War on The Rich: Dumbest Idea in History of Man

[zeke]

Ya'll need to make up your minds. Either 47% of the population is sucking off the government teat and about worthless or the poor is all making it to the middle class on 9 bucks an hour. Or is it that the middle class have moved up to the wealthy class even though their middle class incomes show a decline along with the decline in other assets.

You just have to wonder what world the people who believe such bullshit live in. Black is white, up is down and being a stupid fuck makes you smart and daboss. LMAO.

But who'd a thunk that boss is a comedy writer. After reading what I read today, I do. Funny shit. In a strange sort of way.

Dude, you are the one who doesn't make sense.

Are you saying that it's impossible for 47% of the population to not pay taxes, while more and more people become wealthy? There is no contradiction there. They could change tax law so that 90% of the country didn't pay income taxes, and more and more become wealthy. The two are not mutually exclusive, except in your disabled mind.

The real contradiction is you on the left who claim that the rich 'should pay their fair share'.... when the rich already pay more in taxes than any other group. How is 47% carrying zero of the burden, "fair"? How is forcing the people who generate the most wealth, and generate the most jobs, and generate all of economic, technical, and societal advance, to pay the highest percentage of their rightfully earned income.... 'fair'?

It's not fair. That's the contradiction. And you people on the left are all hypocrites on this too. When you compare yourselfs with others, you always compare yourself to Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.

But if you were to compare yourself to me, who actually is the low income class, and I started demanding that you pay all the tax, so that I could get a free ride on your back... you'd be screaming how unfair it was. Hypocrites. All of you.

What ever gave you the idea that I was interested in your version of "fair"? I'm not.
But to be "fair" to your much beloved ultra wealthy (lets say income 10 million a year and up) I say lets set their tax rate ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME to 25% with NO deductions.

And lets take away the middle class home mortgage interest deduction to show that the middle class home buyers are interested in doing their part to reduce the amount of money we (the USA) borrow.

The wealthy could do more and the middle could do more. And the poor? No more EIC. Done. You qualify for that EIC don't cha? Would you mind giving it up so we can be more fiscally sound?

Are we bankrupt in this country or not? We had a sequester that cut spending. People cried like babies. If we ain't gonna cut spending we have to get more income. That's pretty fucking basic. The Repubs keep saying we are bankrupt. Then why don't they go get more money from the taxpayers? There are only two ways a nation gets money to spend; from its citizens (taxes) or borrow.(China for ex) Well and tariffs a little.

What's really fucking weird about your rants is that the ultra wealthy have been KILLING it in income increases. Don't you ever read anything about the gains in income and wealth that the top citizens have enjoyed? ALONG WITH A REDUCTION IN their taxes owed during the Bush years.

So now they got the great tax program from Bush, during which time they had made a killing in the housing fiasco, then the wealthy got real healthy when Obama started giving them money to play on Wall street.

The wealthy have had a great run. The middle and poor haven't. It's time for the real wealthy to give up some more of their money for the good of me. So I don't have to.

You know what's not fair? That I don't have 100 million dollars and a ten inch dick. But that's life. Ain't always "fair" But some people have that. I'll live with out those two things.

The wealthy will be just fine if they pay more taxes. Just fine. Don't worry about them cause they sure as fuck ain't worrying about YOU. Lmao.

I knew you had no interest in what is actually fair. You are a leftist after all, and there is nothing 'fair' about leftist ideology.

The very fact that you say "the wealthy will be fine if they pay more taxes" proves that fairness is in no way a consideration.

You would be fine if you paid more tax. You should pay more.

Fair is letting people keep the money they earn... period. If you are going to tax one person, then you should tax all people. Whatever the tax rate is, should be applied equally to everyone. That's fair.

What should I pay a higher percentage of my income, than you? What makes me a bad person, and you a good person, that you should have an advantage, or me a disadvantage.

But you of course have no concept of fair at all. They earn more... I want it... they shouldn't have it... so let's tax it. That's the ideology of criminals.

Well you dip shit I did offer to pay more in taxes. And I asked you to pay more. (give up the EIC)

But I see all you want to do is (like several others) claim that life isn't "fair". Why don't we treat everybody "equal". What are you, a fucking pansy liberal? I didn't get treated fairly. WAH WAH. Next thing you'll be saying the YOU are one of those 10 million a year earners I mentioned. And if that were the truth it would really show that life ain't fair.

Were you one of those kids that they had to give an award to whether you earned it or not? So everything would be "fair". Maybe you are a liberal.

 

[MikeK]

It's not imaginary. You guys are too much. You sit here day in and day out, railing against the rich, calling them every possible name in the book, accusing them of being greedy corrupt assholes, calling for draconian measures to "fix" wealth disparity, demanding we sock it to the rich who you claim are not paying their fair share, harkening back to the old 'robber baron' days, insinuating that wealthy people don't deserve their wealth, but somehow, some way, your attacks are not to be seen as a "war" on them. LOL... Yeah, right! AND... Obamacare was a Republican idea! LMFAO... You guys should do comedy, seriously!

I've been around for quite a few years and there is not a time in my memory when there have not been "rich" Americans. But the kind of expressed resentment for the "rich" you've mentioned here is a relatively recent phenomenon and I believe it is directed at a recently emerged class of Americans, one which hasn't been seen since the Robber Baron era was dispersed by the Great Depression, the rise of the middle class, and the equitable redistribution of the Nation's wealth.

Today's "rich" are not the same as the ones who inhabited the comparatively healthy social and economic landscape of America during the era of the 1940s to the 1980s, which is when Ronald Reagan, puppet of the monied shadow government, commenced the decline of the middle class. The "rich" who presently are resented and criticized are in fact the super-rich. They are members of a small but elite group of insiders who have discovered or devised methods and means by which to amass inordinately vast amounts of personal wealth.

What I'm saying is with few exceptions ordinary Americans have never been resentful of reasonable wealth. Ordinary millionaires are and always have always been a respectfully envied, inspirational, and perfectly acceptable presence in America. It is the recently evolved and expanding category of mega-millionaires, billionaires, and multi-billionaires who have transcended the concept of reasonable wealth by creating what in fact is a financial aristocracy commonly referred to as the One Percent.

Ordinary millionaires enjoy reasonable luxury, comfort, pleasure, and security, so there is no reasonable basis on which to resent and criticize them for those rational objectives. But levels of wealth which substantially exceed those objectives exist as a form of manifest political power.

So the resentment of that which is properly designated as excessive wealth is not based on envy of luxury and comfort but rather on the inordinate political power it represents.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well that's because you are an idiot... but you simply do not speak for anyone other than yourself. What kind of a dumbass does it take to not understand it's better to have more middle class and poor become wealthy than to have more wealthy become middle class and poor? How does that not make sense, even to an abject moron such as yourself?

It should be obvious to anyone but you that a healthy middle class drives a thriving consumer economy......not the one percent.

Thats mixing up cause and effect.
Not surprising.
What was the last book on economics you read?

No doubt you can quote the noted economists who believe a large thriving middle class isn't necessary for a successful consumer market economy.

Move the goalposts much?

Where are the goal posts for stupid rhetorical horse shit like "War on the Rich"?

Right behind the "War on Women", the "war o minorities" and other rhetorical bullshit the left trots out here daily.

 

[The Rabbi]

It should be obvious to anyone but you that a healthy middle class drives a thriving consumer economy......not the one percent.

Thats mixing up cause and effect.
Not surprising.
What was the last book on economics you read?

No doubt you can quote the noted economists who believe a large thriving middle class isn't necessary for a successful consumer market economy.

Move the goalposts much?

Where are the goal posts for stupid rhetorical horse shit like "War on the Rich"?

The sixteenth Amenmdent was sold to the American people as a "soak the rich scam"


.

And initially it affected a small number of families, like 3-400 or something.
But a funny thing happens. It always begins to bite the middle class, because thats where the money is. AMT was sold the same way and has gone the same way.

 

[Boss]

Ya'll need to make up your minds. Either 47% of the population is sucking off the government teat and about worthless or the poor is all making it to the middle class on 9 bucks an hour. Or is it that the middle class have moved up to the wealthy class even though their middle class incomes show a decline along with the decline in other assets.

You just have to wonder what world the people who believe such bullshit live in. Black is white, up is down and being a stupid fuck makes you smart and daboss. LMAO.

But who'd a thunk that boss is a comedy writer. After reading what I read today, I do. Funny shit. In a strange sort of way.

Dude, you are the one who doesn't make sense.

Are you saying that it's impossible for 47% of the population to not pay taxes, while more and more people become wealthy? There is no contradiction there. They could change tax law so that 90% of the country didn't pay income taxes, and more and more become wealthy. The two are not mutually exclusive, except in your disabled mind.

The real contradiction is you on the left who claim that the rich 'should pay their fair share'.... when the rich already pay more in taxes than any other group. How is 47% carrying zero of the burden, "fair"? How is forcing the people who generate the most wealth, and generate the most jobs, and generate all of economic, technical, and societal advance, to pay the highest percentage of their rightfully earned income.... 'fair'?

It's not fair. That's the contradiction. And you people on the left are all hypocrites on this too. When you compare yourselfs with others, you always compare yourself to Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.

But if you were to compare yourself to me, who actually is the low income class, and I started demanding that you pay all the tax, so that I could get a free ride on your back... you'd be screaming how unfair it was. Hypocrites. All of you.

What ever gave you the idea that I was interested in your version of "fair"? I'm not.
But to be "fair" to your much beloved ultra wealthy (lets say income 10 million a year and up) I say lets set their tax rate ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME to 25% with NO deductions.

And lets take away the middle class home mortgage interest deduction to show that the middle class home buyers are interested in doing their part to reduce the amount of money we (the USA) borrow.

The wealthy could do more and the middle could do more. And the poor? No more EIC. Done. You qualify for that EIC don't cha? Would you mind giving it up so we can be more fiscally sound?

Are we bankrupt in this country or not? We had a sequester that cut spending. People cried like babies. If we ain't gonna cut spending we have to get more income. That's pretty fucking basic. The Repubs keep saying we are bankrupt. Then why don't they go get more money from the taxpayers? There are only two ways a nation gets money to spend; from its citizens (taxes) or borrow.(China for ex) Well and tariffs a little.

What's really fucking weird about your rants is that the ultra wealthy have been KILLING it in income increases. Don't you ever read anything about the gains in income and wealth that the top citizens have enjoyed? ALONG WITH A REDUCTION IN their taxes owed during the Bush years.

So now they got the great tax program from Bush, during which time they had made a killing in the housing fiasco, then the wealthy got real healthy when Obama started giving them money to play on Wall street.

The wealthy have had a great run. The middle and poor haven't. It's time for the real wealthy to give up some more of their money for the good of me. So I don't have to.

You know what's not fair? That I don't have 100 million dollars and a ten inch dick. But that's life. Ain't always "fair" But some people have that. I'll live with out those two things.

The wealthy will be just fine if they pay more taxes. Just fine. Don't worry about them cause they sure as fuck ain't worrying about YOU. Lmao.

But to be "fair" to your much beloved ultra wealthy (lets say income 10 million a year and up) I say lets set their tax rate ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME to 25% with NO deductions.
Then they stop earning incomes in the United States. We stop getting their investment capital and some other nation gets it. They amass huge fortunes elsewhere and draw the maximum amount of tax-free income from that, while using the wealth as collateral to leverage other deals, or trade as a tangible asset, or just leave in a security trust fund because they don't need wealth... being they are ALREADY RICH!

This is why your war is so dumb, and you are so dumb. For whatever reason, you don't get it.... they don't need to do whatever it is you want to tax the hell out of.

And lets take away the middle class home mortgage interest deduction to show that the middle class home buyers are interested in doing their part to reduce the amount of money we (the USA) borrow.
Then your housing market collapses because so many are dumping their really expensive homes and no one is buying them anymore.

And the poor? No more EIC.
The only reasonable idea you've posted.

It's time for the real wealthy to give up some more of their money for the good of me. So I don't have to.
But nothing you suggest works because they are smarter than you and two steps ahead. This is why your war is so dumb and you are so dumb.

The wealthy will be just fine if they pay more taxes. Just fine. Don't worry about them cause they sure as fuck ain't worrying about YOU. Lmao.
But you can't make them pay more taxes because they don't need to do whatever it is you tax. The more you tax something, the less of it you get. The wealthy are just fine when they pay low inconsequential taxes. You can't set the tax laws in Belize or Switzerland.

You are fully engaged in a war you cannot win against an enemy you'll never defeat. Defiantly blowing holes in your own ship to try and inflict punishment on them to no avail. How much longer will you keep this up? No one knows... depends on how stupid you are.

 

[Boss]

It's not imaginary. You guys are too much. You sit here day in and day out, railing against the rich, calling them every possible name in the book, accusing them of being greedy corrupt assholes, calling for draconian measures to "fix" wealth disparity, demanding we sock it to the rich who you claim are not paying their fair share, harkening back to the old 'robber baron' days, insinuating that wealthy people don't deserve their wealth, but somehow, some way, your attacks are not to be seen as a "war" on them. LOL... Yeah, right! AND... Obamacare was a Republican idea! LMFAO... You guys should do comedy, seriously!

I've been around for quite a few years and there is not a time in my memory when there have not been "rich" Americans. But the kind of expressed resentment for the "rich" you've mentioned here is a relatively recent phenomenon and I believe it is directed at a recently emerged class of Americans, one which hasn't been seen since the Robber Baron era was dispersed by the Great Depression, the rise of the middle class, and the equitable redistribution of the Nation's wealth.

Today's "rich" are not the same as the ones who inhabited the comparatively healthy social and economic landscape of America during the era of the 1940s to the 1980s, which is when Ronald Reagan, puppet of the monied shadow government, commenced the decline of the middle class. The "rich" who presently are resented and criticized are in fact the super-rich. They are members of a small but elite group of insiders who have discovered or devised methods and means by which to amass inordinately vast amounts of personal wealth.

What I'm saying is with few exceptions ordinary Americans have never been resentful of reasonable wealth. Ordinary millionaires are and always have always been a respectfully envied, inspirational, and perfectly acceptable presence in America. It is the recently evolved and expanding category of mega-millionaires, billionaires, and multi-billionaires who have transcended the concept of reasonable wealth by creating what in fact is a financial aristocracy commonly referred to as the One Percent.

Ordinary millionaires enjoy reasonable luxury, comfort, pleasure, and security, so there is no reasonable basis on which to resent and criticize them for those rational objectives. But levels of wealth which substantially exceed those objectives exist as a form of manifest political power.

So the resentment of that which is properly designated as excessive wealth is not based on envy of luxury and comfort but rather on the inordinate political power it represents.

Jeesh.. Hey, I really honestly tried to read your post, but along about the second paragraph, my eyes began to roll into the back of my head and I couldn't get to the end. Sorry.

 

[Contumacious]

Thats mixing up cause and effect.
Not surprising.
What was the last book on economics you read?

No doubt you can quote the noted economists who believe a large thriving middle class isn't necessary for a successful consumer market economy.

Move the goalposts much?

Where are the goal posts for stupid rhetorical horse shit like "War on the Rich"?

The sixteenth Amenmdent was sold to the American people as a "soak the rich scam"


.

And initially it affected a small number of families, like 3-400 or something.
But a funny thing happens. It always begins to bite the middle class, because thats where the money is. AMT was sold the same way and has gone the same way.

The "income tax" imposed by the Sixteeth Amendment exempted $3500.00 of income. But in 1913 the Currency was actually GOLD DOLLARS so most Americans did not earn 3500 GOLD DOLLARS a year, so most Americans were exempted except the very extremely rich.

But in 1935 scumbag FDR ruled by Executive Order 6102 that Americans could no longer redeem their dollars for gold.


From that point on Americans were paid by UN redeemable worthless paper money. So it was much easier for Americans to earn $3500 Federal Reserve Notes.

 

[Discombobulated]

It should be obvious to anyone but you that a healthy middle class drives a thriving consumer economy......not the one percent.

Thats mixing up cause and effect.
Not surprising.
What was the last book on economics you read?

No doubt you can quote the noted economists who believe a large thriving middle class isn't necessary for a successful consumer market economy.

Move the goalposts much?

Where are the goal posts for stupid rhetorical horse shit like "War on the Rich"?

Right behind the "War on Women", the "war o minorities" and other rhetorical bullshit the left trots out here daily.

Exactly so, right in line with the stupidest shit you can think of.......that's what you argue for.

 

[Discombobulated]

It's not imaginary. You guys are too much. You sit here day in and day out, railing against the rich, calling them every possible name in the book, accusing them of being greedy corrupt assholes, calling for draconian measures to "fix" wealth disparity, demanding we sock it to the rich who you claim are not paying their fair share, harkening back to the old 'robber baron' days, insinuating that wealthy people don't deserve their wealth, but somehow, some way, your attacks are not to be seen as a "war" on them. LOL... Yeah, right! AND... Obamacare was a Republican idea! LMFAO... You guys should do comedy, seriously!

I've been around for quite a few years and there is not a time in my memory when there have not been "rich" Americans. But the kind of expressed resentment for the "rich" you've mentioned here is a relatively recent phenomenon and I believe it is directed at a recently emerged class of Americans, one which hasn't been seen since the Robber Baron era was dispersed by the Great Depression, the rise of the middle class, and the equitable redistribution of the Nation's wealth.

Today's "rich" are not the same as the ones who inhabited the comparatively healthy social and economic landscape of America during the era of the 1940s to the 1980s, which is when Ronald Reagan, puppet of the monied shadow government, commenced the decline of the middle class. The "rich" who presently are resented and criticized are in fact the super-rich. They are members of a small but elite group of insiders who have discovered or devised methods and means by which to amass inordinately vast amounts of personal wealth.

What I'm saying is with few exceptions ordinary Americans have never been resentful of reasonable wealth. Ordinary millionaires are and always have always been a respectfully envied, inspirational, and perfectly acceptable presence in America. It is the recently evolved and expanding category of mega-millionaires, billionaires, and multi-billionaires who have transcended the concept of reasonable wealth by creating what in fact is a financial aristocracy commonly referred to as the One Percent.

Ordinary millionaires enjoy reasonable luxury, comfort, pleasure, and security, so there is no reasonable basis on which to resent and criticize them for those rational objectives. But levels of wealth which substantially exceed those objectives exist as a form of manifest political power.

So the resentment of that which is properly designated as excessive wealth is not based on envy of luxury and comfort but rather on the inordinate political power it represents.

Clearly the real war is being waged against the middle class.

 

[Andylusion]

Ya'll need to make up your minds. Either 47% of the population is sucking off the government teat and about worthless or the poor is all making it to the middle class on 9 bucks an hour. Or is it that the middle class have moved up to the wealthy class even though their middle class incomes show a decline along with the decline in other assets.

You just have to wonder what world the people who believe such bullshit live in. Black is white, up is down and being a stupid fuck makes you smart and daboss. LMAO.

But who'd a thunk that boss is a comedy writer. After reading what I read today, I do. Funny shit. In a strange sort of way.

Dude, you are the one who doesn't make sense.

Are you saying that it's impossible for 47% of the population to not pay taxes, while more and more people become wealthy? There is no contradiction there. They could change tax law so that 90% of the country didn't pay income taxes, and more and more become wealthy. The two are not mutually exclusive, except in your disabled mind.

The real contradiction is you on the left who claim that the rich 'should pay their fair share'.... when the rich already pay more in taxes than any other group. How is 47% carrying zero of the burden, "fair"? How is forcing the people who generate the most wealth, and generate the most jobs, and generate all of economic, technical, and societal advance, to pay the highest percentage of their rightfully earned income.... 'fair'?

It's not fair. That's the contradiction. And you people on the left are all hypocrites on this too. When you compare yourselfs with others, you always compare yourself to Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.

But if you were to compare yourself to me, who actually is the low income class, and I started demanding that you pay all the tax, so that I could get a free ride on your back... you'd be screaming how unfair it was. Hypocrites. All of you.

What ever gave you the idea that I was interested in your version of "fair"? I'm not.
But to be "fair" to your much beloved ultra wealthy (lets say income 10 million a year and up) I say lets set their tax rate ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME to 25% with NO deductions.

And lets take away the middle class home mortgage interest deduction to show that the middle class home buyers are interested in doing their part to reduce the amount of money we (the USA) borrow.

The wealthy could do more and the middle could do more. And the poor? No more EIC. Done. You qualify for that EIC don't cha? Would you mind giving it up so we can be more fiscally sound?

Are we bankrupt in this country or not? We had a sequester that cut spending. People cried like babies. If we ain't gonna cut spending we have to get more income. That's pretty fucking basic. The Repubs keep saying we are bankrupt. Then why don't they go get more money from the taxpayers? There are only two ways a nation gets money to spend; from its citizens (taxes) or borrow.(China for ex) Well and tariffs a little.

What's really fucking weird about your rants is that the ultra wealthy have been KILLING it in income increases. Don't you ever read anything about the gains in income and wealth that the top citizens have enjoyed? ALONG WITH A REDUCTION IN their taxes owed during the Bush years.

So now they got the great tax program from Bush, during which time they had made a killing in the housing fiasco, then the wealthy got real healthy when Obama started giving them money to play on Wall street.

The wealthy have had a great run. The middle and poor haven't. It's time for the real wealthy to give up some more of their money for the good of me. So I don't have to.

You know what's not fair? That I don't have 100 million dollars and a ten inch dick. But that's life. Ain't always "fair" But some people have that. I'll live with out those two things.

The wealthy will be just fine if they pay more taxes. Just fine. Don't worry about them cause they sure as fuck ain't worrying about YOU. Lmao.

I knew you had no interest in what is actually fair. You are a leftist after all, and there is nothing 'fair' about leftist ideology.

The very fact that you say "the wealthy will be fine if they pay more taxes" proves that fairness is in no way a consideration.

You would be fine if you paid more tax. You should pay more.

Fair is letting people keep the money they earn... period. If you are going to tax one person, then you should tax all people. Whatever the tax rate is, should be applied equally to everyone. That's fair.

What should I pay a higher percentage of my income, than you? What makes me a bad person, and you a good person, that you should have an advantage, or me a disadvantage.

But you of course have no concept of fair at all. They earn more... I want it... they shouldn't have it... so let's tax it. That's the ideology of criminals.

Well you dip shit I did offer to pay more in taxes. And I asked you to pay more. (give up the EIC)

But I see all you want to do is (like several others) claim that life isn't "fair". Why don't we treat everybody "equal". What are you, a fucking pansy liberal? I didn't get treated fairly. WAH WAH. Next thing you'll be saying the YOU are one of those 10 million a year earners I mentioned. And if that were the truth it would really show that life ain't fair.

Were you one of those kids that they had to give an award to whether you earned it or not? So everything would be "fair". Maybe you are a liberal.

I support getting rid of the EIC. Sure. Get rid of all deductions, and have a flat level, fair, tax. I'm all for that. Always have been.

And what are you talking about 'getting an award whether I earned it or not'?

Everyone being able to keep their own money is now "getting an award whether they earned it or not"?

 

[The Rabbi]

Thats mixing up cause and effect.
Not surprising.
What was the last book on economics you read?

No doubt you can quote the noted economists who believe a large thriving middle class isn't necessary for a successful consumer market economy.

Move the goalposts much?

Where are the goal posts for stupid rhetorical horse shit like "War on the Rich"?

Right behind the "War on Women", the "war o minorities" and other rhetorical bullshit the left trots out here daily.

Exactly so, right in line with the stupidest shit you can think of.......that's what you argue for.

I didnt make up that crap. The Democrats did.

 

[zeke]

Ya'll need to make up your minds. Either 47% of the population is sucking off the government teat and about worthless or the poor is all making it to the middle class on 9 bucks an hour. Or is it that the middle class have moved up to the wealthy class even though their middle class incomes show a decline along with the decline in other assets.

You just have to wonder what world the people who believe such bullshit live in. Black is white, up is down and being a stupid fuck makes you smart and daboss. LMAO.

But who'd a thunk that boss is a comedy writer. After reading what I read today, I do. Funny shit. In a strange sort of way.

Dude, you are the one who doesn't make sense.

Are you saying that it's impossible for 47% of the population to not pay taxes, while more and more people become wealthy? There is no contradiction there. They could change tax law so that 90% of the country didn't pay income taxes, and more and more become wealthy. The two are not mutually exclusive, except in your disabled mind.

The real contradiction is you on the left who claim that the rich 'should pay their fair share'.... when the rich already pay more in taxes than any other group. How is 47% carrying zero of the burden, "fair"? How is forcing the people who generate the most wealth, and generate the most jobs, and generate all of economic, technical, and societal advance, to pay the highest percentage of their rightfully earned income.... 'fair'?

It's not fair. That's the contradiction. And you people on the left are all hypocrites on this too. When you compare yourselfs with others, you always compare yourself to Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.

But if you were to compare yourself to me, who actually is the low income class, and I started demanding that you pay all the tax, so that I could get a free ride on your back... you'd be screaming how unfair it was. Hypocrites. All of you.

What ever gave you the idea that I was interested in your version of "fair"? I'm not.
But to be "fair" to your much beloved ultra wealthy (lets say income 10 million a year and up) I say lets set their tax rate ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME to 25% with NO deductions.

And lets take away the middle class home mortgage interest deduction to show that the middle class home buyers are interested in doing their part to reduce the amount of money we (the USA) borrow.

The wealthy could do more and the middle could do more. And the poor? No more EIC. Done. You qualify for that EIC don't cha? Would you mind giving it up so we can be more fiscally sound?

Are we bankrupt in this country or not? We had a sequester that cut spending. People cried like babies. If we ain't gonna cut spending we have to get more income. That's pretty fucking basic. The Repubs keep saying we are bankrupt. Then why don't they go get more money from the taxpayers? There are only two ways a nation gets money to spend; from its citizens (taxes) or borrow.(China for ex) Well and tariffs a little.

What's really fucking weird about your rants is that the ultra wealthy have been KILLING it in income increases. Don't you ever read anything about the gains in income and wealth that the top citizens have enjoyed? ALONG WITH A REDUCTION IN their taxes owed during the Bush years.

So now they got the great tax program from Bush, during which time they had made a killing in the housing fiasco, then the wealthy got real healthy when Obama started giving them money to play on Wall street.

The wealthy have had a great run. The middle and poor haven't. It's time for the real wealthy to give up some more of their money for the good of me. So I don't have to.

You know what's not fair? That I don't have 100 million dollars and a ten inch dick. But that's life. Ain't always "fair" But some people have that. I'll live with out those two things.

The wealthy will be just fine if they pay more taxes. Just fine. Don't worry about them cause they sure as fuck ain't worrying about YOU. Lmao.

But to be "fair" to your much beloved ultra wealthy (lets say income 10 million a year and up) I say lets set their tax rate ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME to 25% with NO deductions.
Then they stop earning incomes in the United States. We stop getting their investment capital and some other nation gets it. They amass huge fortunes elsewhere and draw the maximum amount of tax-free income from that, while using the wealth as collateral to leverage other deals, or trade as a tangible asset, or just leave in a security trust fund because they don't need wealth... being they are ALREADY RICH!

This is why your war is so dumb, and you are so dumb. For whatever reason, you don't get it.... they don't need to do whatever it is you want to tax the hell out of.

And lets take away the middle class home mortgage interest deduction to show that the middle class home buyers are interested in doing their part to reduce the amount of money we (the USA) borrow.
Then your housing market collapses because so many are dumping their really expensive homes and no one is buying them anymore.

And the poor? No more EIC.
The only reasonable idea you've posted.

It's time for the real wealthy to give up some more of their money for the good of me. So I don't have to.
But nothing you suggest works because they are smarter than you and two steps ahead. This is why your war is so dumb and you are so dumb.

The wealthy will be just fine if they pay more taxes. Just fine. Don't worry about them cause they sure as fuck ain't worrying about YOU. Lmao.
But you can't make them pay more taxes because they don't need to do whatever it is you tax. The more you tax something, the less of it you get. The wealthy are just fine when they pay low inconsequential taxes. You can't set the tax laws in Belize or Switzerland.

You are fully engaged in a war you cannot win against an enemy you'll never defeat. Defiantly blowing holes in your own ship to try and inflict punishment on them to no avail. How much longer will you keep this up? No one knows... depends on how stupid you are.

What a chicken shit response there bossdude. Cool how you completely ignored the Repub rant of are we bankrupt or not and do we want to stay bankrupt or do something about it?

The rich will take their money and leave you say. Bullshit I say. And who the fuck cares. As you wrote just yesterday, the middle class in moving UP to the wealthy class. There will be plenty of wealthy class to invest.
Besides that, that's just a right wing hack such as yourself's wet dream. Why you dream of the rich taking their money elsewhere, I have no idea. But lets find out if they will or won't.

And the housing market will collapse. Well you stupid shit, it already collapsed. And it wasn't the mortgage interest deduction that did that. Don't worry, people will still buy houses without the deduction of interest.
But you are just worried that the ultra wealthy with a 10 million mortgage would lose a big deduction. You sure as fuck ain't worried about the middle class.

But you was quick to put the screws to the poorest by getting rid of that EIC.

And what is fucking up with your obsession about this supposed war on the rich? That repeated lie makes you sound stupid.

Besides that, my proposal had everyone paying more.

Are we bankrupt or not? Do we want to do something about it or not?

 

[RKMBrown]

Nonsense. Prior to Microsoft there was Amipro (which Microsoft bought) and many other competitors.

AmiPro was Lotus, a competitor to Word. Microsoft did not buy them. Word was developed from the ground up by Microsoft. Richard Brodie wrote the code for it.

MS-Word was released in 1983. AmiPro was released in 1994. The first viable word processor on microcomputers was Word Star - a port from the dedicated Wang word processors. But Word Star was difficult to use, almost as difficult as Word Perfect would later be. Word was designed to be open to the masses. Which is why it shut out the competition.

Ah lotus bought them up ... aight.

 

[RKMBrown]

I beg to differ, an economy is much better served by 1000 millionaires than one billionaire. The mega-rich only buy so many houses, cars and jet-skis. Increasingly concentrated wealth in a nation where wages really do not move up is a drag on the economy not a boon. People only think we need the mega-rich because they own everything worth owning.

Historically what you say is far from true. The economy is far better served by a Steve Jobs or a Bill Gates than by 1,000 liquor store owners. The billionaires create massive industries that give millions of people jobs.

Looters are concerned with what men own, creators are concerned with what men create. The marvels of this age exist because men like Gates, Jobs, Allen, Birn, etc. created wonders which changed our world.

Its not just that.
Think of what office work was like prior to Microsoft. Typing. Faxing. Filing papers. It took 3 or 4 people to do what can be done with one person today. And the results are better, faster and cheaper. Bill Gates has saved people and businesses tons of money. Which is why he is the richest man in America.

Nonsense. Prior to Microsoft there was Amipro (which Microsoft bought) and many other competitors.

Bullshit. So what?

You wrote that as if Msft invented word processing.

 

[Boss]

Ya'll need to make up your minds. Either 47% of the population is sucking off the government teat and about worthless or the poor is all making it to the middle class on 9 bucks an hour. Or is it that the middle class have moved up to the wealthy class even though their middle class incomes show a decline along with the decline in other assets.

You just have to wonder what world the people who believe such bullshit live in. Black is white, up is down and being a stupid fuck makes you smart and daboss. LMAO.

But who'd a thunk that boss is a comedy writer. After reading what I read today, I do. Funny shit. In a strange sort of way.

Dude, you are the one who doesn't make sense.

Are you saying that it's impossible for 47% of the population to not pay taxes, while more and more people become wealthy? There is no contradiction there. They could change tax law so that 90% of the country didn't pay income taxes, and more and more become wealthy. The two are not mutually exclusive, except in your disabled mind.

The real contradiction is you on the left who claim that the rich 'should pay their fair share'.... when the rich already pay more in taxes than any other group. How is 47% carrying zero of the burden, "fair"? How is forcing the people who generate the most wealth, and generate the most jobs, and generate all of economic, technical, and societal advance, to pay the highest percentage of their rightfully earned income.... 'fair'?

It's not fair. That's the contradiction. And you people on the left are all hypocrites on this too. When you compare yourselfs with others, you always compare yourself to Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.

But if you were to compare yourself to me, who actually is the low income class, and I started demanding that you pay all the tax, so that I could get a free ride on your back... you'd be screaming how unfair it was. Hypocrites. All of you.

What ever gave you the idea that I was interested in your version of "fair"? I'm not.
But to be "fair" to your much beloved ultra wealthy (lets say income 10 million a year and up) I say lets set their tax rate ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME to 25% with NO deductions.

And lets take away the middle class home mortgage interest deduction to show that the middle class home buyers are interested in doing their part to reduce the amount of money we (the USA) borrow.

The wealthy could do more and the middle could do more. And the poor? No more EIC. Done. You qualify for that EIC don't cha? Would you mind giving it up so we can be more fiscally sound?

Are we bankrupt in this country or not? We had a sequester that cut spending. People cried like babies. If we ain't gonna cut spending we have to get more income. That's pretty fucking basic. The Repubs keep saying we are bankrupt. Then why don't they go get more money from the taxpayers? There are only two ways a nation gets money to spend; from its citizens (taxes) or borrow.(China for ex) Well and tariffs a little.

What's really fucking weird about your rants is that the ultra wealthy have been KILLING it in income increases. Don't you ever read anything about the gains in income and wealth that the top citizens have enjoyed? ALONG WITH A REDUCTION IN their taxes owed during the Bush years.

So now they got the great tax program from Bush, during which time they had made a killing in the housing fiasco, then the wealthy got real healthy when Obama started giving them money to play on Wall street.

The wealthy have had a great run. The middle and poor haven't. It's time for the real wealthy to give up some more of their money for the good of me. So I don't have to.

You know what's not fair? That I don't have 100 million dollars and a ten inch dick. But that's life. Ain't always "fair" But some people have that. I'll live with out those two things.

The wealthy will be just fine if they pay more taxes. Just fine. Don't worry about them cause they sure as fuck ain't worrying about YOU. Lmao.

But to be "fair" to your much beloved ultra wealthy (lets say income 10 million a year and up) I say lets set their tax rate ON ALL FORMS OF INCOME to 25% with NO deductions.
Then they stop earning incomes in the United States. We stop getting their investment capital and some other nation gets it. They amass huge fortunes elsewhere and draw the maximum amount of tax-free income from that, while using the wealth as collateral to leverage other deals, or trade as a tangible asset, or just leave in a security trust fund because they don't need wealth... being they are ALREADY RICH!

This is why your war is so dumb, and you are so dumb. For whatever reason, you don't get it.... they don't need to do whatever it is you want to tax the hell out of.

And lets take away the middle class home mortgage interest deduction to show that the middle class home buyers are interested in doing their part to reduce the amount of money we (the USA) borrow.
Then your housing market collapses because so many are dumping their really expensive homes and no one is buying them anymore.

And the poor? No more EIC.
The only reasonable idea you've posted.

It's time for the real wealthy to give up some more of their money for the good of me. So I don't have to.
But nothing you suggest works because they are smarter than you and two steps ahead. This is why your war is so dumb and you are so dumb.

The wealthy will be just fine if they pay more taxes. Just fine. Don't worry about them cause they sure as fuck ain't worrying about YOU. Lmao.
But you can't make them pay more taxes because they don't need to do whatever it is you tax. The more you tax something, the less of it you get. The wealthy are just fine when they pay low inconsequential taxes. You can't set the tax laws in Belize or Switzerland.

You are fully engaged in a war you cannot win against an enemy you'll never defeat. Defiantly blowing holes in your own ship to try and inflict punishment on them to no avail. How much longer will you keep this up? No one knows... depends on how stupid you are.

What a chicken shit response there bossdude. Cool how you completely ignored the Repub rant of are we bankrupt or not and do we want to stay bankrupt or do something about it?

The rich will take their money and leave you say. Bullshit I say. And who the fuck cares. As you wrote just yesterday, the middle class in moving UP to the wealthy class. There will be plenty of wealthy class to invest.
Besides that, that's just a right wing hack such as yourself's wet dream. Why you dream of the rich taking their money elsewhere, I have no idea. But lets find out if they will or won't.

And the housing market will collapse. Well you stupid shit, it already collapsed. And it wasn't the mortgage interest deduction that did that. Don't worry, people will still buy houses without the deduction of interest.
But you are just worried that the ultra wealthy with a 10 million mortgage would lose a big deduction. You sure as fuck ain't worried about the middle class.

But you was quick to put the screws to the poorest by getting rid of that EIC.

And what is fucking up with your obsession about this supposed war on the rich? That repeated lie makes you sound stupid.

Besides that, my proposal had everyone paying more.

Are we bankrupt or not? Do we want to do something about it or not?

Well, we can't do anything about it until we get rid of stupid people like you who are pushing the War on The Rich agenda. If we don't get some pro-capitalist smart people elected soon, who understand that free market capitalism is the key to prosperity, there is little hope for our future.

The rich will take their money and leave you say. Bullshit I say. And who the fuck cares.
Oh, they won't leave, just their money will leave. In fact, much of it already has. There is an estimated $20 trillion in wealth abroad held by US citizens. And you should care, that's a lot of money... enough to pay off the national debt.

There will be plenty of wealthy class to invest.
Not if the tax rate on investment income is the same as earned income. It would be stupid to make such investments and wealthy people aren't stupid. They can invest elsewhere with little or no tax penalty, and so that's what they will do.

But lets find out if they will or won't.
I already know they will. You don't know because you're stupid. Why would anyone invest $100 million here and pay 39.6% tax on dividends when they can invest the same $100 million in another country and only pay 2% on dividends? You see... they would have to be stupid like you, and they aren't.

And the housing market will collapse. Well you stupid shit, it already collapsed. And it wasn't the mortgage interest deduction that did that. Don't worry, people will still buy houses without the deduction of interest.
Why do you think we adopted the mortgage interest deduction in the first place? It was to encourage people to buy homes. Now... most uber-wealthy people don't have a mortgage, they paid for their homes a long time ago... (remember, they are rich.) The people who are affected are mostly the middle class and some lower-middle class who are trying to move up. If you remove that deduction, which is the largest tax break they generally get, then you've effectively imposed a massive tax increase on the middle class working families.

But you was quick to put the screws to the poorest by getting rid of that EIC.
Well that's because EIC is basically people getting tax refunds who didn't pay taxes in. AKA: Wealth redistribution.

Besides that, my proposal had everyone paying more.
No it didn't... It had you increasing the percentages. Every time we've increased the percentage of taxation on top marginal rates of income, the resulting revenue has declined when adjusted to GDP. So it's a plan that we know produces less revenue. Wealthy people don't have to do whatever it is you are taxing too high. It's stupid to assume they will.

 

[Discombobulated]

No doubt you can quote the noted economists who believe a large thriving middle class isn't necessary for a successful consumer market economy.

Move the goalposts much?

Where are the goal posts for stupid rhetorical horse shit like "War on the Rich"?

Right behind the "War on Women", the "war o minorities" and other rhetorical bullshit the left trots out here daily.

Exactly so, right in line with the stupidest shit you can think of.......that's what you argue for.

I didnt make up that crap. The Democrats did.

Are you really this dense?

 

[The Rabbi]

Move the goalposts much?

Where are the goal posts for stupid rhetorical horse shit like "War on the Rich"?

Right behind the "War on Women", the "war o minorities" and other rhetorical bullshit the left trots out here daily.

Exactly so, right in line with the stupidest shit you can think of.......that's what you argue for.

I didnt make up that crap. The Democrats did.

Are you really this dense?

You think Republicans made up the "War On Women" meme to bolster their base? Seriously?

 

[zeke]

Besides that, my proposal had everyone paying more.
No it didn't... It had you increasing the percentages. Every time we've increased the percentage of taxation on top marginal rates of income, the resulting revenue has declined when adjusted to GDP. So it's a plan that we know produces less revenue. Wealthy people don't have to do whatever it is you are taxing too high. It's stupid to assume they will.

Eliminate deductions, eliminate the EIC and raise the rate on capital gains for the ultra wealthy will increase federal tax receipts. To say otherwise is fucking stupid.

Are we bankrupt or not? Is there a problem of paying off debt or not.

You want to do anything about those issues. Apparently not, you can't come up with any ideas beyond getting rid of the EIC.

No, if we actually dealt with the problems and issues we have, you wouldn't have any reason to make shit up like the War on the Rich.

But it is funny to see you at odds with some of your right wing brethren. Particularly on taxes. You must have seen some of the posts of skull or androw and their desire to see taxes administered fairly. As in why should a home buyer be treated differently than a non home buyer. Those two are into the fairness part. And the home interest deduction isn't fair according to them.

And you ever heard of the OPM theory. Real rich people don't buy their houses outright. Why would they do that when they can borrow other peoples money dirt cheap and get a nice big ole tax deduction for that 5 million dollar mortgage.

 

[The Rabbi]

Besides that, my proposal had everyone paying more.
No it didn't... It had you increasing the percentages. Every time we've increased the percentage of taxation on top marginal rates of income, the resulting revenue has declined when adjusted to GDP. So it's a plan that we know produces less revenue. Wealthy people don't have to do whatever it is you are taxing too high. It's stupid to assume they will.

Eliminate deductions, eliminate the EIC and raise the rate on capital gains for the ultra wealthy will increase federal tax receipts. To say otherwise is fucking stupid.

.

I guess Obama is fucking stupid because even he understands raising cap gains rates produces LESS income to the Treasury.

 

[MikeK]

Well, we can't do anything about it until we get rid of stupid people like you who are pushing the War on The Rich agenda. If we don't get some pro-capitalist smart people elected soon, who understand that free market capitalism is the key to prosperity, there is little hope for our future.[/b]

[...]

Free market capitalism is laissez-faire capitalism, which is unregulated capitalism, which ultimately operates to benefit only a small group of insiders, who in the current example are commonly known as the "One Percent."

Free market capitalism is the system imposed (with Milton Friedman's direct guidance) on the Chilean economy by Augusto Pinochet after murdering Salvador Allende during the 1973 coup. What has happened and continues to happen here in the U.S., i.e. the gradual concentration of wealth in the hands of a small group of insiders, is essentially the same thing that happened in Chile. The main difference is the method of transition is peaceful rather than violent and has taken much longer.

The free market system initiated by Ronald Reagan was introduced as "trickle down" economics (a more accurately descriptive name for it would be "siphon up" economics). This transition was implemented by the incremental removal of regulations which had prevented the maneuvers and manipulations which brought about the near-collapse of the U.S. Economy in 2008 and promoted the growth of the One Percent (Naomi Klein: The Shock Doctrine).

The main point of the above being the basic system operating in both supply side and demand side economics is capitalism. Even the strongest opponents of your ideology (including me) are pro-capitalist. What we oppose is not capitalism but the absence of certain socialist controls (regulations). Without those controls laissez-faire capitalism will eventually begin feeding on itself, as it is doing now with such concepts as privatized prisons.