War on The Rich: Dumbest Idea in History of Man

[JoeNormal]

It appears to me that you've never ever been a care taker. Not for kids, not for parents, not for anyone. It tends to put a dent in the time and energy it takes to 'pull yourself up by your own bootstraps'.

We all have the same time every week.

So tell me why is it that some people with a bunch of kids don't use their kids as an excuse not to do something but as a reason to do it.

As a reason to get rich? Or what? I've seen people complete an education after kids and some even start a business after kids but I haven't seen anyone get rich after kids unless the seeds were well sown beforehand.

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it can't be done.

I know people who started business while they had kids and they even had more kids after who never made excuses they way you people do and they actually became quite wealthy.

But people like you would rather say it can't be done so you can justify your own lack of initiative. The sad thing is that at least 80% of people will agree with you so it's quite a group of enablers.

Maybe you should associate with more ambitious people.

I've got all the material wealth I could ever want. If I had a lot more money, I'd buy time with it. That's the commodity that most rich people I know don't have.

more rationalization.

You have yet to tell me who made it harder or impossible for you to amass this material wealth.

Maybe that's because no one is stopping you or anyone else from improving their financial position

There's definitely a glass ceiling in my industry and if you're good at what you're doing currently, a move into a management position isn't going to happen. Now that the economy has stagnated, there are even fewer managers looking to move. I've stopped fighting it. I'm getting close enough to retirement that it wouldn't be worth the energy.

 

[The Rabbi]

How is readjusting the tax code so that it no longer favors the rich, a "war on the rich"?

A flat tax doesn't favor anyone.

I have yet to see a flat tax proposal that does not result in a significant cut in taxes for the wealthy

SO?

All that illustrates is that some people pay far beyond their fair share.

Why should anyone pay a higher share than anyone else.

So...you don't try to get blood from a turnip

You tax where the money is not by shaking down poor people. Care to name a successful nation on earth that has a flat tax? Why not start with Russia?

Actually some eastern European countries have done very well with a flat tax and it has worked very well in Hong kong

There you go interjecting fact into it.
Yeah, the East European countries saw revenue soar when they went to a flat tax. Simpler and less incentive to cheat.
No wonder Dems hate it.

 

[Boss]

I think the OP fails to realize that corporations and Wall Street own and are part of the government. In fact the 'war on the rich' is a fallacy, as they own the politicians in both parties, hold the vast majority of political power, and only give token gestures to the plebs so they don't revolt. They profit more from the status quo, which is why they want to keep it, though the next step is making it so only the poor and middle class pay tax, like in the good old days of serfdom.

Wow... Coulda sworn the 13th and 14th Amendment got rid of people owning people.

Looked at student loan debt lately, or the national debt.

Student loan debt? The debt is high because the cost is high, and the cost is high because of the Utopian policy of "free money" to go to college, as opposed to letting capitalism work. For much the same reasons we have accumulated a national debt.

 

[The Rabbi]

It appears to me that you've never ever been a care taker. Not for kids, not for parents, not for anyone. It tends to put a dent in the time and energy it takes to 'pull yourself up by your own bootstraps'.

We all have the same time every week.

So tell me why is it that some people with a bunch of kids don't use their kids as an excuse not to do something but as a reason to do it.

As a reason to get rich? Or what? I've seen people complete an education after kids and some even start a business after kids but I haven't seen anyone get rich after kids unless the seeds were well sown beforehand.

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it can't be done.

I know people who started business while they had kids and they even had more kids after who never made excuses they way you people do and they actually became quite wealthy.

But people like you would rather say it can't be done so you can justify your own lack of initiative. The sad thing is that at least 80% of people will agree with you so it's quite a group of enablers.

Maybe you should associate with more ambitious people.

I've got all the material wealth I could ever want. If I had a lot more money, I'd buy time with it. That's the commodity that most rich people I know don't have.

more rationalization.

You have yet to tell me who made it harder or impossible for you to amass this material wealth.

Maybe that's because no one is stopping you or anyone else from improving their financial position

It's because he cares about his family. And he has to care about his family because government just isnt doing enough, darn it.

 

[Boss]

Had President Romney been in charge and implemented exactly the same program you and all the other Republicans would lauded it as a triumph of free market capitalism.

Nuupe! Wrong!

Your so called principles are entirely subject to political ideology.

Well no,.. that would be YOU!

 

[JoeNormal]

We all have the same time every week.

So tell me why is it that some people with a bunch of kids don't use their kids as an excuse not to do something but as a reason to do it.

As a reason to get rich? Or what? I've seen people complete an education after kids and some even start a business after kids but I haven't seen anyone get rich after kids unless the seeds were well sown beforehand.

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it can't be done.

I know people who started business while they had kids and they even had more kids after who never made excuses they way you people do and they actually became quite wealthy.

But people like you would rather say it can't be done so you can justify your own lack of initiative. The sad thing is that at least 80% of people will agree with you so it's quite a group of enablers.

Maybe you should associate with more ambitious people.

I've got all the material wealth I could ever want. If I had a lot more money, I'd buy time with it. That's the commodity that most rich people I know don't have.

more rationalization.

You have yet to tell me who made it harder or impossible for you to amass this material wealth.

Maybe that's because no one is stopping you or anyone else from improving their financial position

It's because he cares about his family. And he has to care about his family because government just isnt doing enough, darn it.

Show me where I said that.

 

[Boss]

Again, my question to you (you fucking retard) is why are we continuing policies that only contribute to the existing disparity in wealth? Even a fucking retard such as yourself with exceptionally poor personal hygeine should be able to respond to a fucking easy question. Are you that dimwitted? Answer the question you fucking moron!

<Aren't threads so much more fun when we get to insult each other?>

Well moron, the question was answered in the OP on page 1, if you bothered to read that. Most people who take time to respond to a thread have done that. I even presented it in analogy form, so you could better understand in your moronic state. (See the Marathon example between athletes and couch potatoes)

It doesn't matter what policies we do, the natural inclination of all free market capitalism is for the wealthy to become wealthier at a faster pace than the poor become wealthy. That's human nature. The best way to change that dynamic or keep the disparity from growing rapidly is to motivate the poor. You can't do this by pacifying their every need, which is what your policies tend to want to do.

 

[Boss]

How is readjusting the tax code so that it no longer favors the rich, a "war on the rich"?

The tax code does not matter to the rich. They do not have to earn incomes because they are rich. Many of them actually pay accountants fairly well to ensure they don't earn much taxable income. The ONLY thing you accomplish in messing with the tax code is to make it harder for people who are trying to get rich.

Every small business in America file taxes as an individual. What you mistakenly think of as "the rich" based on high income, is actually mostly small business. Many of these business owners are far from rich, they certainly aren't the uber-rich who you want to punish, but they are the ones bearing the brunt of your stupid policies.

 

[Contumacious]

I guess giving 150+ million acres free and loaning them $60+ million is 'little to do with it' (creating the RR's)

Yes... they gave them land which they stole and made LOANS to them which were repaid with interest. Again.... Railroads were built by Capitalists.

Crony Capitalism and the Transcontinental Railroads

....a government program that in reality should be best remembered as a pioneering feat in government corruption, corporate welfare, and immense waste.

Sure, OR we could've waited another 50 or so years for the 'free market' to work. Hmm

Excuse me dingle berry,

"as the first transcontinentals took shape, there was no economic justification. This is why the first transcontinentals were all creatures, not of capitalism or the private markets, but of government. There simply were not enough people, capital, manufactured goods, or crops between Missouri and the West coast to support a private-sector railroad."

Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett: Face it, Obama is a conservative
Just look at the president's record, Bartlett says. This is no progressive

Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett Face it Obama is a conservative - Salon.com


Obama Is a Republican
He’s the heir to Richard Nixon, not Saul Alinsky.
By Bruce Bartlett • October 21, 2014

Obama Is a Republican The American Conservative

Excuse me dingle berry,

"as the first transcontinentals took shape, there was no economic justification. This is why the first transcontinentals were all creatures, not of capitalism or the private markets, but of government. There simply were not enough people, capital, manufactured goods, or crops between Missouri and the West coast to support a private-sector railroad."

 

[The Rabbi]

As a reason to get rich? Or what? I've seen people complete an education after kids and some even start a business after kids but I haven't seen anyone get rich after kids unless the seeds were well sown beforehand.

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it can't be done.

I know people who started business while they had kids and they even had more kids after who never made excuses they way you people do and they actually became quite wealthy.

But people like you would rather say it can't be done so you can justify your own lack of initiative. The sad thing is that at least 80% of people will agree with you so it's quite a group of enablers.

Maybe you should associate with more ambitious people.

I've got all the material wealth I could ever want. If I had a lot more money, I'd buy time with it. That's the commodity that most rich people I know don't have.

more rationalization.

You have yet to tell me who made it harder or impossible for you to amass this material wealth.

Maybe that's because no one is stopping you or anyone else from improving their financial position

It's because he cares about his family. And he has to care about his family because government just isnt doing enough, darn it.

Show me where I said that.

It was implied in your statements.

 

[rightwinger]

A flat tax doesn't favor anyone.

I have yet to see a flat tax proposal that does not result in a significant cut in taxes for the wealthy

SO?

All that illustrates is that some people pay far beyond their fair share.

Why should anyone pay a higher share than anyone else.

So...you don't try to get blood from a turnip

You tax where the money is not by shaking down poor people. Care to name a successful nation on earth that has a flat tax? Why not start with Russia?

Actually some eastern European countries have done very well with a flat tax and it has worked very well in Hong kong

There you go interjecting fact into it.
Yeah, the East European countries saw revenue soar when they went to a flat tax. Simpler and less incentive to cheat.
No wonder Dems hate it.

Never thought I would see the day

Conservatives advocating that we be more like Eastern Europe

 

[Boss]

No, I just get tired of sociopathic douchebags criticizing people who help people besides themselves.

Hey, look around, dumbass... you're not "helping" anyone. The rich keep getting richer, the poor remain mired in poverty. We've spent 20-trillion dollars trying to bring them out of poverty to no avail. Not only do your policies FAIL, they cause even more dynamic problems... take student loans for example. You've artificially driven the price of education through the roof by doling out "free money" instead of letting capitalism work. Now we have kids who can never repay their massive student loans. Who did your policy help?

The same thing with the housing/financial collapse... It all started with Utopian dreams of poor people owning homes.... helping people! All the "free money" was doled out so poor people could buy homes and the price of homes went through the roof because free market capitalist forces were removed. Eventually, the poor can't afford their homes and default, then everything comes crashing down... you stick your index finger in your mouth and bite the tip, then blame it all on Republicans! The same thing is going to happen with health care.

 

[MikeK]

Wealth is property.

Wealth is anything of relative material value which is identifiable as personal assets.

According to the 4th Amendment, the government cannot seize your property without due cause.

Government can (and does) seize property for any of a number of reasons.

Wanting to steal your property is not due cause./QUOTE]
Legitimate taxation is not stealing -- except in the minds of fanatical tax protesters. Legitimate taxation is authorized by The Congress.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Just as soon as bailouts for the rich come from the rich only. I will agree...

Which bailouts are these?

GM? Nope, that was for the UAW votes - purchased by Obama with taxpayer funds. Chrysler? Nah, same as GM.

The bailout of CALPERS? Payola to to the corrupt unions in California.

AIG? Nope, that was to protect the public employee unions who would have crashed along with AIG.

So what are you babbling about, exactly?

 

[Uncensored2008]

and how much of inherited wealth is exempt from taxes?

How many times should you looters get to tax the same dollar? 10? 20? No limit as long as there is something you can loot?

and what percentage of people actually inherit enough wealth to pay inheritance taxes.

it's my understanding that there are six families behind the fight against inheritance taxes. one of them is the hilton family.

Paris Hilton may be a slut, but that does not give you the right to rob her at gun point just because you think she has too much.

 

[The Rabbi]

I have yet to see a flat tax proposal that does not result in a significant cut in taxes for the wealthy

SO?

All that illustrates is that some people pay far beyond their fair share.

Why should anyone pay a higher share than anyone else.

So...you don't try to get blood from a turnip

You tax where the money is not by shaking down poor people. Care to name a successful nation on earth that has a flat tax? Why not start with Russia?

Actually some eastern European countries have done very well with a flat tax and it has worked very well in Hong kong

There you go interjecting fact into it.
Yeah, the East European countries saw revenue soar when they went to a flat tax. Simpler and less incentive to cheat.
No wonder Dems hate it.

Never thought I would see the day

Conservatives advocating that we be more like Eastern Europe

That would be E.Europe, post Soviet break up.
Liberals prefer E.Europe, pre Soviet break up.

 

[Boss]

Kind of melodramatic aren't you?

Adjusting the tax structure on that 1% who have 34% of the wealth is far from a war. It's just sensible fiscal policy

No. it's utterly stupid policy. You can't tax wealth. You can only tax income. Wealthy people do not have to earn incomes... they are already wealthy.

The only thing you can do is to put up roadblocks so that no one else can obtain wealth. This seems to be the approach you've chosen to take, and it's the dumbest idea ever in the history of man.

Taxing wealth is how taxation was originally done in our republic. Jefferson and Paine and some other wise men decided that Dynastic wealth was a threat to democracy, and that taxing the sweat of a man's brow was an abhorrent idea.

Start at page 77

Screwed The Undeclared War Against the Middle Class and What We Can Do ... - Thom Hartmann - Google Books

I have no interest in reading the ramblings of a propagandist who is distorting the Founding Fathers to promote Marxism. No, our nation has never taxed wealth. We tax incomes, we tax inheritance. Neither of those is wealth.

Wealth is property. According to the 4th Amendment, the government cannot seize your property without due cause. Wanting to steal your property is not due cause.

They taxed property, they taxed estates, they still do, to a lesser (yet much wailed about) extent. And yes, inheritance is realized wealth. You are a functional moron or an accomplished liar. I'll let you decide which to settle on.

Well no, they didn't tax property at the federal level. The states tax property, not the feds. And estates are not taxed, even though we call it an "estate tax" ..aka: inheritance tax. What is taxed is the amount inherited. If that amount falls below a certain level, it is not taxed. Yes, inheritance is realized wealth but not all wealth is taxed.

I can't recall the threshold for inheritance tax, I think it's $1 million or $2 million.... but let's say it's $1 million. If I have a $10 million estate and I die, leaving my estate to a single individual, it is subject to the estate tax. But if I divide my estate up between my 20 children and grandchildren, each of them getting roughly $500k each, there is no estate tax. The taxation happens on the inheritance not the estate.

 

[JoeNormal]

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it can't be done.

I know people who started business while they had kids and they even had more kids after who never made excuses they way you people do and they actually became quite wealthy.

But people like you would rather say it can't be done so you can justify your own lack of initiative. The sad thing is that at least 80% of people will agree with you so it's quite a group of enablers.

Maybe you should associate with more ambitious people.

I've got all the material wealth I could ever want. If I had a lot more money, I'd buy time with it. That's the commodity that most rich people I know don't have.

more rationalization.

You have yet to tell me who made it harder or impossible for you to amass this material wealth.

Maybe that's because no one is stopping you or anyone else from improving their financial position

It's because he cares about his family. And he has to care about his family because government just isnt doing enough, darn it.

Show me where I said that.

It was implied in your statements.

What I might have implied is that I would like to see the same safety net and medical system that other industrialized countries offer their citizens. Why wouldn't you want that?

 

[MikeK]

[...]Eventually, the poor can't afford their homes and default, then everything comes crashing down...

This happened only because regulations which controlled the granting of home loans to unqualified (low income) borrowers were removed.

The same thing is going to happen with health care.

Only if preventive regulations are removed or tampered with.

 

[JoeNormal]

No, I just get tired of sociopathic douchebags criticizing people who help people besides themselves.

Hey, look around, dumbass... you're not "helping" anyone. The rich keep getting richer, the poor remain mired in poverty. We've spent 20-trillion dollars trying to bring them out of poverty to no avail. Not only do your policies FAIL, they cause even more dynamic problems... take student loans for example. You've artificially driven the price of education through the roof by doling out "free money" instead of letting capitalism work. Now we have kids who can never repay their massive student loans. Who did your policy help?

The same thing with the housing/financial collapse... It all started with Utopian dreams of poor people owning homes.... helping people! All the "free money" was doled out so poor people could buy homes and the price of homes went through the roof because free market capitalist forces were removed. Eventually, the poor can't afford their homes and default, then everything comes crashing down... you stick your index finger in your mouth and bite the tip, then blame it all on Republicans! The same thing is going to happen with health care.

All of your right wing fallacies have been proven wrong and it's the sociopathic douchebags who've turned the system on its ear (for their short term personal gain) who are to blame.