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.
Because the "captains of industry" foolishly crashed the economy ship into the rocks and now they have the gall to complain about what lifeboats and hull patches cost.
Pompous much? The American capitalist system is rigged to concentrate wealth at the top were it tends to stay. That's a fact of life you need to accept. Not looking for socialism just wanting things to work as you seem to think they currently do where opportunity exists in sufficient quantity where no one has to do without if they simply get some hustle.You sound like a broken record "wealth is infinite" you say? So what? Wealth is an abstract concept. What is real are things like GDP and the supply of raw materials and the energy supply etc. which are not infinite, It is the great tragedy of humanity that resources are not scattered evenly around the world and the people you worship as blameless gods of commerce exploit scarcity for their own profits. Wealth may be infinite because it is an artificial construct but real things that raise humans above abject poverty are not.
Well, wealth is certainly not an abstract concept. It's not a tragedy of humanity that resources aren't evenly distributed around the world, it's just a fact of nature and life. What is a tragedy is that a country as wealthy as ours, with as much going for it as ours, with the potential we have here for wealth acquisition and such, that we are inundated with absolute moronic idiots who have no clue about how even the most rudimentary capitalist system works.
Making the bulk of total income naturally requires the rich to pay the bulk of taxes. If that income were spread around more we would have a broader tax base and perhaps they would not be so "oppressed".Mitt Romney was not smart enough to beat Barack Obama. The war is not on the rich it is on the politicians that give the rich a free ride on the backs of taxpayers.
The "rich" pay most of the taxes how is that a free ride on the backs of taxpayers? We pump $1 trillion dollars a year now into state and federal welfare programs, cry me a freaking river.
If they are paying the taxes then what the hell does the left have to complain about?
I'm just one person, do you realize how stupid it is to personalize your rage at the decline of capitalism into monopolistic plutocracy on one person on a message board who has never even held the office of dog catcher? If you were talking to Ben Bernanke perhaps your personal blame game would not be so stupid and misplaced.Because the "captains of industry" foolishly crashed the economy ship into the rocks and now they have the gall to complain about what lifeboats and hull patches cost.
No, it was actually the captains of socialism and anti-capitalism who crashed the ship. Now you are trying to avoid the blame for your incompetence. Lifeboats and hull patches do us no good at all, you just keep firing your cannons into the hull and blaming it on the enemy you'll never defeat in this war you cannot win.
The wealth of any nation is finite. The more of it the rich concentrate in their own hands, the less there is left for everyone else.
Wrong! Wealth is NOT finite, it is infinite. People generate wealth through their labor, creativity, talents, etc. This is your key problem, the failure to understand wealth is not finite. When you believe such a fallacy, it causes you to think the wealthy should only become so wealthy else the poor can never become wealthy. It makes you believe there is only so much wealth and the wealthy have it all.
.
Notice that Boss likes the crazy idea of wealth being infinite if the Rich are accumulating it for themselves, however, in his mind,
wealth becomes extremely finite when the idea that the working class might get a bigger share of it rears its ugly head.
lol, classic rightwinger idiocy.
It's not crazy, wealth is infinite. You're crew has already had to admit it's not finite. Now "wealth is infinite" does not mean there is a great big unlimited pile of it somewhere for the taking. It means the ability to acquire wealth is unlimited. It's infinite, it still has to be acquired.
What you are calling the "working class" aren't going to ever get a bigger share. If you increase their share, the prices of goods and services rise and the amount of everyone's shares increase all the way down the line, so the "working class" end up with exactly the same share relative to everyone else. The only way a "worker" can get a bigger share is if you re-introduce free market capitalist principles and have capitalists compete for labor again. We're obviously not going to ever do that, so it's an academic point.
The average McDonald's franchise makes 500,000 to a million a year in profits.
What is a McDonald s franchise s profit Ask.com
Take the midpoint, $750,000 a year.
What if the franchise made 600,000 a year, and the 150,000 difference went to the workers in the form of better wages and/or benefits.
Did the workers gain? Yes. Did prices have to be increased? No.
They pay the bulk of federal income tax while the poor and middle class pay the bulk of state income and excise taxes.Making the bulk of total income naturally requires the rich to pay the bulk of taxes. If that income were spread around more we would have a broader tax base and perhaps they would not be so "oppressed".Mitt Romney was not smart enough to beat Barack Obama. The war is not on the rich it is on the politicians that give the rich a free ride on the backs of taxpayers.
The "rich" pay most of the taxes how is that a free ride on the backs of taxpayers? We pump $1 trillion dollars a year now into state and federal welfare programs, cry me a freaking river.
If they are paying the taxes then what the hell does the left have to complain about?
They are finding legal loopholes to get out of paying taxes. I disagree they pay the bulk of the taxes.
The answer is, of course, if wages went up and profits went down the shareholders would dump the stock. What a heartless bunch of assholes the almighty stockholders are. They are comfortably insulated from the pain their constant pressure to maximize profit causes, no understanding that the best companies are the ones trying to do well ten or twenty years from now rather than just next quarter. Extreme short-sightedness is another flaw in capitalism.The wealth of any nation is finite. The more of it the rich concentrate in their own hands, the less there is left for everyone else.
Wrong! Wealth is NOT finite, it is infinite. People generate wealth through their labor, creativity, talents, etc. This is your key problem, the failure to understand wealth is not finite. When you believe such a fallacy, it causes you to think the wealthy should only become so wealthy else the poor can never become wealthy. It makes you believe there is only so much wealth and the wealthy have it all.
.
Notice that Boss likes the crazy idea of wealth being infinite if the Rich are accumulating it for themselves, however, in his mind,
wealth becomes extremely finite when the idea that the working class might get a bigger share of it rears its ugly head.
lol, classic rightwinger idiocy.
It's not crazy, wealth is infinite. You're crew has already had to admit it's not finite. Now "wealth is infinite" does not mean there is a great big unlimited pile of it somewhere for the taking. It means the ability to acquire wealth is unlimited. It's infinite, it still has to be acquired.
What you are calling the "working class" aren't going to ever get a bigger share. If you increase their share, the prices of goods and services rise and the amount of everyone's shares increase all the way down the line, so the "working class" end up with exactly the same share relative to everyone else. The only way a "worker" can get a bigger share is if you re-introduce free market capitalist principles and have capitalists compete for labor again. We're obviously not going to ever do that, so it's an academic point.
The average McDonald's franchise makes 500,000 to a million a year in profits.
What is a McDonald s franchise s profit Ask.com
Take the midpoint, $750,000 a year.
What if the franchise made 600,000 a year, and the 150,000 difference went to the workers in the form of better wages and/or benefits.
Did the workers gain? Yes. Did prices have to be increased? No.
I think we've found a simple math problem that Boss can't solve.
Because the "captains of industry" foolishly crashed the economy ship into the rocks and now they have the gall to complain about what lifeboats and hull patches cost.Making the bulk of total income naturally requires the rich to pay the bulk of taxes. If that income were spread around more we would have a broader tax base and perhaps they would not be so "oppressed".Mitt Romney was not smart enough to beat Barack Obama. The war is not on the rich it is on the politicians that give the rich a free ride on the backs of taxpayers.
The "rich" pay most of the taxes how is that a free ride on the backs of taxpayers? We pump $1 trillion dollars a year now into state and federal welfare programs, cry me a freaking river.
If they are paying the taxes then what the hell does the left have to complain about?
Making the bulk of total income naturally requires the rich to pay the bulk of taxes. If that income were spread around more we would have a broader tax base and perhaps they would not be so "oppressed".Mitt Romney was not smart enough to beat Barack Obama. The war is not on the rich it is on the politicians that give the rich a free ride on the backs of taxpayers.
The "rich" pay most of the taxes how is that a free ride on the backs of taxpayers? We pump $1 trillion dollars a year now into state and federal welfare programs, cry me a freaking river.
If they are paying the taxes then what the hell does the left have to complain about?
They are finding legal loopholes to get out of paying taxes. I disagree they pay the bulk of the taxes.
They pay the bulk of federal income tax while the poor and middle class pay the bulk of state income and excise taxes.Making the bulk of total income naturally requires the rich to pay the bulk of taxes. If that income were spread around more we would have a broader tax base and perhaps they would not be so "oppressed".Mitt Romney was not smart enough to beat Barack Obama. The war is not on the rich it is on the politicians that give the rich a free ride on the backs of taxpayers.
The "rich" pay most of the taxes how is that a free ride on the backs of taxpayers? We pump $1 trillion dollars a year now into state and federal welfare programs, cry me a freaking river.
If they are paying the taxes then what the hell does the left have to complain about?
They are finding legal loopholes to get out of paying taxes. I disagree they pay the bulk of the taxes.
All states have regressive tax structures when all income taxes, property taxes, excise taxes and fees are counted by share of income, the red states tend to be worst of all.They pay the bulk of federal income tax while the poor and middle class pay the bulk of state income and excise taxes.Making the bulk of total income naturally requires the rich to pay the bulk of taxes. If that income were spread around more we would have a broader tax base and perhaps they would not be so "oppressed".The "rich" pay most of the taxes how is that a free ride on the backs of taxpayers? We pump $1 trillion dollars a year now into state and federal welfare programs, cry me a freaking river.
If they are paying the taxes then what the hell does the left have to complain about?
They are finding legal loopholes to get out of paying taxes. I disagree they pay the bulk of the taxes.
Which states, please specify?
Was the poster meant to say is that as a victim of the educational octopus she does not understand your premises.The OP wonders why people don't often respond to his threads.
Would he like an honest answer to that question?
No, I'd rather you obey the forum rules and keep your harassing and trolling comments to yourself if you're not going to participate in the thread.
Of course not. You'd prefer that everyone just let you drop your piles of BS here and avoid engaging you in discussion. That is why you post in the manner that you do. It isn't discussion you want. All you seek is nods of agreement from lightweights who like your thread titles.
If you want a thread with honest participation, I can advise you on how to achieve it.
Point 1. Develop a premise that has some basis in fact and is free of hyperbole.
You can thank me later.
So whenever any new advance it technology happens it just magically appears at wherever you work the next Monday? Delivered by the Magic Technology Fairy, is it? Doesn't cost anything, it's free of charge, whoever created it doesn't care about profiting from it at all... they are just happy to help out the Technology Fairy!
rightwinger is the mother off all parasites. Elizabeth Warren's picture is prominently displayed in his double wide.Nothing wrong with being rich as long as you contribute to the society that supports you
No more Bill Gates? You're spewing liberal nonsense.The wealth of any nation is finite. The more of it the rich concentrate in their own hands, the less there is left for everyone else.
I'm embarrassed for you.[
If wealth is infinite, why do you people like you complain so much about wealth redistribution?
If wealth is in infinite supply, why would you care who gets how much? Why would care that a government program gives the poor some of that wealth if it is coming from an infinite source?
All states have regressive tax structures when all income taxes, property taxes, excise taxes and fees are counted by share of income, the red states tend to be worst of all.They pay the bulk of federal income tax while the poor and middle class pay the bulk of state income and excise taxes.Making the bulk of total income naturally requires the rich to pay the bulk of taxes. If that income were spread around more we would have a broader tax base and perhaps they would not be so "oppressed".
If they are paying the taxes then what the hell does the left have to complain about?
They are finding legal loopholes to get out of paying taxes. I disagree they pay the bulk of the taxes.
Which states, please specify?
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.
