Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In reality, the Free Market / Liberty way to get wealthy is to provide something of value for which people are willing to pay.
And if the capitalist is not investing in productive capacity, but rather gambling with the money, what is he/she providing of value?
You produce nothing? Then according to your own criteria...You have to get your head around the fact that I am the supposed capitalist hero that you are advocating for. I do not labor. I produce nothing. I own.
There is a third way...Yes. That is the basic conflict.
Some of use believe people should be able to keep what they have earned or been voluntarily bequeathed.
Others would rather use unfettered government power to take away from some for their own benefit.
The moral systems upon which each side is based are Quite Different.
There is no third way. "Third way" is just Marxism by another name.
Most of those who who are at the top of the wealth tier don't live off their wages, they live off their investments and pay their 15% in taxes versus the tax rates of working Americans.
I guess Warren Buffet's comment that his secretary pays more taxes than he does is a good example. The top percentile gets write-offs the wage earner can't take advantage of, plus tier gets lower tax rates. What a great country we live in. So, thanks to government intervention, the wealthy gets to a higher percentage of their wealth than the working class.
Plutocracy in action.
Nor can you deny that you wish to take from the individual by insisting you'll only take from the class to which they belong. That's called 'dishonesty' and makes it hard to take anything you say at face value.No. But you can't justify the suffering of the vast majority of the collective based on your individual freedom to be idle and rich.
No? America was a superpower under such a system as I advocate. Do you even know the slightest thing of my philosophy?There's a reason why you want to keep the conversation in hoity-toity philosophy land. It's because when your faux-philosophy is applied to the real world, it doesn't work.
Citigroup Oct 16, 2005 Plutonomy Report Part 1Plutocracy in action.
Nor can you deny that you wish to take from the individual by insisting you'll only take from the class to which they belong. That's called 'dishonesty' and makes it hard to take anything you say at face value.No. But you can't justify the suffering of the vast majority of the collective based on your individual freedom to be idle and rich.
No? America was a superpower under such a system as I advocate. Do you even know the slightest thing of my philosophy?There's a reason why you want to keep the conversation in hoity-toity philosophy land. It's because when your faux-philosophy is applied to the real world, it doesn't work.
I'll give you a hint:
I'd like to know why the unequal distribution of wealth is a bad thing. This seems to be a major premise from those on the left, but it's like you just assume it's a bad thing without every really providing evidence or justifying the premise.
That is a load of class warfare nonsense.
Most of those who who are at the top of the wealth tier don't live off their wages, they live off their investments and pay their 15% in taxes versus the tax rates of working Americans.
I guess Warren Buffet's comment that his secretary pays more taxes than he does is a good example. The top percentile gets write-offs the wage earner can't take advantage of, plus tier gets lower tax rates. What a great country we live in. So, thanks to government intervention, the wealthy gets to a higher percentage of their wealth than the working class.
Plutocracy in action.
That is a load of class warfare nonsense.
Obama wants to raise taxes on the top 2%, which is his magical dividing line where incomes are $250,000. The vast majority of those who make $250,000 per year are not living off of investment income. They are small business owners or upper middle class people (often two earner families) who WORK FOR A LIVING.
That is a load of class warfare nonsense.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/assets_c/2010/08/GR2010081106717-thumb-454x592-23659.gif
Guy Fawkes wanted to install a theocratic regime. His only complaint was that the one he was fighting was Catholic.Nor can you deny that you wish to take from the individual by insisting you'll only take from the class to which they belong. That's called 'dishonesty' and makes it hard to take anything you say at face value.No. But you can't justify the suffering of the vast majority of the collective based on your individual freedom to be idle and rich.
No? America was a superpower under such a system as I advocate. Do you even know the slightest thing of my philosophy?There's a reason why you want to keep the conversation in hoity-toity philosophy land. It's because when your faux-philosophy is applied to the real world, it doesn't work.
I'll give you a hint:
Are you by any chance wearing a Guy Fawkes mask?
Most of those who who are at the top of the wealth tier don't live off their wages, they live off their investments and pay their 15% in taxes versus the tax rates of working Americans.
I guess Warren Buffet's comment that his secretary pays more taxes than he does is a good example. The top percentile gets write-offs the wage earner can't take advantage of, plus tier gets lower tax rates. What a great country we live in. So, thanks to government intervention, the wealthy gets to a higher percentage of their wealth than the working class.
Plutocracy in action.
That is a load of class warfare nonsense.
Obama wants to raise taxes on the top 2%, which is his magical dividing line where incomes are $250,000. The vast majority of those who make $250,000 per year are not living off of investment income. They are small business owners or upper middle class people (often two earner families) who WORK FOR A LIVING.
So the top tier's main income isn't investment income? The tax rate on Capital Gains and Dividends isn't 15% The wealthy don't hanve more write offs that your average working American?
Really?
They plan to liquidate the lower tenth before it comes to that. As the cycle repeats, unemployment remains low as only the most fit are left.I'd like to know why the unequal distribution of wealth is a bad thing. This seems to be a major premise from those on the left, but it's like you just assume it's a bad thing without every really providing evidence or justifying the premise.
speaking of distribution of wealth....
as more and more jobs disappear because of automation, computers and robotics, I can see a time at which MOST people become unemployed.....
we even have the military working on robot-troops to replace people....
i imagine that at that point ONLY the very best, brightest, strongest, most useful will have "jobs"/"positions"
maybe...10% of the population? 15%?
my q; since we all know that it would be completely unfair for the 10% of the population who have ALL THE WEALTH to have to pay any money at all just to support lazy good for nothing freeloaders, what should be done with/to the unemployed?
cultivated for spare parts for the wealthy?
slavery?
extermination?
set loose in the wilds and hunted for sport?
the Right is waging a class warThat is a load of class warfare nonsense.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/assets_c/2010/08/GR2010081106717-thumb-454x592-23659.gif
Do you actually have a point?
