This is why we need to tax the wealthy

[TruthNotBS]

Most of the people complaining about the "rich" getting away with something are not "rich" themselves and don't have a clue.

I see, so to "have a clue" of whatever you're referring to, which supposedly justifies the rich getting government giveaways one has to be rich? One has to be rich to "have a clue"? What are you referring to which somehow, magically justifies the rich getting whatever help they need (or just want) from the government that doesn't apply to working-class people?

When government help is handed to the rich, it's good, but when the government serves or assists a working-class person who works 60 hours weekly to make ends meet, that's "commie" and renders the recipient of the government assistance a "lazy bum". Explain this fuzzy logic of yours. Enlighten us.

 

[Frankenstein]

We aren't going to address $34 trillion on just cuts.

Best place to start is keeping Government accountable, and not spending more than they take in period!

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I didn’t ignore them, I disagreed with them.

You didn't address most of them.

I didn’t know I was required to.

I’m one of those workers.

You're a waged worker?

Yes. I get paid by the day but nevertheless, the company I work for pays me to do a job.

What is the working class and capitalism in general, going to do when advanced automation eliminates waged work?

I don’t know.

As I said, I don’t like the increasing automation any more than you but what is a viable solution that doesn’t involve usurping the rights of businesses to cut costs?

It’s not a question of should/shouldn’t, it’s a question of choice. If a group of people get together and want to start a business where everyone manages and makes the decisions, by all means, have at it.

Try applying for an SBA loan or for a loan at your local bank to start a worker-owned cooperative. Good luck! Practically impossible. The system is rigged against workers owning the means of production. Private business owners or capitalists see labor cooperatives as a threat and hence push for laws that make them difficult, if not impossible to launch.

Maybe, maybe not. But banks loan to who or what they see as low risk. They’re not likely to loan to a bunch of people who have no real world experience at running a business.

I forget what the percentage is but a majority of new businesses fail within six months and bank and loan companies know this.

But requiring businesses to operate this way would be wrong and unconstitutional.

I agree, it would be unconstitutional under our current system.

It would be unconstitutional under any system.

I'm not for forcing people to turn their privately owned and operated businesses into worker-owned and run co-ops, although, in principle and practice, I believe the people who work a business should own and operate it together. I consider mass production a social project and endeavor requiring many people, hence people, not one individual should own the productive enterprise.

Again, choice.

Eventually, in the not-too-distant future, production will be forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit, more centrally planned system of production. Socialists aren't going to have to fire a shot, it will happen due to the circumstances created by advanced, intelligent automation.

Non profit? What the hell would be the point of that?

I don’t think any capitalist thinks they can manage the business and do every job on the production line at the same time. They know they can’t which is why they pay people to do the work.

When you sell your labor power to a capitalist, you're selling yourself.

No you’re not.

Under a capitalist system, you have to sell your presence, and power, placing yourself in the position of the product that is being sold.

Um, what?

A company doesn’t sell you, they sell the product. And you know who’s buying the product? Workers. How can they afford the product? With the money they’re paid to work.

Capitalism commodifies people, turning them into products in a "labor market" for capitalist consumption.

If true, workers would be commodified under any system.

There are no elections at work, you're at the whim of your employer/exploiter. The system which commodifies human beings this way under an authoritarian, profit-based system, is what leads to much of the suffering in the world.

If people suffer from being paid to work then they will be miserable wretches anywhere, anytime.

Suffering is a part of life, such that we measure our lives against our suffering.

That’s fine for those who choose it but again, requiring it is simply not right.

I agree, that socialism should happen gradually and as organically, naturally as possible. Advanced technology pushes society into the lap of socialism, there's no need to force anyone to accept it. At the right time, people will adopt it.

If it serves to increase or preserve prosperity, great. But if it constrains individuality or subverts individual rights and liberties, forget it.

I don’t like all the automation either but that is their right as Americans.

Production-Automation in a modern, capitalist economy is necessary, or you'll go out of business. Your competitors will automate and leave you behind in the dust.

Exactly.

 

[TruthNotBS]

You know what the biggest problem with government "assistance" is, Christian? When you start paying people for not doing anything...they totally lose ambition. Why get up and go to work if the government will pay you to stay home? You on the left have created generations of people that don't have a work ethic and are therefore trapped in border line poverty. They don't even know what's being done to them because it's been a part of their lives for so long they don't know anything different. The left's War Against Poverty has been going on for the better part of 60 years now...how's that going? Is the average poor person better off? Is their life more fulfilling?

You know what the biggest problem with government "assistance" is, Christian? When you start paying people for not doing anything...

How convenient. The rich get assistance because supposedly they're always doing something but working class people who wake up in the morning and work 10 hours a day, six days weekly, aren't doing anything hence they don't deserve any government services or assistance. How RICH. Typical silly right-wing fuzzy logic.

they totally lose ambition. Why get up and go to work if the government will pay you to stay home?

When did I ever suggest that the government assist people who can work and yet refuse to get up in the morning and go to work? I never did, you're just going off on another one of your straw man tangents. The working class is called the ("Working Class"), because they work. These are people who sell their labor power, their very lives, to a capitalist, for eight, ten, or even twelve hours daily. If anyone isn't working, it's not them, it's the rich who are at the country club playing golf or getting a tan by the pool, drinking a Martini, who are the ones who should get to work. If you're going to accuse anyone of being a bum and not working, it's the rich, not the working class.

You on the left have created generations of people that don't have a work ethic and are therefore trapped in border line poverty.

The work ethic applies to everyone, not just the working class. Moreover, the people who you demand have a "work ethic" are human beings, not machines to be exploited and abused. Right-wing Republicans often disregard the legitimate concerns and needs of workers, arguing that they should just STFU and get to work. You demand a work ethic from the poor or the Middle Class, but the rich trust fund babies, those born into wealth, who had everything handed to them on a silver platter by their wealthy parents, you defend and advance their interests at the expense of working-class people.

More, even if a person started out poor and somehow, became rich, that doesn't give them the right to exploit and abuse anyone or be more entitled to government services and assistance. I'm not against the wealthy employers, and companies receiving help from the government, but what I am against, is for the government to help the wealthy and completely disregard the needs of workers. The working class needs affordable food, housing, healthcare, education, child daycare services, and an extensive, well-run public transit system that transports people throughout the city. etc. Workers have their needs, just like the wealthy capitalists do.

They don't even know what's being done to them because it's been a part of their lives for so long they don't know anything different. The left's War Against Poverty has been going on for the better part of 60 years now...how's that going? Is the average poor person better off? Is their life more fulfilling?

The so-called "left" in America isn't Marxist or a true "left". That's one thing you need to realize. In Western Europe, there is a true left and there they apply socialist policies which indeed eliminate poverty, improving the standard of living for working-class people.

In America, there was a time when there weren't that many unemployed people and homeless out on the street. Do you know when that was? It was when the US economy was the most leftist in its history, with 23% of the workforce unionized. When a blue-collar worker, could easily own a home and a car, due to housing being more affordable and wages paying enough for people to live on. That era started in the late 40s and began to wither away in the 1970s, with the final nail in the coffin in the 1980s with Ronald Reagan.

True leftists don't believe in supporting people who don't work and we don't care if they're poor or rich. Whoever can work, must do so and then they get access to government resources and infrastructure. That's how leftists think, they don't agree with the American liberals who give out government checks to bums, who refuse to work and earn their keep. Leftists believe in people working and when they do then they are entitled to affordable housing and food, plus other services like healthcare (Universal Medicare), an education (Including vocational, job training)..etc. People are entitled to live in a society with a modern, well-developed infrastructure.

Government programs serve the public, and the members of that public, have to work, if they can. The only people who receive government assistance without working, are the elderly who are retired, or those who can't work due to some illness or disability. Those who can work and don't should be penalized, fined..etc. I'm not a liberal, I'm a socialist.

 

[Nostra]

CommieMan is economically illiterate.

 

[pknopp]

How much of that was due to Covid spending, PK? Spending done by a Democratically controlled House? Be fair...just for once!

As I've noted 500 times, there are always excuses.

Nothing passed without Trump signing off on it.

 

[pknopp]

Best place to start is keeping Government accountable, and not spending more than they take in period!

I do that. Not many others do.

 

[Frankenstein]

I do that. Not many others do.

So you understand the Government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem?

 

[pknopp]

So you understand the Government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem?

It has a spending problem but we aren't going to pay off $34 trillion in debt without more revenue also.

 

[Frankenstein]

It has a spending problem but we aren't going to pay off $34 trillion in debt without more revenue also.

FLat tax everyone pays the same, no more class warfare

 

[pknopp]

FLat tax everyone pays the same, no more class warfare

Whatever, I don't care how its done.

 

[DBA]

When government help is handed to the rich, it's good, but when the government serves or assists a working-class person who works 60 hours weekly to make ends meet, that's "commie" and renders the recipient of the government assistance a "lazy bum".

Provide specific examples of the "rich" getting things handed to them. We aren't talking about corporate bailouts here, but "rich" individuals. Just as a note, the Biden administration has previously defined "rich" as 400k+/yr.

 

[DBA]

I see, so to "have a clue" of whatever you're referring to, which supposedly justifies the rich getting government giveaways one has to be rich?

I don't know, we have been told that one has to be a minority or a protected class in order to truly understand what it is like to be discriminated against. Which is it?

 

[Roy C]

Funny how people side with gov over their fellow citizens. Instead of pointing your finger at the other guy--learn from him instead. Learn how to do your taxes. Most people have their thumb up their ass.

 

[TruthNotBS]

I don't know, we have been told that one has to be a minority or a protected class in order to truly understand what it is like to be discriminated against. Which is it?

What does that have to do with the topic of receiving assistance or services from the government concerning the rich knowing something everyone else doesn't? When did I ever say that white people can't be discriminated against? I'm Cuban American, so technically, being Hispanic, I'm a "minority" but if you meet me in person, I look whiter than white. I have dirty blonde hair and light grey eyes. When people learn I'm Cuban American they're surprised since I look German.

Even with the way I look, I've been discriminated against as both a Hispanic (having a Spanish name) and also as a white person ("white privilege"), so I get double whammy when it comes to discrimination. I refuse to change my Spanish name, whoever doesn't like can go fly a kite.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

my god...i see why a lot of you don't have a pot to piss, in but are financial experts...lololol

look, if you earn 60k or less, you pay nearly nil in taxes, you get it all back..........you live a great life for shits on the dollar....wake the fuck up

 

[pknopp]

my god...i see why a lot of you don't have a pot to piss, in but are financial experts...lololol

look, if you earn 60k or less, you pay nearly nil in taxes, you get it all back..........you live a great life for shits on the dollar....wake the fuck up

What does any of that have to do with the U.S. being 34 trillion in debt?

 

[TruthNotBS]

Provide specific examples of the "rich" getting things handed to them. We aren't talking about corporate bailouts here, but "rich" individuals. Just as a note, the Biden administration has previously defined "rich" as 400k+/yr.

My criticism is directed at a specific type of rich person called "capitalists", who receive government assistance for their productive ventures. I wouldn't be so against bailing out businesses if the working class could also receive government services and assistance when needed, without being accused by right-wing Republican conservatives of being lazy bums who just want to live off of the government.

Any help an average Joe, working person gets from the government is characterized by MAGA hats as a shameful handout, whereas when the wealthiest people in our society, namely multimillionaires or billionaires receive any services or assistance from the government, it's "Peachy-King".

"Good for them, why not? What idiot wouldn't get help from the government when it's being offered, like DUH."

Will you ever acknowledge that such a variant in attitude towards people receiving services and resources from the government is hypocritical?

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

What does any of that have to do with the U.S. being 34 trillion in debt?

well everything report button pusher......we have people who have not a pot to piss in running policy....lool

look.....the key to life is to only listen and follow self made successful people beholden to no one

otherwise you'll end up making 70k a yr cleaning shitters dying 3 days after you retire

 

[pknopp]

well everything report button pusher......we have people who have not a pot to piss in running policy....lool

look.....the key to life is to only listen and follow self made successful people beholden to no one

otherwise you'll end up making 70k a yr cleaning shitters dying 3 days after you retire

Right, nothing.