundits. Just an observation...

I'm not a "Con" (although I've been called it a few times) but I'll offer a few ideas.
1. Technology. It has had the same effect on wealth creation as on many other things: acceleration. While technology has contributed to the decline of income from all those people who used to work at say, printing shops or travel agencies, it has increased the amount and rate at which the rich can leverage their specialized knowledge (i.e. how to get rich or richer) into even more wealth.
2. Globalization. We can monitor the NIKKEI in real time, send and receive contracts, orders etc... across the globe in seconds. So people who have the ability to get rich, have certain skills. Now they can leverage them even more efficiently and in more places.
3. In one respect you're right - but not when it comes to personal tax breaks. Where you're right is Corps. Corporations have been given BILLIONS is special tax breaks, subsidies etc... since the 80's, that they never used to get. It used to be, these tax breaks and subsidies were reserved only for businesses that were helping the public good (like phone companies putting phone lines in rural areas that wouldn't be profitible to them, because of the low number of customers) but now? Big Oil? Other Multi-National companies? They are not providing some new technology or service that Americans wouldn't otherwise have. They aren't building bridges or infrastructure. They haven't been for decades. But they still get our money. This defnitely helps the rich get richer and faster.

So I'm not demonizing the rich. I don't fault them their success and I feel blessed to have mine. I'm just making an Independent's observations.

hey man pick a side or SHUT THE HELL UP!!

LOL! I assume that was in jest. It's funny that those watching MSNBC and FOX never stop to think that maybe some things just aren't entirely "the other guys fault!!!". Sometimes the world just changes.
But then, that's reasonable and would take away all the fun they get out of blaming, name-calling etc...

yea dude that was a jest.my belief is this if you want something work for it!!!people that bitch and complain about people who they consider should pay or donate more are the ones that never give.if you want a better life earn it!!!if your ship doesn't come in swim out to it.every body ain't dealt the same hand of cards in life,but i saw a pair beat 2 of a kind.IT"S NOT ALWAYS THE HAND YOU ARE DEALT IT"S HOW YOU PLAY THE HAND YOU ARE DEALT.

 

[IndependntLogic]

hey man pick a side or SHUT THE HELL UP!!

LOL! I assume that was in jest. It's funny that those watching MSNBC and FOX never stop to think that maybe some things just aren't entirely "the other guys fault!!!". Sometimes the world just changes.
But then, that's reasonable and would take away all the fun they get out of blaming, name-calling etc...

yea dude that was a jest.my belief is this if you want something work for it!!!people that bitch and complain about people who they consider should pay or donate more are the ones that never give.if you want a better life earn it!!!if your ship doesn't come in swim out to it.every body ain't dealt the same hand of cards in life,but i saw a pair beat 2 of a kind.IT"S NOT ALWAYS THE HAND YOU ARE DEALT IT"S HOW YOU PLAY THE HAND YOU ARE DELAT

I agree.

 

[georgephillip]

The OP is flawed.

It's not "America's income"

Income belongs to those who earn it not to America.

I think the term "America's income" refers to the total US national income earned by all workers in a single year.

The richest 1% of Americans have tripled their share of total income over the last 40 years.

I don't believe they've earned that money in any meaningful way; I'm even more certain that level of inequality is not sustainable over the next four decades.

The freedom to succeed that goes hand in hand with the freedom to fail

You don't get to share in the earnings of others because you feel you are owed it, you deserve it, or that they don't deserve it

Asshole

Drink your milk, Troll.

China's Poisoned Milk Scandal: Is Sorry Enough? - TIME

 

[thereisnospoon]

So what?

So then the entire premise of your stupid-assed OP is blown out of the water.

The question is answered and the best thing you can come back with is "so what?"

Question: "In what way do the richest 1% deserve these extraordinary gains?"

Answer: "Gubmint has no money of its own...Period.

What question did you answer?
It wasn't the one I posed.

There is no "deserve". These people used their money to make money. So what?
You are not entitled to one fucking dime.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It was their money to begin with. They earned it.

When are you on the left going to realize that taxes burden the American people with labor they have to pay the government before they can take care of themselves? The money is theirs.

At what point have they paid their fair share?

At the point that they at least pay a representative percentage in taxes based on their income. While everyone on the right loves to throw out the fact that the wealthy pay most of the income taxes, they miss the true facts. When we look at the federal government, we need to look at all taxes and all revenue, not just a portion that is less than half.

When all forms of taxation are included into revenues, the top 10% only pay 30% of all federal taxes. And that is definitely unfair, because the top 10% take in 45% of all income. They are undertaxed and because of this, they have accumulated enormous amounts of wealth while the rest of Americans have seen their incomes stagnate or diminish. This is not about stealing from the rich; it's about making them pay their fair share. All I hear on this board is how we have a spending problem, which we do. However, revenues have fallen 30% in the last ten years as a percentage of GDP, so we definitely have a revenue problem also. But God forbid we should suggest asking the wealthy to pay a fair share. Instead, we see ridiculous examples of how the wealthy pay 70% out of 40% of all revenues, while paying next to nothing out of the other 60% of revenues.

That's a nice rationalization if you're in the camp of higher taxes.
The fact is you have no facts. You posted these numbers yet offered no links, no point of reference. No allowance for rebuttal.
That's not participating in a discussion. That is TELLING people what you want them to believe and they must accept what you post.
Here's news for you.....You have a lot of homework to do. Because without facts to back up your claims, they are just that. Claims. Have at it.
BTW, opinion pieces and quotes from blogs are not acceptable. Facts only.
Caution....Your sources will be questioned. I leave no stone unturned.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The OP is flawed.

It's not "America's income"

Income belongs to those who earn it not to America.

I think the term "America's income" refers to the total US national income earned by all workers in a single year.

The richest 1% of Americans have tripled their share of total income over the last 40 years.

I don't believe they've earned that money in any meaningful way; I'm even more certain that level of inequality is not sustainable over the next four decades.

Point number one...There is no such thing as a "share" of US income. Each individual earns their income through labor or investment. There is no magical pot of money from which we all draw after filling out some kind of voucher. Your premise presupposes the existence of a zero sum game. That premise is false. What your next door neighbor or a guy in Walla Walla, Washington earns has ZERO effect on you or anyone else.
How may friggin times must this be explained to you before you get it?
What you think of how a man or woman accumulates their earnings or wealth is immaterial. It's none of your business. It is certainly not for you to judge. You have no say in the matter nor should you. And you will never have a say.

 

[thereisnospoon]

"The following fact was sent to numerous conservative pundits, politicians, and profit-seekers:

"Based on Tax Foundation figures, the richest 1% has TRIPLED its share of America's income over the past 30 years. Much of the gain came from tax cuts and minimally taxed financial instruments.

"If their income had increased only at the pace of American productivity (80%), they would be taking about a TRILLION DOLLARS LESS out of our economy.

"And a question was posed:

"In what way do the richest 1% deserve these extraordinary gains?

"This question was not posed in sarcasm.

"A factual answer is genuinely sought.

"It seems unlikely that 1% of the population worked three times harder than the rest of us, or contributed three times as much to American productivity.

"Money earned from tax cuts and minimally taxed financial instruments is not productive income."

Any takers, Cons?

The Question Conservatives Can't Answer | Common Dreams

Hey, no matter how many ways you try to inject the poor abused worker bee card, your message still remains the same. You despise anyone who you deem to have somehow cheated you throughout your miserably unproductive life.
Back under your rock.

US Worker bees have been victimized over the last forty years by the richest 1% of their countrymen.
My message is, it is time for economic payback.
Or do you believe that level of inequality is sustainable over the next four decades?

How so..You must explain yourself. GO!
I think you are small minded jealous underachieving person who fucked up somewhere and are looking for someone to blame for your own self created misfortunes. You feel the rich have fucked you over and you come on here to start threads looking for people who feel equally aggrieved by those who have succeeded or achieved. You hate them. You feel they have taken what you believe to be yours. You feel this due to some fantasy you have conjured up to make yourself feel better about your own inadequacies.

 

[georgephillip]

The OP is flawed.

It's not "America's income"

Income belongs to those who earn it not to America.

I think the term "America's income" refers to the total US national income earned by all workers in a single year.

The richest 1% of Americans have tripled their share of total income over the last 40 years.

I don't believe they've earned that money in any meaningful way; I'm even more certain that level of inequality is not sustainable over the next four decades.

When you say "share of income" you are implying that income is a zero sum game.

It's not.

Total national income is a finite number.
It's obtained by totaling the amount of income all US workers earn in one year.

In 1980 the richest 1% of workers earned 8% of that total income.
In 2008 they earned 20%

They have increased their share of total national income by bribing politicians to write favorable tax policy, and not because they have worked two-and-a-half times harder than the other 99% of workers.

And they always want more.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I think the term "America's income" refers to the total US national income earned by all workers in a single year.

The richest 1% of Americans have tripled their share of total income over the last 40 years.

I don't believe they've earned that money in any meaningful way; I'm even more certain that level of inequality is not sustainable over the next four decades.

When you say "share of income" you are implying that income is a zero sum game.

It's not.

Total national income is a finite number.
It's obtained by totaling the amount of income all US workers earn in one year.

In 1980 the richest 1% of workers earned 8% of that total income.
In 2008 they earned 20%

They have increased their share of total national income by bribing politicians to write favorable tax policy, and not because they have worked two-and-a-half times harder than the other 99% of workers.

And they always want more.

"They have increased their share of total national income by bribing politicians to write favorable tax policy, and not because they have worked two-and-a-half times harder than the other 99% of workers"

How do you know they didn't work two-and-a-half times harder?

 

[georgephillip]

Hey, no matter how many ways you try to inject the poor abused worker bee card, your message still remains the same. You despise anyone who you deem to have somehow cheated you throughout your miserably unproductive life.
Back under your rock.

US Worker bees have been victimized over the last forty years by the richest 1% of their countrymen.
My message is, it is time for economic payback.
Or do you believe that level of inequality is sustainable over the next four decades?

How so..You must explain yourself. GO!
I think you are small minded jealous underachieving person who fucked up somewhere and are looking for someone to blame for your own self created misfortunes. You feel the rich have fucked you over and you come on here to start threads looking for people who feel equally aggrieved by those who have succeeded or achieved. You hate them. You feel they have taken what you believe to be yours. You feel this due to some fantasy you have conjured up to make yourself feel better about your own inadequacies.

Answer the question.

"Based on Tax Foundation figures, the richest 1% has TRIPLED its share of America's income over the past 30 years. Much of the gain came from tax cuts and minimally taxed financial instruments.

"If their income had increased only at the pace of American productivity (80%), they would be taking about a TRILLION DOLLARS LESS out of our economy.

"And a question was posed:

"In what way do the richest 1% deserve these extraordinary gains?"

Do you find Thomas Sowell's answer credible:

"Most people are paid voluntarily by others to whom they supply goods and/or services, and only to the extent that others value what is supplied enough to part with their own hard cash."

The Question Conservatives Can't Answer | Common Dreams

 

[georgephillip]

I've never earned money from tax cuts.
Tax cuts means the gov't takes less than what they had been taking, of money someone earned on his own. No one gave it to him. He did something productive than someone was willing to pay him for.
What did he do to deserve that? He worked.
The better question is, what did people at the bottom of society do to deserve the unprecedented level of benefits they receive?

Tax cuts that shift the tax burden from FIRE sector incomes to wages and salaries are theft.

Taxpayer supplied bail outs supply the same service to our creditor class, as proven by the $14 trillion gift to Wall Street that doubled the richest 5% of Americans share of returns to wealth in less than a single decade while keeping the debt overhead in place for 98% of Americans.

$14 trillion gift? Please explain further.

"Bailouts Of Bondholders Will Sock Taxpayers With $10-$14 Trillion Loss..."

Bailouts Of Bondholders Will Sock Taxpayers With $10-$14 Trillion Loss

Are you a bondholder?
lol.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Tax cuts that shift the tax burden from FIRE sector incomes to wages and salaries are theft.

Taxpayer supplied bail outs supply the same service to our creditor class, as proven by the $14 trillion gift to Wall Street that doubled the richest 5% of Americans share of returns to wealth in less than a single decade while keeping the debt overhead in place for 98% of Americans.

$14 trillion gift? Please explain further.

"Bailouts Of Bondholders Will Sock Taxpayers With $10-$14 Trillion Loss..."

Bailouts Of Bondholders Will Sock Taxpayers With $10-$14 Trillion Loss

Are you a bondholder?
lol.

2.5 years later. You have any evidence Henry Blodget (LOL!) was right?

 

[georgephillip]

"We simply cannot make these bad investments whole unless we are willing to hand the next 10-20 years of U.S. private savings over to the bondholders who financed reckless lending."

7.5 to 17.5 years to go?

Bailouts Of Bondholders Will Sock Taxpayers With $10-$14 Trillion Loss

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"We simply cannot make these bad investments whole unless we are willing to hand the next 10-20 years of U.S. private savings over to the bondholders who financed reckless lending."

7.5 to 17.5 years to go?

Bailouts Of Bondholders Will Sock Taxpayers With $10-$14 Trillion Loss

He was making a guess.
If you have any follow up with actual data, please provide it.
So far, the only money we're losing from the bailouts is from Fannie, Freddie, the automakers and the failed mortgage program.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I think the term "America's income" refers to the total US national income earned by all workers in a single year.

The richest 1% of Americans have tripled their share of total income over the last 40 years.

I don't believe they've earned that money in any meaningful way; I'm even more certain that level of inequality is not sustainable over the next four decades.

When you say "share of income" you are implying that income is a zero sum game.

It's not.

Total national income is a finite number.
It's obtained by totaling the amount of income all US workers earn in one year.

In 1980 the richest 1% of workers earned 8% of that total income.
In 2008 they earned 20%

They have increased their share of total national income by bribing politicians to write favorable tax policy, and not because they have worked two-and-a-half times harder than the other 99% of workers.

And they always want more.

So what if some people want to make more.

If i make a million dollars more this year than last it has absolutely no effect on your income.

None, zero, zip, nada.