Unequal distribution of wealth

[thanatos144]

Hey maybe the three billionth time of distributing wealth will be the charm huh?

The last time government (under FDR) imposed a significant reparative redistribution of the Nation's wealth resources was in the 1930s. It occurred as a means of stimulating the severely depressed economy and it led to the rise of the middle class and the most prosperous period in our history, the late 40s to the early 80s, when Reaganomics and a long series of deregulations fostered the incremental decline which has led to the current economic downturn.

The relatively minor cyclical economic adjustments which occur routinely and predictably, even during the best of times, are not reparative redistributions. But what we are seeing today is in many ways a repetition of what went on in the 1920s and the only thing that will pull us out of this depressed condition is another major reparative redistribution. It will require spending reductions, such as available through elimination of many unnecessary military bases in foreign countries, general reductions in military spending, immediate cessation of the wasteful, wholly counterproductive drug war and major tax increases on the upper income levels. The derived revenue should be used to repair our crumbling infrastructure which will create millions of jobs and give rise to many new and thriving industries.

All would be cool if it wasnt all bullshit. FDR prolonged the depression.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I see, so if I defend Joe Blow's right to keep his property because I have no evidence that he stole through violence or fraud , then it is because I am indoctrinated?!?!?!

I would think so. Because whether or not you are consciously aware of it the taking one's property argument is right out of the right-wing corporatist and fanatical Libertarian propaganda playbook. I've heard Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly (all three multi-millionaires) pronounce it many times.

What must be considered when raising that argument is every fortune created within the United States is produced by exploiting the Nation's material, administrative and human resources. And while there is no wish nor intention to preclude the enjoyment of reasonable wealth derived from one's efforts it was not the intention of the founders of this nation, nor is it the the wish of the vast majority of its population, that certain individuals should have the ability to accumulate and hoard inordinate amounts of the Nation's wealth resources, thereby impeding circulation of those resources and causing stagnation of the national economy.

As a committed socialist I advocate the confiscation of all personal assets in excess of twenty million dollars. But the way FDR dealt with the hoarding of wealth is by imposing a progressive tax structure with a maximum rate of ninety-one percent! Keep in mind that either approach would not debilitate the wealthy but would simply cause them to be a bit less wealthy and would vastly improve the overall health of the Nation by maintaining a vibrant economy.

Fortunately moonbats like you are virtual outcasts here in the US.
You could not even come close to producing a logical explanation for your THEFT proposal.
I'd like to know how it is you and those who "feel" as you( you people do not think) showering government with the rightful and legal property of others in effect an excessive amount would solve any of your problems.
Your theory is the equivalent of trying to cure obesity by giving MORE food to the fat person.
Look you greedy bastard, you get NOTHING until government gets it fiscal house in order.
You do realize your idea is a dream, do you not?
If you want socialism by confiscation, move to another country. Your shit won't wash here.
DONE.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Unequal distribution of wealth is just another excuse and argument to increase taxes, the only problem, counter productive, pathetic to say the least, ignores the real problem. The real issue is they pushed corporate taxation to the worlds highest, continued to spend more than we have, killed manufacturing, replaced middle class jobs with service sector lackey jobs, and need another huckleberry to suck dry.

You have been badly misinformed and you're in need of some basic education in what is really wrong with the U.S. Economy and what is needed to fix it. You would do yourself (and your Country) a big favor by not allowing Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reilly to brainwash you as they apparently have done. These guys are multi-millionaire propagandists who serve the interests of an emerging plutocracy. They need people like you to carry water for them and I don't say that to offend you but to hopefully make you aware of something.

Badly misinformed? How so? Explain in detail. Do not post blogs or opinions. Facts only.
Show proof. Reference your findings with links.
What's wrong with the US economy is the White House interfering with the private sector.
Obama has been the worst president for business and economy since Jimmy Carter.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Hey maybe the three billionth time of distributing wealth will be the charm huh?

The last time government (under FDR) imposed a significant reparative redistribution of the Nation's wealth resources was in the 1930s. It occurred as a means of stimulating the severely depressed economy and it led to the rise of the middle class and the most prosperous period in our history, the late 40s to the early 80s, when Reaganomics and a long series of deregulations fostered the incremental decline which has led to the current economic downturn.

The relatively minor cyclical economic adjustments which occur routinely and predictably, even during the best of times, are not reparative redistributions. But what we are seeing today is in many ways a repetition of what went on in the 1920s and the only thing that will pull us out of this depressed condition is another major reparative redistribution. It will require spending reductions, such as available through elimination of many unnecessary military bases in foreign countries, general reductions in military spending, immediate cessation of the wasteful, wholly counterproductive drug war and major tax increases on the upper income levels. The derived revenue should be used to repair our crumbling infrastructure which will create millions of jobs and give rise to many new and thriving industries.

Now you are spewing pure bullshit. You are desperate.
FDR's New Deal did nothing to improve the US Economy. In fact, but for the US entry into WW II, who knows how long the Great Depression would have lasted. This event lasted into the late 40's.
FDR did the best thing he could. He instituted "make work " projects at great expense to federal coffers. With little revenue stream to pay for the expenditures, government borrowing put the US into an economic malaise which lasted nearly two full decades.
FDR created temporary government jobs. This was to get able bodied people to work.
Try that today. Sure. Let's say Obama instituted( no doubt by executive order) "New Deal II"... The offer would be all those able bodied people on unemployment and other public assistance would be offered jobs. They would earn market wages in lieu of their public assistance checks. The bums who've been collecting checks would scream bloody murder.
Stop it. Just stop it.

 

[MikeK]

Hey maybe the three billionth time of distributing wealth will be the charm huh?

The last time government (under FDR) imposed a significant reparative redistribution of the Nation's wealth resources was in the 1930s. It occurred as a means of stimulating the severely depressed economy and it led to the rise of the middle class and the most prosperous period in our history, the late 40s to the early 80s, when Reaganomics and a long series of deregulations fostered the incremental decline which has led to the current economic downturn.

The relatively minor cyclical economic adjustments which occur routinely and predictably, even during the best of times, are not reparative redistributions. But what we are seeing today is in many ways a repetition of what went on in the 1920s and the only thing that will pull us out of this depressed condition is another major reparative redistribution. It will require spending reductions, such as available through elimination of many unnecessary military bases in foreign countries, general reductions in military spending, immediate cessation of the wasteful, wholly counterproductive drug war and major tax increases on the upper income levels. The derived revenue should be used to repair our crumbling infrastructure which will create millions of jobs and give rise to many new and thriving industries.

All would be cool if it wasnt all bullshit. FDR prolonged the depression.

Who told you that? Rush Limbaugh?

Can you tell us spefically how FDR managed to prolong the Depression? Solid facts, please, not speculative notions and vague theories. Facts.

 

[oreo]

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.

5 famous sentences:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The last time government (under FDR) imposed a significant reparative redistribution of the Nation's wealth resources was in the 1930s. It occurred as a means of stimulating the severely depressed economy and it led to the rise of the middle class and the most prosperous period in our history, the late 40s to the early 80s, when Reaganomics and a long series of deregulations fostered the incremental decline which has led to the current economic downturn.

The relatively minor cyclical economic adjustments which occur routinely and predictably, even during the best of times, are not reparative redistributions. But what we are seeing today is in many ways a repetition of what went on in the 1920s and the only thing that will pull us out of this depressed condition is another major reparative redistribution. It will require spending reductions, such as available through elimination of many unnecessary military bases in foreign countries, general reductions in military spending, immediate cessation of the wasteful, wholly counterproductive drug war and major tax increases on the upper income levels. The derived revenue should be used to repair our crumbling infrastructure which will create millions of jobs and give rise to many new and thriving industries.

All would be cool if it wasnt all bullshit. FDR prolonged the depression.

Who told you that? Rush Limbaugh?

Can you tell us spefically how FDR managed to prolong the Depression? Solid facts, please, not speculative notions and vague theories. Facts.

 

[Gadawg73]

Imagine the outrage if we dare make the moocher class do anything to earn their plunder.
Work camps to get food stamps, Medicaid, free day care and housing.
If FDR would try that now he would be labeled a NAZI.

 

[thanatos144]

The last time government (under FDR) imposed a significant reparative redistribution of the Nation's wealth resources was in the 1930s. It occurred as a means of stimulating the severely depressed economy and it led to the rise of the middle class and the most prosperous period in our history, the late 40s to the early 80s, when Reaganomics and a long series of deregulations fostered the incremental decline which has led to the current economic downturn.

The relatively minor cyclical economic adjustments which occur routinely and predictably, even during the best of times, are not reparative redistributions. But what we are seeing today is in many ways a repetition of what went on in the 1920s and the only thing that will pull us out of this depressed condition is another major reparative redistribution. It will require spending reductions, such as available through elimination of many unnecessary military bases in foreign countries, general reductions in military spending, immediate cessation of the wasteful, wholly counterproductive drug war and major tax increases on the upper income levels. The derived revenue should be used to repair our crumbling infrastructure which will create millions of jobs and give rise to many new and thriving industries.

All would be cool if it wasnt all bullshit. FDR prolonged the depression.

Who told you that? Rush Limbaugh?

Can you tell us spefically how FDR managed to prolong the Depression? Solid facts, please, not speculative notions and vague theories. Facts.

Nope from his own treasury secretary

Henry Morgenthau, Roosevelt’s Treasury Secretary:

We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong . . . somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. . . . I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. . . . And an enormous debt to boot.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The last time government (under FDR) imposed a significant reparative redistribution of the Nation's wealth resources was in the 1930s. It occurred as a means of stimulating the severely depressed economy and it led to the rise of the middle class and the most prosperous period in our history, the late 40s to the early 80s, when Reaganomics and a long series of deregulations fostered the incremental decline which has led to the current economic downturn.

The relatively minor cyclical economic adjustments which occur routinely and predictably, even during the best of times, are not reparative redistributions. But what we are seeing today is in many ways a repetition of what went on in the 1920s and the only thing that will pull us out of this depressed condition is another major reparative redistribution. It will require spending reductions, such as available through elimination of many unnecessary military bases in foreign countries, general reductions in military spending, immediate cessation of the wasteful, wholly counterproductive drug war and major tax increases on the upper income levels. The derived revenue should be used to repair our crumbling infrastructure which will create millions of jobs and give rise to many new and thriving industries.

All would be cool if it wasnt all bullshit. FDR prolonged the depression.

Who told you that? Rush Limbaugh?

Can you tell us spefically how FDR managed to prolong the Depression? Solid facts, please, not speculative notions and vague theories. Facts.

No. If you'd take the time to research the subject, you'd find the facts. Instead ,you use your blind loyalty to party to establish your position.
In any event, you'll NEVER realize your dream of socialism here.
I view your ideas as an attack on our civil rights. That line you do not wish to cross.
Thank the Founders for the Second Amendment.
Come get ya some.

 

[MikeK]

All would be cool if it wasnt all bullshit. FDR prolonged the depression.

Who told you that? Rush Limbaugh?

Can you tell us spefically how FDR managed to prolong the Depression? Solid facts, please, not speculative notions and vague theories. Facts.

Nope from his own treasury secretary

Henry Morgenthau, Roosevelt’s Treasury Secretary:

We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong . . . somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. . . . I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. . . . And an enormous debt to boot.

What made FDR great was his willingness to act in opposition to the advice of such critical influences in government as Henry Morgenthau and adhere to his New Deal, which raised America out of the Depression and into the phenomenal recovery seen between the 40s and the 80s. FDR was a glowing example of political courage.

So instead of grasping for anything to support your argument, such as the vain pronouncements of a proven-wrong critic like Morgenthau, why not refer to solid, undeniable evidence to base a conclusion on. If Morgenthau was right, how do you account for the recovery? And don't lose sight of the fact that much of FDR's New Deal was conceived and implemented by Morgenthau, so he is criticizing something he held some responsibility for creating.

Keep in mind that FDR inherited an economy that had been looted in much the same way as the current economy has. It took many years of tampering with the mechanics of the system to bring about the '29 crash and the damage was so vast it surprised many that we recovered at all.

Think of Henry Morgenthau as analogous to Alan Greenspan and the situation will be easier for you to understand. Just because someone holds an important government office is no assurance that person is either competent, honest, unbiased, or is concerned with pursuing the best interests of the American People.

So, again; if Morgenthau was right, how do you account for the spectacular recovery?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Who told you that? Rush Limbaugh?

Can you tell us spefically how FDR managed to prolong the Depression? Solid facts, please, not speculative notions and vague theories. Facts.

Nope from his own treasury secretary

Henry Morgenthau, Roosevelt’s Treasury Secretary:

We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong . . . somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. . . . I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. . . . And an enormous debt to boot.

What made FDR great was his willingness to act in opposition to the advice of such critical influences in government as Henry Morgenthau and adhere to his New Deal, which raised America out of the Depression and into the phenomenal recovery seen between the 40s and the 80s. FDR was a glowing example of political courage.

So instead of grasping for anything to support your argument, such as the vain pronouncements of a proven-wrong critic like Morgenthau, why not refer to solid, undeniable evidence to base a conclusion on. If Morgenthau was right, how do you account for the recovery? And don't lose sight of the fact that much of FDR's New Deal was conceived and implemented by Morgenthau, so he is criticizing something he held some responsibility for creating.

Keep in mind that FDR inherited an economy that had been looted in much the same way as the current economy has. It took many years of tampering with the mechanics of the system to bring about the '29 crash and the damage was so vast it surprised many that we recovered at all.

Think of Henry Morgenthau as analogous to Alan Greenspan and the situation will be easier for you to understand. Just because someone holds an important government office is no assurance that person is either competent, honest, unbiased, or is concerned with pursuing the best interests of the American People.

So, again; if Morgenthau was right, how do you account for the spectacular recovery?

WRONG....
Timeline of the Great Depression
About the U.S. Economy During WWII | eHow.com
Great Depression Timeline | Timeline Of The Great Depression | Timelines | Causes

But for the US entry into WWII, the devastating effects of the Great Depression could have lasted into the 1950's.

 

[MikeK]

Imagine the outrage if we dare make the moocher class do anything to earn their plunder.
Work camps to get food stamps, Medicaid, free day care and housing.
If FDR would try that now he would be labeled a NAZI.

Maybe I don't get out enough but I'm not aware of who you mean by the "moocher class?" Could you be a bit more specific.

I am aware that regardless of any efforts on the part of government to eliminate unqualified recipients of aid (in one form or other) there always will be the "ten percent" who manage to finagle their way onto the dole. Is this the category you mean by "moocher class?" If so, can you suggest an effective means of eliminating them (aside from gas chambers and the like) because no one else has been able to?

I don't believe you mean to include in your "moocher class" those unfortunates who for one reason or other legitimately rely on such things as welfare, food stamps and medicare for their very survival. But if I'm mistaken please suggest a workable solution to the problem. (Again; no gas chambers, etc.)

PS: if you wish to talk about "plunder" you need to focus on the recipients of the multi-billion dollar bail-outs who recently milked our Treasury. I don't think your so-called "moocher class" comes close to receiving even five percent of that level of "plunder." Which do you think is more deserving to receive public money, those who are too damaged or defective to make it on their own -- or those who are simply "too big to fail?"

 

[Gadawg73]

Imagine the outrage if we dare make the moocher class do anything to earn their plunder.
Work camps to get food stamps, Medicaid, free day care and housing.
If FDR would try that now he would be labeled a NAZI.

Maybe I don't get out enough but I'm not aware of who you mean by the "moocher class?" Could you be a bit more specific.

I am aware that regardless of any efforts on the part of government to eliminate unqualified recipients of aid (in one form or other) there always will be the "ten percent" who manage to finagle their way onto the dole. Is this the category you mean by "moocher class?" If so, can you suggest an effective means of eliminating them (aside from gas chambers and the like) because no one else has been able to?

I don't believe you mean to include in your "moocher class" those unfortunates who for one reason or other legitimately rely on such things as welfare, food stamps and medicare for their very survival. But if I'm mistaken please suggest a workable solution to the problem. (Again; no gas chambers, etc.)

PS: if you wish to talk about "plunder" you need to focus on the recipients of the multi-billion dollar bail-outs who recently milked our Treasury. I don't think your so-called "moocher class" comes close to receiving even five percent of that level of "plunder." Which do you think is more deserving to receive public money, those who are too damaged or defective to make it on their own -- or those who are simply "too big to fail?"

Those on SSDI that can work.
Those that get food stamps, housing assistance, free medical care, free day care, WICK, subsidized energy assistance and free cell phone minutes would be moocher class.

Under yout theory since it is okay for government to bail out business then it is okay to fund lazy moochers.

Got it, makes no sense whatsoever but read you loud and clear.

 

[Gadawg73]

You really believe government does a good job weeding out unqualified recipients?

You don't so quit bull shitting us.

 

[zeke]

Those on SSDI that can work.
Those that get food stamps, housing assistance, free medical care, free day care, WICK, subsidized energy assistance and free cell phone minutes would be moocher class.

Sure are a lot of employers looking to hire people that have been injured and are now recieving Social Security Disability Income. Are you hiring these folks cause I know a guy that needs a job?

And in case you missed it, everybody in this country gets health care coverage. All you need to do is show up at the emergency room and presto, you have health coverage. What is the problem? You can do it to.

And you are right. With a minimum wage job, 30 - 35 hours a week. Plenty of money to pay for child care. Or they could just quit their job cause no one would take care of their kids for 25 dollars a week.

And I hate it that old people get help with their heating and cooling costs. Free loaders that worked most of their lives and now expect YOU to pay for their heat. I say let em freeze orbake. What ever. How about you. Freeze or bake?

But the part about cell phones is the kicker. I can't believe that cell phones fall under that law of universal access or something like that. Everyone knows that those phones are not free. And with the amount of my cell phone bill, someone is making out like a bandit.


But did you hear about the one trillion dollar farm subsidy bill that Congress passed?
Poor ole farmers. They need the help bad. Don't they?

 

[MikeK]

Those on SSDI that can work.

According to who? You? You are able to certify each one as being able to work? Or are you just taking Rush Limbaugh's word that they are?

Those that get food stamps, housing assistance, free medical care, free day care, WICK, subsidized energy assistance and free cell phone minutes would be moocher class.

Every one of them is a "moocher?" You know that to be a fact? If so, how do you make such determinations?

Under yout theory since it is okay for government to bail out business then it is okay to fund lazy moochers.

What I stated is not theory. It is documentable fact.

The amount of "bailout" money handed over to Wall Street and banks, the CEOs of which continued to take home $multi-million bonuses, is infinitely greater than the total cost of all aid programs. But you haven't a thing to say about that. Your concern is the "moochers" whom you cannot identify but whom you simply assume are malingering without even knowing who they are.

I will concede the aforementioned "ten percenters" always have been with us and always will be with us. But unless you wish to exterminate them no one has ever figured out a way to be rid of them. So to just broadly assume all recipients of aid are "ten percenters" and are unworthy is thoughtless, mean-spirited, and simply wrong.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Imagine the outrage if we dare make the moocher class do anything to earn their plunder.
Work camps to get food stamps, Medicaid, free day care and housing.
If FDR would try that now he would be labeled a NAZI.

Maybe I don't get out enough but I'm not aware of who you mean by the "moocher class?" Could you be a bit more specific.

I am aware that regardless of any efforts on the part of government to eliminate unqualified recipients of aid (in one form or other) there always will be the "ten percent" who manage to finagle their way onto the dole. Is this the category you mean by "moocher class?" If so, can you suggest an effective means of eliminating them (aside from gas chambers and the like) because no one else has been able to?

I don't believe you mean to include in your "moocher class" those unfortunates who for one reason or other legitimately rely on such things as welfare, food stamps and medicare for their very survival. But if I'm mistaken please suggest a workable solution to the problem. (Again; no gas chambers, etc.)

PS: if you wish to talk about "plunder" you need to focus on the recipients of the multi-billion dollar bail-outs who recently milked our Treasury. I don't think your so-called "moocher class" comes close to receiving even five percent of that level of "plunder." Which do you think is more deserving to receive public money, those who are too damaged or defective to make it on their own -- or those who are simply "too big to fail?"

Moocher class. Those who can work, but refuse to work. Instead they game the system to mooch off the taxpayers.
Your question( how to get the moochers off the dole) is asked with the conclusion in mind that "the job of culling out "moochers" is so large, there is no sense in trying"..
The plan to get the moochers off the dole is quite simple.
First, drug test every one of them. If the fail, they get to come back in 30 days. If they fail again, bye bye checks..If they fail to show up, they get 30 days to make up their test. If they don't show up..Bye bye check.
They also must PROVE they cannot work. Oh, day care or baby sitters are not an excuse for not working. Get one.
As for your rant regarding bailouts.....All of the TARP money was paid back. Actually it was not a bailout. It was a purchase of Preferred Stock in 9 of the largest banks in the US.
The federal government MADE the banks sell the stock...Those banks' Boards of Directors had no choice but to allow the federal government to buy the stock....
The federal government told the banks that this was necessary to maintain confidence in the markets. Otherwise ,the government officials maintained that the economic system would have collapsed. That is THEIR version.
Every time one of you lefty kooks spews about banks and Wall Street getting billions in assistance I have to laugh me head off. The fucking federal government took MY money and yours and GAVE it to those institutions....Most of them did not want it. That is why the heads of the US 9 largest banks were summoned to Washington. To have the TARP rammed down their throats.
Now, you will go on believing your version of the events and creating your own reality.
It still does not change the facts.
What the fuck do you care. You're a socialist. And you people don't need money. You just expect others to take care of you.

 

[Gadawg73]

Those on SSDI that can work.
Those that get food stamps, housing assistance, free medical care, free day care, WICK, subsidized energy assistance and free cell phone minutes would be moocher class.

Sure are a lot of employers looking to hire people that have been injured and are now recieving Social Security Disability Income. Are you hiring these folks cause I know a guy that needs a job?

And in case you missed it, everybody in this country gets health care coverage. All you need to do is show up at the emergency room and presto, you have health coverage. What is the problem? You can do it to.

And you are right. With a minimum wage job, 30 - 35 hours a week. Plenty of money to pay for child care. Or they could just quit their job cause no one would take care of their kids for 25 dollars a week.

And I hate it that old people get help with their heating and cooling costs. Free loaders that worked most of their lives and now expect YOU to pay for their heat. I say let em freeze orbake. What ever. How about you. Freeze or bake?

But the part about cell phones is the kicker. I can't believe that cell phones fall under that law of universal access or something like that. Everyone knows that those phones are not free. And with the amount of my cell phone bill, someone is making out like a bandit.


But did you hear about the one trillion dollar farm subsidy bill that Congress passed?
Poor ole farmers. They need the help bad. Don't they?

What the fuck are folks with miminum wage jobs doing having children?
So that I have to pay for them like I do my own?
Your logic is since farmers get subsidies, a bad idea, it is okay to hand out cash to everyone since that is a bad idea also.
Got it, read you loud and clear.

 

[Gadawg73]

Mike and his followers can make their minds up without hesitation.
It is very easy to be a socialist when you are using OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY.