War on The Rich: Dumbest Idea in History of Man

[Uncensored2008]

If a restaurant is paying 8 dollars an hour to its workers and then starts paying them 10 dollars an hour,

where did the other 2 dollars an hour come from? ...all else being equal?

From the staff they laid off.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If a restaurant is paying 8 dollars an hour to its workers and then starts paying them 10 dollars an hour,

where did the other 2 dollars an hour come from? ...all else being equal?

From the staff they laid off.

That's not what all else being equal means.

Try again.

 

[Judicial review]

Bottom line is Obama wants to eliminate the middle class so there is only rich and poor and nothing inbetween to bridge the gap so the poor have no hope other than wealth redistrobution, which is to forcefully take from the rich and give to the poor making them dependent on the Federal Government and the only way to do that is through federal government intervention.

What Libs don't understand is it's not about the big businesses that can afford to pay the higher taxes it's really the small businesses that hurt and every business starts out with a small business mindset. Small businesses employ 50% of our nation workforce and if you take their money and tax them higher and make it impossible for them to expand they go out of business because they can't turn a profit or there work doesn't justify their pay and business owners get paid more when they expand and become big which naturally creates more jobs. Big businesses just like small businesses want to hire and expand to create more and more and infinate wealth, but hurt them financially in any specific way and they will hoard there money and won't hire.

Bottom line is do nothing but incentivice businesses and jobs will be created and people won't be complaining. That means lower that corporate tax rate, reduce regulations, and offer tax breaks. Do nothing but offer incentives and make sure they are in place longer than 1-2 years. Businesses need to be able to project long term with their plans. they aren't short term thinkers like Liberals on welfare.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well then, how much bigger a share of the US's annual productivity should go to the top 5%,

to where you people on the right wouldn't cry about some war on the Rich going on?

 

[kaz]

1 question for you - Where is the middle class in today's economy?

Job providers are being overtaxed reducing pay and opportunity and the money given to people poorer than they are, they are left out.

If I was a large business owner I'd get ride of full time employees and get below 50 and hire all 1099 - misc independent contractors. Why? They will take a pay cut because they can work for multiple companies and are willing to do way more work AND since they aren't employees corporations aren't required to offer health coverage so they don't have to pay any fees saving the big corporations millions and billions.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If a restaurant is paying 8 dollars an hour to its workers and then starts paying them 10 dollars an hour,

where did the other 2 dollars an hour come from? ...all else being equal?

From the staff they laid off.

Why did they need to lay staff off? So the owners could keep their share? According to you, the Rich don't need to take a bigger share from the rest of us in order to get richer...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Exactly. Why do libs think they can skip the middle class and go from poor to rich? Don't they understand the importance of the middle class?

One of the great misnomers is that the left hates the rich. But Andrew Grove, Bill Gates, George Soros, Jeff Immelt, et al. show that the majority of the extremely wealthy are dedicated leftists. Surely they don't hate themselves.

The left, the Khmer Rouge democrats, have no hatred for the rich, what they hate is the middle class, the Bourgeoisie. From the time of Marx, it has always been the middle which the left attacks.

Even with the attacks on the Koch brothers, who combined have less than 1% of the wealth of Bill Gates, less than 5% of the wealth of George Soros, is to destroy the usurpers, those who rise up from the great unwashed.

What the left fights to do is pull the ladder up, to ensure that one born poor will remain poor for life, to end income mobility.

Leftism is ultimately Feudalism - a return to an elite ruling over the masses "for their own good."

 

[Judicial review]

Well then, how much bigger a share of the US's annual productivity should go to the top 5%,

to where you people on the right wouldn't cry about some war on the Rich going on?

Why don't you work for 1 or 2 of those top 5% companies and quit complaining?.

 

[Judicial review]

If a restaurant is paying 8 dollars an hour to its workers and then starts paying them 10 dollars an hour,

where did the other 2 dollars an hour come from? ...all else being equal?

From the staff they laid off.

Why did they need to lay staff off? So the owners could keep their share? According to you, the Rich don't need to take a bigger share from the rest of us in order to get richer...

see my quoted post from post #365 then read post #363

 

[Discombobulated]

War on the rich......funny idea. If there's a war against rich folks it doesn't seem to be going very well, looks they're winning. One of the advantages of living in a free society is that the people with the most money are free to use it to gain more money, power and influence for themselves.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why did they need to lay staff off?

Because the cost of each staff member went up.

owners could keep their share? According to you, the Rich don't need to take a bigger share from the rest of us in order to get richer...

What is it you believe a person starts a business to do? Serve his fellow man?

 

[Uncensored2008]

War on the rich......funny idea. If there's a war against rich folks it doesn't seem to be going very well, looks they're winning. One of the advantages of living in a free society is that the people with the most money are free to use it to gain more money, power and influence for themselves.

Yes, you of the left are at war against the middle. A tiny elite ruling over a dependent peasantry is exactly the society the left advocates.

 

[Mustang]

No need in chronicling the various left-wing memes, we see them daily being presented as "arguments" for justifying this insidious war against the wealthy. Form the anti-capitalists bemoaning "multi-national corporations" to the Occutards who seem to think "Wall Street" is this lumbering out-of-control monster that is gobbling up everyone's wealth except for the wealthiest. Oh... and those evil "bankers" who simply have all this unlimited supply of money and won't willingly hand it out to deadbeat liberals because they are just mean and greedy.

On and on, these people have convinced themselves that it's a great idea and 'noble cause' to wage all-out war on the rich. It is arguably the most stupid political idea ever in the history of mankind, and I am here to tell you why.

The first and foremost reason is, it's a losing strategy. In fact, it is worse of a boondoggle than Vietnam ever could have hoped to be. It's literally a war that cannot ever be won. Rich people, it just so happens, are very smart when it comes to their wealth. This fact of the matter has prompted the formation of such sayings as... "A fool and his money are soon parted." Their ability to be one step ahead of you is astonishing and impressive to say the least. No matter how much you may believe that we can use the forces of government to confiscate the wealth of the rich, it ain't ever going to happen. The more you try, the more you fail.

What you manage to do in the process is bomb your own facilities and resources. You plant land mines for unsuspecting middle-income people trying to obtain wealth through small business. You rig booby-traps for poor people who are struggling to get to middle-income with better jobs. The so-called "rich" are rarely ever affected by your actions. They simply remain a few moves ahead of you, and we never touch their wealth.

Okay, so we're going to "punish" these wealthy people and corporations by burdening them with high income taxes and corporate tax, more regulations and fines, more penalties and fees... but it never works. Tax the rich person's earned income more and they stop earning income, because they are rich and don't have to earn income anymore. Make it harder for a corporation and they close the doors or move someplace else. More regulations, mandates, burdens... they simply eliminate jobs. Obamacare alone is responsible for trillions of dollars in potential raises and bonuses for the middle-income that will never be realized now. You see, you gifted to them the ultimate excuse... "no pay raise this year... Obamacare!"

Wall Street is a location in New York City, it's where capitalists go to trade public stocks with each other in our free market capitalist system. All the crap we hear about Wall Street would lead one to believe a silver stake is needed to kill this horrible evil creature who is destroying us all. If we don't have this location in NYC where capitalists can freely trade their public stocks, what do you think will take the place of it? Because, capitalists are still going to be capitalists, it's what they do. So think about that for a moment, and explain to me what you envision the alternative would be to a Wall Street?

Okay, so we're going to "punish" all these greedy capitalists on Wall Street by implementing all sorts of trade restrictions and penalties, heap more hassle and burden on them to prevent them capitalizing TOO much... Wrong! What you are going to do is force capitalists away from your market and allow foreign markets to obtain a portion of their wealth instead. *You see, as much as you may hate the rich, other countries seem to really LIKE the rich. (*I mention this for the sheeple out there who like to follow what other countries do.)

For the past 8 years of this de facto "war against the rich" being waged by the left, we've managed to keep the economy floating by borrowing and printing more money. We've infused trillions of dollars so far, and will continue to do this as long as Obama and the Democrats are in charge politically. Now this is all money we will have to repay at some point, but for now, it's keeping the economy of America from going tits up. As this has happened, the screws have been tightened on the 'rich greedy capitalists' but the results are not forthcoming. In fact, they are moving in the opposite direction rather rapidly. Wealthy capitalists are at least two moves ahead at all times. It's how they got to be rich, for the most part.

So, ostensibly, you are waging a war you can't win against an enemy who cannot be defeated. In the process, you are destroying yourself and your only remaining resources. You will only be able to borrow and print for so long to float the economy. The only proven thing in the history of man to ever recover any failing economy is free market capitalism. Some will brazenly claim "Keynesianism" has worked, but the only times where Keynes policies ever were successful, were under a ripe and ready capitalist economy. You can't have Keynesianism without Capitalism, the numbers simply don't work.

Oh, but what about the terrible growing disparity in wealth? Well, what about that? Okay, imagine a marathon race... this represents the acquisition of wealth. In the marathon are competitors who are well-trained athletes, who know how to win, who have trained hard to win, and will ultimately be in a position to win. Also, we have some couch potatoes who have never had much interest in the race, they are just there for the free gatorade. Then there are a whole bunch of people in the middle, who are not couch potatoes or athletes, but honestly hope to be able to compete and do well in the race. Now.... logically speaking, who is going to likely lead this race and extend their lead as the race progresses? Is there ever going to be a time where the couch potatoes are gaining more ground on the athletes and catching up, or are the athletes always going to be pulling away?

The point of the analogy is, the wealthy naturally become wealthier at a faster rate than the poor. So, this "gap" is normal in a free capitalist system and it's normal for the "gap" to continue to grow. Now, what can be done about this? Well, one thing that doesn't ever work is to hobble the athlete so the couch potatoes can catch up, because the couch potato is only interested in free gatorade, they had just as soon not race at all. The best alternative to deal with this growing disparity is to motivate the couch potato. Get them into the race. They may not ever win, they may not ever catch the athlete, but if they are at least competing, they are improving the situation and limiting the growing disparity. At the same time, you encourage the athletes to mentor the competitors in the middle who earnestly want to learn to be a better athlete. There are any number of free market ways to do this, we just need to explore those possibilities. But we first need to take the ball and chain off the legs of the athletes and admit this is a stupid idea.

Or now.... We CAN do as Chairman Mao tried to do in China... Gather all the rich greedy capitalists in front of an open ditch and put a bullet in their head, confiscate their assets and try to implement anti-capitalism as a legitimate form of government. Last time, it resulted in 70 million deaths and still didn't work.

To date, I have never heard rank and file conservatives ask for an across the board pay cut in order that their wealthy employer won't outsource their jobs. When I see that, then I'll start to believe the conservatives have a better understanding what's happening in the economy as the wealthy are not only continuing to amass greater wealth while the rest of Americans see falling wages, the wealthy are taking a larger share of the national income as well. It just so happens that bodes poorly for an economy dependent on consumer spending.

One more point should not be forgotten. While it's true that the poorer classes may very well rely on corporations to provide jobs, corporations rely on workers to create the wealth since the economy works based on the fact that the workers are paid LESS than the value of their labor they provide. In case you didn't realize it, that's where the profit margins come from. That means it's a symbiotic relationship.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why did they need to lay staff off?

Because the cost of each staff member went up.

owners could keep their share? According to you, the Rich don't need to take a bigger share from the rest of us in order to get richer...

What is it you believe a person starts a business to do? Serve his fellow man?

I believe that humans are capable, for the sake of money, wealth, riches, etc., of committing the most heinous acts imaginable against their fellow human beings. In fact that is more than a belief, it's a historical fact.

 

[rightwinger]

Bottom line is Obama wants to eliminate the middle class so there is only rich and poor and nothing inbetween to bridge the gap so the poor have no hope other than wealth redistrobution, which is to forcefully take from the rich and give to the poor making them dependent on the Federal Government and the only way to do that is through federal government intervention.

What Libs don't understand is it's not about the big businesses that can afford to pay the higher taxes it's really the small businesses that hurt and every business starts out with a small business mindset. Small businesses employ 50% of our nation workforce and if you take their money and tax them higher and make it impossible for them to expand they go out of business because they can't turn a profit or there work doesn't justify their pay and business owners get paid more when they expand and become big which naturally creates more jobs. Big businesses just like small businesses want to hire and expand to create more and more and infinate wealth, but hurt them financially in any specific way and they will hoard there money and won't hire.

Bottom line is do nothing but incentivice businesses and jobs will be created and people won't be complaining. That means lower that corporate tax rate, reduce regulations, and offer tax breaks. Do nothing but offer incentives and make sure they are in place longer than 1-2 years. Businesses need to be able to project long term with their plans. they aren't short term thinkers like Liberals on welfare.

Who said anything about big or small business?

We are talking about personal income

 

[Judicial review]

Bottom line is Obama wants to eliminate the middle class so there is only rich and poor and nothing inbetween to bridge the gap so the poor have no hope other than wealth redistrobution, which is to forcefully take from the rich and give to the poor making them dependent on the Federal Government and the only way to do that is through federal government intervention.

What Libs don't understand is it's not about the big businesses that can afford to pay the higher taxes it's really the small businesses that hurt and every business starts out with a small business mindset. Small businesses employ 50% of our nation workforce and if you take their money and tax them higher and make it impossible for them to expand they go out of business because they can't turn a profit or there work doesn't justify their pay and business owners get paid more when they expand and become big which naturally creates more jobs. Big businesses just like small businesses want to hire and expand to create more and more and infinate wealth, but hurt them financially in any specific way and they will hoard there money and won't hire.

Bottom line is do nothing but incentivice businesses and jobs will be created and people won't be complaining. That means lower that corporate tax rate, reduce regulations, and offer tax breaks. Do nothing but offer incentives and make sure they are in place longer than 1-2 years. Businesses need to be able to project long term with their plans. they aren't short term thinkers like Liberals on welfare.

Who said anything about big or small business?

We are talking about personal income

How can you get personal income if you can't work for a small or large business due to them not hireing or them reducing fulltime to part time or laying off workers and hireing 1099 employees? They go hand in hand. Go back a re-read my last 3 posts.

 

[rightwinger]

Bottom line is Obama wants to eliminate the middle class so there is only rich and poor and nothing inbetween to bridge the gap so the poor have no hope other than wealth redistrobution, which is to forcefully take from the rich and give to the poor making them dependent on the Federal Government and the only way to do that is through federal government intervention.

What Libs don't understand is it's not about the big businesses that can afford to pay the higher taxes it's really the small businesses that hurt and every business starts out with a small business mindset. Small businesses employ 50% of our nation workforce and if you take their money and tax them higher and make it impossible for them to expand they go out of business because they can't turn a profit or there work doesn't justify their pay and business owners get paid more when they expand and become big which naturally creates more jobs. Big businesses just like small businesses want to hire and expand to create more and more and infinate wealth, but hurt them financially in any specific way and they will hoard there money and won't hire.

Bottom line is do nothing but incentivice businesses and jobs will be created and people won't be complaining. That means lower that corporate tax rate, reduce regulations, and offer tax breaks. Do nothing but offer incentives and make sure they are in place longer than 1-2 years. Businesses need to be able to project long term with their plans. they aren't short term thinkers like Liberals on welfare.

Who said anything about big or small business?

We are talking about personal income

How can you get personal income if you can't work for a small or large business due to them not hireing or them reducing fulltime to part time or laying off workers and hireing 1099 employees? They go hand in hand. Go back a re-read my last 3 posts.

We are talking about personal income of those small businesses not business income

Dealing with increased business costs is part of running a business. We never see this whining when a business has to pay more for raw materials or rent or advertising....they make adjustments
But as soon as you talk about increasing wages, all of a sudden it is "you know, we are going to have to lay people off"

Has never been the case with other minimum wage increases

 

[Judicial review]

Bottom line is Obama wants to eliminate the middle class so there is only rich and poor and nothing inbetween to bridge the gap so the poor have no hope other than wealth redistrobution, which is to forcefully take from the rich and give to the poor making them dependent on the Federal Government and the only way to do that is through federal government intervention.

What Libs don't understand is it's not about the big businesses that can afford to pay the higher taxes it's really the small businesses that hurt and every business starts out with a small business mindset. Small businesses employ 50% of our nation workforce and if you take their money and tax them higher and make it impossible for them to expand they go out of business because they can't turn a profit or there work doesn't justify their pay and business owners get paid more when they expand and become big which naturally creates more jobs. Big businesses just like small businesses want to hire and expand to create more and more and infinate wealth, but hurt them financially in any specific way and they will hoard there money and won't hire.

Bottom line is do nothing but incentivice businesses and jobs will be created and people won't be complaining. That means lower that corporate tax rate, reduce regulations, and offer tax breaks. Do nothing but offer incentives and make sure they are in place longer than 1-2 years. Businesses need to be able to project long term with their plans. they aren't short term thinkers like Liberals on welfare.

Who said anything about big or small business?

We are talking about personal income

How can you get personal income if you can't work for a small or large business due to them not hireing or them reducing fulltime to part time or laying off workers and hireing 1099 employees? They go hand in hand. Go back a re-read my last 3 posts.

We are talking about personal income of those small businesses not business income

Dealing with increased business costs is part of running a business. We never see this whining when a business has to pay more for raw materials or rent or advertising....they make adjustments
But as soon as you talk about increasing wages, all of a sudden it is "you know, we are going to have to lay people off"

Has never been the case with other minimum wage increases

What you fail to realize is that in a lot of those small business they are sole proprietors meaning their business income is there personal income and expenses vice versa. Also, small businesses don't hvae the cash flow of larger corporations to be able to increase those wages. Lot's of small businesses can't even get credit from banks due to dodd Frank regulatory bill that was passed. Of course they'd have to lay people off. Common sense.

 

[Discombobulated]

War on the rich......funny idea. If there's a war against rich folks it doesn't seem to be going very well, looks they're winning. One of the advantages of living in a free society is that the people with the most money are free to use it to gain more money, power and influence for themselves.

Yes, you of the left are at war against the middle. A tiny elite ruling over a dependent peasantry is exactly the society the left advocates.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Bottom line is Obama wants to eliminate the middle class so there is only rich and poor and nothing inbetween to bridge the gap so the poor have no hope other than wealth redistrobution, which is to forcefully take from the rich and give to the poor making them dependent on the Federal Government and the only way to do that is through federal government intervention.

What Libs don't understand is it's not about the big businesses that can afford to pay the higher taxes it's really the small businesses that hurt and every business starts out with a small business mindset. Small businesses employ 50% of our nation workforce and if you take their money and tax them higher and make it impossible for them to expand they go out of business because they can't turn a profit or there work doesn't justify their pay and business owners get paid more when they expand and become big which naturally creates more jobs. Big businesses just like small businesses want to hire and expand to create more and more and infinate wealth, but hurt them financially in any specific way and they will hoard there money and won't hire.

Bottom line is do nothing but incentivice businesses and jobs will be created and people won't be complaining. That means lower that corporate tax rate, reduce regulations, and offer tax breaks. Do nothing but offer incentives and make sure they are in place longer than 1-2 years. Businesses need to be able to project long term with their plans. they aren't short term thinkers like Liberals on welfare.

Who said anything about big or small business?

We are talking about personal income

How can you get personal income if you can't work for a small or large business due to them not hireing or them reducing fulltime to part time or laying off workers and hireing 1099 employees? They go hand in hand. Go back a re-read my last 3 posts.

We are talking about personal income of those small businesses not business income

Dealing with increased business costs is part of running a business. We never see this whining when a business has to pay more for raw materials or rent or advertising....they make adjustments
But as soon as you talk about increasing wages, all of a sudden it is "you know, we are going to have to lay people off"

Has never been the case with other minimum wage increases

for most small businesses business income is personal income because they are organized as s corps and llcs