What Is Wrong With America ?

[Uncensored2008]

Guy, here's the thing. Besides your questionable claims about "working 18 hours a day for months".

When I was in college, I worked two minimum wage jobs and was in the National Guard. And I did this to get the good college degree job after college. And for a while that worked just fine.

Then you got a government job and never worked another day in your life.

Then I got the job with the company that decided to chop me off at the knees when I needed medical attention.

So today I am working three jobs (well, two jobs and a side business, anyway) to pay down my debt.

And I am getting pretty fucking sick of 1% wannabees like you and Poodle making the greed of the 1% into some kind of virtue right between claiming how rich you are on the internet.

Because, frankly, given the amount of time the two of you spend here, I'm imaginging a double wide and a disability check.

Yeah, bullshit.

Most companies provide insurance, but they have nothing at all to do with medical decisions.

 

[P@triot]

I doubt the figures you use here, the rich hide a lot of their wealth. But even if you are totally correct it does not mean we shouldn't raise those taxes to take a bite out of the fiscal mess.

I have seen historic figures that show no matter what party is in office spending stays relatively constant at say 23% of GDP (cant remember the actual number but I believe it is around there) Revenue as a % of GDP has however fallen in recent years. That indicates that at least part of the problem is too low of tax rate on the rich.

Think of the absurd "logic" behind that statement. Because both parties have turned radical liberal over the past 30 years, that means what they are doing must be right or ok?

23% of GDP is beyond outrageous. A quarter of our entire economy goes just to fund the federal government?!?! And you find that acceptable?!? Anyone who finds that total even remotely acceptable is seriously ignorant.

It's amazing how liberals can't take a whopping 8 minutes of their life to actually read the Constitution.

 

[RKMBrown]

I doubt the figures you use here, the rich hide a lot of their wealth. But even if you are totally correct it does not mean we shouldn't raise those taxes to take a bite out of the fiscal mess.

I have seen historic figures that show no matter what party is in office spending stays relatively constant at say 23% of GDP (cant remember the actual number but I believe it is around there) Revenue as a % of GDP has however fallen in recent years. That indicates that at least part of the problem is too low of tax rate on the rich.

Think of the absurd "logic" behind that statement. Because both parties have turned radical liberal over the past 30 years, that means what they are doing must be right or ok?

23% of GDP is beyond outrageous. A quarter of our entire economy goes just to fund the federal government?!?! And you find that acceptable?!? Anyone who finds that total even remotely acceptable is seriously ignorant.

It's amazing how liberals can't take a whopping 8 minutes of their life to actually read the Constitution.

25% would make sense if we were in the middle of a world war and most of the money was going to the war effort. But as it stands most of our military spending is going to policing efforts around the planet, and most of our budget is for DC plutocrats who do nothing at all for us but piss our money away on extravagant conferences, and lobster dinners. I just don't see the need for us to be the worlds police force and to keep funding this aristocracy.

 

[Mac1958]

[
I have worked 18 hour days for months at a time in my life. I was working a full time third shift job in a machine shop and rehabbing houses to sell during the day. I've gone as long as 6 months working well over 100 hours a week without even a single day off.

Now I don't have to work at all if I don't want to.

I think everyone should work like that at least for a while. Maybe then they'd stop whining about working a mere 40 hours a week.

Maybe they'll learn that working more will actually improve their financial situation.

Guy, here's the thing. Besides your questionable claims about "working 18 hours a day for months".

When I was in college, I worked two minimum wage jobs and was in the National Guard. And I did this to get the good college degree job after college. And for a while that worked just fine.

Then I got the job with the company that decided to chop me off at the knees when I needed medical attention.

So today I am working three jobs (well, two jobs and a side business, anyway) to pay down my debt.

And I am getting pretty fucking sick of 1% wannabees like you and Poodle making the greed of the 1% into some kind of virtue right between claiming how rich you are on the internet.

Because, frankly, given the amount of time the two of you spend here, I'm imaginging a double wide and a disability check.

I'm turning 43 in a few months and I am retired.

I make more than enough to live on from my rental properties and never ever have to work again.

I really don't care about your petty jealousies.

I have never once claimed I was rich all I ever said was I don't have to work anymore if I don't want to.

Your problem is you fell for the line of bullshit that is go to college get a job get married and have kids.

In fact you probably didn't even really think about it. Like most people you had no plan.

You put your future into someone else's hands and now you blame everyone else for your problems.

To get back to the title of the thread

That's what's wrong with America. You are what's wrong with America.

They can't admit that people are willing to work that hard, it fucks with the dishonest "you didn't earn that"/"you didn't build that" tactic on which they rely so heavily.

.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I doubt the figures you use here, the rich hide a lot of their wealth. But even if you are totally correct it does not mean we shouldn't raise those taxes to take a bite out of the fiscal mess.

I have seen historic figures that show no matter what party is in office spending stays relatively constant at say 23% of GDP (cant remember the actual number but I believe it is around there) Revenue as a % of GDP has however fallen in recent years. That indicates that at least part of the problem is too low of tax rate on the rich.

Think of the absurd "logic" behind that statement. Because both parties have turned radical liberal over the past 30 years, that means what they are doing must be right or ok?

23% of GDP is beyond outrageous. A quarter of our entire economy goes just to fund the federal government?!?! And you find that acceptable?!? Anyone who finds that total even remotely acceptable is seriously ignorant.

It's amazing how liberals can't take a whopping 8 minutes of their life to actually read the Constitution.

Bear in mind that those are absolutely NOT my words that you quoted.

 

[dcraelin]

I doubt the figures you use here, the rich hide a lot of their wealth. But even if you are totally correct it does not mean we shouldn't raise those taxes to take a bite out of the fiscal mess.

I have seen historic figures that show no matter what party is in office spending stays relatively constant at say 23% of GDP (cant remember the actual number but I believe it is around there) Revenue as a % of GDP has however fallen in recent years. That indicates that at least part of the problem is too low of tax rate on the rich.

You must remember comrade, that the taxes your GLORIOUS PARTY promote are aimed at income from wages. The truly wealthy, such as the owner of the shameful democratic party, George Soros, have no income from wages.

When the party programs the drones to squawk about a 90% tax rate, or whatever ludicrous rate the GLORIOUS PARTY is pushing this week, they are not going after the rich, you owner, lord and master, Soros, will face no tax at all. You attack and seek to savage the middle class, the Bourgeoisie. The merchants and professionals who earn wealth and challenge the privilege of the entrenched aristocracy.

You merely follow orders, so do not grasp that the agenda of your rulers is nothing less than to pull the ladder up, and kick the upwardly mobile down. They bribe the loyal drones with the welfare of government make-work jobs with obscene benefits and retirement after 20 years - to live another 40 on the sweat of the private sector workers. These drones then demand war on the "rich," which is not dictator Soros, but instead those making $250K a year - per little lord Obama. Dr. Yee the dentist is rich, but Matt Damon is not, nor is Nancy Pelosi. Eduardo the grocer working 18 hours a day in his store is rich, and must be punished; Algore is not rich - not according to party class warfare guidelines.

I say

the rich hide a lot of their wealth

, implied in that statement is that we should find it and tax it. I have said before in this forum that the tax-exemption of municipal bonds should be rescinded, that seemingly would satisfy conservatives who see the wasteful projects those bonds often fund, and "liberals" and others like you who want to get at Soros money etc. I also think capital gains should be taxed at regular income tax rates.

 

[dcraelin]

I doubt the figures you use here, the rich hide a lot of their wealth. But even if you are totally correct it does not mean we shouldn't raise those taxes to take a bite out of the fiscal mess.

I have seen historic figures that show no matter what party is in office spending stays relatively constant at say 23% of GDP (cant remember the actual number but I believe it is around there) Revenue as a % of GDP has however fallen in recent years. That indicates that at least part of the problem is too low of tax rate on the rich.

Think of the absurd "logic" behind that statement. Because both parties have turned radical liberal over the past 30 years, that means what they are doing must be right or ok?

23% of GDP is beyond outrageous. A quarter of our entire economy goes just to fund the federal government?!?! And you find that acceptable?!? Anyone who finds that total even remotely acceptable is seriously ignorant.

It's amazing how liberals can't take a whopping 8 minutes of their life to actually read the Constitution.

Bear in mind that those are absolutely NOT my words that you quoted.

The quote you responded to Rot is actually mine.

You may think 23% is outlandish but none of your party have reduced it when they had the power. Neither party has that was a main point of the post.

I think federal spending needs to be cut also, but I also think the tax rate needs to be increased, especially on the wealthy.

What does reading the Constitution have to do with this?, I dare say I've read it more than you and know it better than you.

 

[RKMBrown]

Think of the absurd "logic" behind that statement. Because both parties have turned radical liberal over the past 30 years, that means what they are doing must be right or ok?

23% of GDP is beyond outrageous. A quarter of our entire economy goes just to fund the federal government?!?! And you find that acceptable?!? Anyone who finds that total even remotely acceptable is seriously ignorant.

It's amazing how liberals can't take a whopping 8 minutes of their life to actually read the Constitution.

Bear in mind that those are absolutely NOT my words that you quoted.

The quote you responded to Rot is actually mine.

You may think 23% is outlandish but none of your party have reduced it when they had the power. Neither party has that was a main point of the post.

I think federal spending needs to be cut also, but I also think the tax rate needs to be increased, especially on the wealthy.

What does reading the Constitution have to do with this?, I dare say I've read it more than you and know it better than you.

Liar.

 

[Ame®icano]

I doubt the figures you use here, the rich hide a lot of their wealth. But even if you are totally correct it does not mean we shouldn't raise those taxes to take a bite out of the fiscal mess.

I have seen historic figures that show no matter what party is in office spending stays relatively constant at say 23% of GDP (cant remember the actual number but I believe it is around there) Revenue as a % of GDP has however fallen in recent years. That indicates that at least part of the problem is too low of tax rate on the rich.

Think of the absurd "logic" behind that statement. Because both parties have turned radical liberal over the past 30 years, that means what they are doing must be right or ok?

23% of GDP is beyond outrageous. A quarter of our entire economy goes just to fund the federal government?!?! And you find that acceptable?!? Anyone who finds that total even remotely acceptable is seriously ignorant.

It's amazing how liberals can't take a whopping 8 minutes of their life to actually read the Constitution.

Beside, interest on $17.25 trillion is around $415 billion annually.

Imagine what US could do with that money every year.

 

[Contumacious]

What's Wrong with America ? What is wrong is that the worst catastrophe that has ever happened to America (by far) is waiting to happen. This is an attack on the US electic power grid which can shut the whole country down and literally send us back to the early 19th century, for years to come. t.

Yet you are still clamoring for more welfare/warfare , elitism. parastism , stazi police state policies which are the root causes of the problems you described.

.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I say

the rich hide a lot of their wealth

, implied in that statement is that we should find it and tax it. I have said before in this forum that the tax-exemption of municipal bonds should be rescinded, that seemingly would satisfy conservatives who see the wasteful projects those bonds often fund, and "liberals" and others like you who want to get at Soros money etc. I also think capital gains should be taxed at regular income tax rates.

You say the rich hide a lot of their wealth, but wealth isn't taxed, INCOME is.

The fact that you are avoiding is that the class warfare you wage on behalf of your party is aimed purely at the middle class.

The left is waging war to eradicate the middle class. This hasn't changed since the days of Karl Marx, the left has always sought to end the middle class.

 

[dcraelin]

I say

the rich hide a lot of their wealth

, implied in that statement is that we should find it and tax it. I have said before in this forum that the tax-exemption of municipal bonds should be rescinded, that seemingly would satisfy conservatives who see the wasteful projects those bonds often fund, and "liberals" and others like you who want to get at Soros money etc. I also think capital gains should be taxed at regular income tax rates.

You say the rich hide a lot of their wealth, but wealth isn't taxed, INCOME is.
The fact that you are avoiding is that the class warfare you wage on behalf of your party is aimed purely at the middle class.
The left is waging war to eradicate the middle class. This hasn't changed since the days of Karl Marx, the left has always sought to end the middle class.

well then they hide their INCOME also, and I give ways to get at that. I would agree with those on the left that want a tax on stocks which would get at the wealth of the rich also.

The idea that the left are waging "war" on the middle class is just plainly absurd.

 

[Uncensored2008]

well then they hide their INCOME also, and I give ways to get at that.

The truly wealthy have no wage income.

I would agree with those on the left that want a tax on stocks which would get at the wealth of the rich also.

And would cause our economy to implode.

The idea that the left are waging "war" on the middle class is just plainly absurd.

Right, y'all write so lovingly of the Bourgeoisie... You DO know that means the middle class, right? The rich are the "Aristocracy."

 

[Iceweasel]

The whole tax the rich argument is for the naive. If they took in another 500 billion a year they would spend it and it wouldn't be on the basics of government. It would be another wet dream project and the poor would be in the same boat. For evidence I point to history.

 

[Redfish]

what is wrong with america?

1. liberalism
2. corruption in government
3. a biased media
4. girly men
5. the gay agenda
6. deficit spending
7. waste in govt
8. lazy citizens
9. incompetent leadership
10. lifetime congressmen
11. the ghetto culture
12. too many laws
13. obamacare
14. too many taxes
15. stupid foreign policy

 

[Spiderman]

Think of the absurd "logic" behind that statement. Because both parties have turned radical liberal over the past 30 years, that means what they are doing must be right or ok?

23% of GDP is beyond outrageous. A quarter of our entire economy goes just to fund the federal government?!?! And you find that acceptable?!? Anyone who finds that total even remotely acceptable is seriously ignorant.

It's amazing how liberals can't take a whopping 8 minutes of their life to actually read the Constitution.

Bear in mind that those are absolutely NOT my words that you quoted.

The quote you responded to Rot is actually mine.

You may think 23% is outlandish but none of your party have reduced it when they had the power. Neither party has that was a main point of the post.

I think federal spending needs to be cut also, but I also think the tax rate needs to be increased, especially on the wealthy.

What does reading the Constitution have to do with this?, I dare say I've read it more than you and know it better than you.

You just illustrated the problem with our corrupt 2 party system.

 

[Wyld Kard]

What Is Wrong With America ?

The Federal Reserve

Too many government regulations

Redistributation of wealth

Obama and Obamacare

 

[dcraelin]

well then they hide their INCOME also, and I give ways to get at that.

The truly wealthy have no wage income.

I would agree with those on the left that want a tax on stocks which would get at the wealth of the rich also.

And would cause our economy to implode.

The idea that the left are waging "war" on the middle class is just plainly absurd.

Right, y'all write so lovingly of the Bourgeoisie... You DO know that means the middle class, right? The rich are the "Aristocracy."

they have unearned income from stocks and bonds

It would not cause our economy to implode

I havn't said a word about the Bourgeoisie, nor have I heard anyone on this thread use that word.

 

[dcraelin]

Bear in mind that those are absolutely NOT my words that you quoted.

The quote you responded to Rot is actually mine.

You may think 23% is outlandish but none of your party have reduced it when they had the power. Neither party has that was a main point of the post.

I think federal spending needs to be cut also, but I also think the tax rate needs to be increased, especially on the wealthy.

What does reading the Constitution have to do with this?, I dare say I've read it more than you and know it better than you.

You just illustrated the problem with our corrupt 2 party system.

yes, the 2 party system enables corruption

 

[Uncensored2008]

they have unearned income from stocks and bonds

They have investments that garner a return.

Why do you think Dear Leader hasn't levied a 95% capital gains? If he wanted to attack the rich, wouldn't that be the way?

It would not cause our economy to implode

Factual data shows otherwise.

Even modest increases in capital gains tax causes investment to flee, drying up capital and severely retarding growth.

Satiating your greed comes are a price that even Obama is unwilling to pay.

I havn't said a word about the Bourgeoisie, nor have I heard anyone on this thread use that word.

You don't need to. For the last 150 years, the left has been at war against the middle. Obama continues that trend.