Which Side Are You On?

[georgephillip]

Are you functionally illiterate? "...the British Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773..."

The reality is, George, that if you and I were alive in the 1770s, I'd be fighting alongside the Founding Fathers, and you'd be informing on us to the King.

Leftists don't like freedom. They love their oligarchy.

Are you functional at all?

What do your "proud conservative" instincts tell you about the political loyalties of the British Parliament in 1773?

Monarch or Democracy?

That's a tough one, right daveslave?

Based on everything you've posted, the reality is you would have fought for whichever side paid you the most in the Revolutionary War.

Conservative love their Monarchs (and Wall Street)

At least I would have fought.

You wouldn't. You're a coward.

What kind of coward am I?

Moral?

Physical?

Got Proof?

Links?

Maybe you're projecting (again)

 

[georgephillip]

Here we go again with the usual LOSER LEFT and their CLASS ENVY BS!

Who are YOU to decide who acquires their wealth honestly and who does not?

This is a TOTAL JOKE considering who you losers support in elections.

Like Barack Obama got his money honestly? Or Ted Kennedy? Or Nancy Pelosi?

But you don't talk about defunding them. You just go right on supporting them and voting for them.

No, it's the people THAT ACTUALLY SUPPLY JOBS TO THE COUNTRY you want to go after.

And why? BECAUSE THEY HAVE MONEY AND YOU DON'T AND YOU WANT IT!

And if you can't get that money personally, then at least you can get that money as a collective through the government.

It won't put a dime in your pocket, but it makes you feel better that the "undeserving" don't have it.

Then you have the temerity to talk about who earns and who doesn't the money?

Like the government has earned the money they take in taxes?

Do you libs ever talk about taking THAT money away from the government or questioning if the government earned it?

Oh HELL TO THE NO! You want the government to have MORE MORE MORE.

You guys are just so full of it.

That's why no one either of you seriously.

Do you believe Hank Paulson honestly earned his share of TARP funds?

How about the richest 5% of Americans who nearly doubled their returns on wealth due to a certain $13 trillion taxpayer-funded bail out?

Are you clear about how many jobs small business owners provide in this country?
What percentage of those productive business owners are among the richest 5%?
How many are as rich as Hank?

As far as all the Democrats you mentioned, I'm fine with throwing each and every one of them in prison for the rest of their useless lives.

Are you ready to say the same about Dick and Dubya?

If you guys (gals) don't start taking the rich seriously, the Republic you claim to care so much about will go the way of Rome's.

Do you believe TAXING THOSE PEOPLE is going to make everything right?

When are you morons going to get it that taxing those people does nothing but PASS THE BURDEN ONTO US!

They don't pay those taxes, WE DO! They simply pass those taxes on in HIGHER PRICES and LAYING OFF PEOPLE.

You are never going to get the Utopian "fair world" you dream about in your child like fantasies.

The answer to those problems is stop electing people who think "stimulus" is the answer to our economic problems.

Not your communist ideas of "taxing" everone into "prosperity."

Explain how the FIRE sector will "pass the burden on to us" if they are required to pay taxes at 35% instead of 15%?

 

[georgephillip]

You're fighting for the working and middle class...how, exactly? By voting Democrat?

Then you're fighting to give the oligarchy even more power and control. Congratulations.

I know... you think that GOVERNMENT is the oligarchy. Congratulations on your ignorance. Governments come and go... but the influence peddlers remain.... that falls directly in the laps of those "exceptional Americans" that make up our Plutocracy that runs the government.

I want this country to be of, by and for the people... not the top 1%... but ALL the people. Not the people that YOU like.. but the people YOU despise too.

Again with the 1% boogeyman.

It gets worse, Buffy.

How about the top 0.01% of income "earners" in the US?

Those whose median annual income is $50,000,000.
Those with $350,000,000 in assets "and, since 1978, that is an increase of 550% -how have you done the past 30 years?"

Care to hazard a guess at their tax rate?

"(J)ust over 20%"

America is 234 Years Old Today – Is It Finished? | Phil

 

[Too Tall]

"New data released by the IRS reveals that, over a period of 12 years, tax rates for the richest 400 Americans were effectively cut in half. In 1995, the richest 400 Americans paid, on average, 29.93% of their income in federal taxes. In 2007, the last year for which the IRS has released data, the richest 400 Americans paid just 16.63%...

"As their tax rates plummeted, the total income of the richest 400 Americans skyrocketed.

"In 1995, the combined income of the richest 400 was just over $6 billion. By 2007, the combined income of the richest 400 was almost $23 billion."

ThinkProgress » REPORT: In 12 Years, Income For Richest 400 Americans Quadruples, Tax Rate Nearly Halved

Or maybe you should get off your knees, Knave?

Ready for global Feudalism?

So...you're stupid and lazy...and it's MY fault.

Is 29.93% of their income to much to ask of our richest 400?

If you think the tax laws are not fair, write your Congresscritter and ask him/her to change them.

Obama had the majority in the House and Senate for two years and didn't do anything about it. He also caved on doing away with the Bush tax cuts. All I heard for two years was raise the taxes on those making over $250.000.

 

[Too Tall]

History tells us that all socialist states have failed. History tells us that socialism is a lie brought by utopian nitwits who want to cared for from cradle to grave. History tells us that capitalism produces the strongest economies, and the greatest personal wealth. History tells us that socialism/ communism takes away the incentive to risk personal wealth in entrepreneurial endeavor. History tells us that entrepreneurial endeavor isn't always rewarded. More business' fail then succeed. The successful are then treated to an onslaught of socialist leaches trying to suck everything that they've earned out of them.

If America chooses the socialist path we deserve what we get. Our reward will be that we'll all live equally in abject poverty just like the people from other socialist states. Now if you socialists have any credible evidence bolstering your agenda please present it here. I've looked high and low. Everything that I've found indicates that America still has the best system. It damn sure isn't socialism. Capitalism rules.

And if we ever approach a purely Socialistic society, I will fight it tooth and nail. Your last quote says it all... Capitalism rules... with an Iron Fist. That's why we can't go back to those pre-depression era robber/baron days. We need a degree of Socialism to temper the greed and ruthlessness of Capitalism.

Look, there is no way in hell I am advocating a Socialist America. However, I am of the opinion that the working and Middle Class are in trouble and need a boost. Not having to worry about Health Care would have been a great place to start. When 60% of all bankruptcies are due to Medical bills, that is a huge problem. Same with Education... I saw a statistic last night that showed Graduating Seniors are going into the workforce approximately $140k in debt and the average earnings are now down to $27k/year.... if they are lucky enough to find a job.

Health Care and Education are the two biggies as far as I'm concerned.

How about checking out how much University professors are paid and how many hours they work for that pay and then we can talk.

 

[Too Tall]

Leftists don't know shit about history.

The conflict was with King George, you moron. The East India Company was just the vehicle.

Let me guess -- public education?

Actually, it was about taxation without representation. Let's see...Oh... wait.. that's what YOU guys want. You want even our poorest to pay taxes(even though they still do on the state and local level, and sales tax, and SSI... and), but you want to cut them off of all that damned Socialism that you rail against continually.

Then you want our wealthiest to pay even less than they do now and get rid of all those pesky regulations that keep them from raping us more than they already do.

You are not a "Tea Party" person... you guys are the catalyst for the next Tea Party.

SSI is funded from the U.S. Treasury general funds, not the Social Security trust fund so no poor person is paying for it. The 'general funds' come from those that do pay income taxes.

Not raising taxes on the highest earners is quite different than cutting their taxes. When you get someone to explain the difference between income and wealth, you might begin to make sense.

 

[georgephillip]

So...you're stupid and lazy...and it's MY fault.

Is 29.93% of their income to much to ask of our richest 400?

If you think the tax laws are not fair, write your Congresscritter and ask him/her to change them.

Obama had the majority in the House and Senate for two years and didn't do anything about it. He also caved on doing away with the Bush tax cuts. All I heard for two years was raise the taxes on those making over $250.000.

If your critter is a Democrat OR Republican it's hard to see why you would waste time writing.

Both corporate parties depend on the richest 1% of voters to fund their campaigns.
Both are equally subservient to Wall Street and the Pentagon.
So far Obama is looking the best investment Goldman Sachs ever made.

 

[Too Tall]

Do you believe Hank Paulson honestly earned his share of TARP funds?

How about the richest 5% of Americans who nearly doubled their returns on wealth due to a certain $13 trillion taxpayer-funded bail out?

Are you clear about how many jobs small business owners provide in this country?
What percentage of those productive business owners are among the richest 5%?
How many are as rich as Hank?

As far as all the Democrats you mentioned, I'm fine with throwing each and every one of them in prison for the rest of their useless lives.

Are you ready to say the same about Dick and Dubya?

If you guys (gals) don't start taking the rich seriously, the Republic you claim to care so much about will go the way of Rome's.

Do you believe TAXING THOSE PEOPLE is going to make everything right?

When are you morons going to get it that taxing those people does nothing but PASS THE BURDEN ONTO US!

They don't pay those taxes, WE DO! They simply pass those taxes on in HIGHER PRICES and LAYING OFF PEOPLE.

You are never going to get the Utopian "fair world" you dream about in your child like fantasies.

The answer to those problems is stop electing people who think "stimulus" is the answer to our economic problems.

Not your communist ideas of "taxing" everone into "prosperity."

Explain how the FIRE sector will "pass the burden on to us" if they are required to pay taxes at 35% instead of 15%?

Congress writes the tax laws so you should take it up with them. The 15% tax rate is the capital gains tax. Increase it and all the people with 401K retirement plans will take a major hit.

It is a proven fact that lowering the capital gains tax INCREASED revenue to the government in case you are interested in that.

 

[Too Tall]

Is 29.93% of their income to much to ask of our richest 400?

If you think the tax laws are not fair, write your Congresscritter and ask him/her to change them.

Obama had the majority in the House and Senate for two years and didn't do anything about it. He also caved on doing away with the Bush tax cuts. All I heard for two years was raise the taxes on those making over $250.000.

If your critter is a Democrat OR Republican it's hard to see why you would waste time writing.

Both corporate parties depend on the richest 1% of voters to fund their campaigns.
Both are equally subservient to Wall Street and the Pentagon.
So far Obama is looking the best investment Goldman Sachs ever made.

Point taken!

 

[georgephillip]

Do you believe TAXING THOSE PEOPLE is going to make everything right?

When are you morons going to get it that taxing those people does nothing but PASS THE BURDEN ONTO US!

They don't pay those taxes, WE DO! They simply pass those taxes on in HIGHER PRICES and LAYING OFF PEOPLE.

You are never going to get the Utopian "fair world" you dream about in your child like fantasies.

The answer to those problems is stop electing people who think "stimulus" is the answer to our economic problems.

Not your communist ideas of "taxing" everone into "prosperity."

Explain how the FIRE sector will "pass the burden on to us" if they are required to pay taxes at 35% instead of 15%?

Congress writes the tax laws so you should take it up with them. The 15% tax rate is the capital gains tax. Increase it and all the people with 401K retirement plans will take a major hit.

It is a proven fact that lowering the capital gains tax INCREASED revenue to the government in case you are interested in that.

What do you think the effect would be of abolishing the 15% capital gains rate and taxing that income at a minimum of 35%?

 

[initforme]

Wall street is the most corrupt street in the WORLD. Someone want to argue this?

 

[georgephillip]

Wall street is the most corrupt street in the WORLD. Someone want to argue this?

Not me.

According to some critics of Wall Street real wages in the US stopped rising in 1979: doubling the share of wealth enjoyed by the richest 1%.

A single minimum wage job in the mid-70s covered my rent on a brand new one bedroom apartment with enough left over to maintain a 6 year old Chevy.

I haven't been able to afford a one bedroom apartment or a car of any age since 1995.

And I don't think "choosing" between Republican OR Democrat will change anything for those in my end of the economic pool ever again.

 

[Avatar4321]

Wall street is the most corrupt street in the WORLD. Someone want to argue this?

i would argue that the most corrupt street in the world is E. Capitol. St.

 

[Newby]

Wall street is the most corrupt street in the WORLD. Someone want to argue this?

Not me.

According to some critics of Wall Street real wages in the US stopped rising in 1979: doubling the share of wealth enjoyed by the richest 1%.

A single minimum wage job in the mid-70s covered my rent on a brand new one bedroom apartment with enough left over to maintain a 6 year old Chevy.

I haven't been able to afford a one bedroom apartment or a car of any age since 1995.
And I don't think "choosing" between Republican OR Democrat will change anything for those in my end of the economic pool ever again.

So, in over 30 years you haven't done anything to improve yourself or your situation so that you could make more than minimum wage? I think most people would not be able to understand how that could possibly be? How does someone not try to improve their circumstances?

 

[georgephillip]

Wall street is the most corrupt street in the WORLD. Someone want to argue this?

Not me.

According to some critics of Wall Street real wages in the US stopped rising in 1979: doubling the share of wealth enjoyed by the richest 1%.

A single minimum wage job in the mid-70s covered my rent on a brand new one bedroom apartment with enough left over to maintain a 6 year old Chevy.

I haven't been able to afford a one bedroom apartment or a car of any age since 1995.
And I don't think "choosing" between Republican OR Democrat will change anything for those in my end of the economic pool ever again.

So, in over 30 years you haven't done anything to improve yourself or your situation so that you could make more than minimum wage? I think most people would not be able to understand how that could possibly be? How does someone not try to improve their circumstances?

I think it depends on how you define "improving your circumstances."

If you limit your definition to increasing your income it would be impossible to grasp.

At different points in my life I've put education ahead of income, and I'm about to do it again at age 63.

I've quit my part time job, and I'll resume college full time this fall, depending on whether my Stafford student loan comes through.

Most people who opt to raise a family don't usually have this option available.

 

[Newby]

Not me.

According to some critics of Wall Street real wages in the US stopped rising in 1979: doubling the share of wealth enjoyed by the richest 1%.

A single minimum wage job in the mid-70s covered my rent on a brand new one bedroom apartment with enough left over to maintain a 6 year old Chevy.

I haven't been able to afford a one bedroom apartment or a car of any age since 1995.
And I don't think "choosing" between Republican OR Democrat will change anything for those in my end of the economic pool ever again.

So, in over 30 years you haven't done anything to improve yourself or your situation so that you could make more than minimum wage? I think most people would not be able to understand how that could possibly be? How does someone not try to improve their circumstances?

I think it depends on how you define "improving your circumstances."

If you limit your definition to increasing your income it would be impossible to grasp.

At different points in my life I've put education ahead of income, and I'm about to do it again at age 63.

I've quit my part time job, and I'll resume college full time this fall, depending on whether my Stafford student loan comes through.

Most people who opt to raise a family don't usually have this option available.

Therefore, you've made the CHOICE to remain low income and not be able to afford an apartment or a car. You don't see being able to pay your own way as YOUR responsibility?

 

[georgephillip]

The choices I've made since 1980 haven't changed GDP growth or productivity gains or how they have not "trickled down":

"From 1980 to 2005 the economy grew by more than 120 percent. Productivity, the amount of goods and services produced in an average hour of work, rose by almost 70 percent. Yet the wage for a typical worker changed little over this period, after adjusting for inflation.

"Furthermore, workers had far less security at the end of this period than the beginning, as access to health insurance and pension coverage dwindled, and layoffs and downsizing became standard practices. In short, most workers saw few gains from a quarter century of economic growth."

What makes you think I haven't paid my own way?

For the last 25 years workers in the middle and lower economic classes have been paying the way of those in the top 5% of the population.

The Conservative Nanny State

 

[thereisnospoon]

Wall street is the most corrupt street in the WORLD. Someone want to argue this?

Please offer up some bits of wisdom as to how it you came up with this conclusion?
Are you actually so hung up on "go to work, get paid and there's no other legitimate way to earn a living"?
Do you believe that doing what one can do to make their savings and investment work for them is somehow evil?
401k's, mutual funds, IRA accounts, Keough accounts, money market funds, all evil?
What about investing in a local business as a silent partner for the express purpose of positive return on investment? Evil?
Did it ever occur to you that most 401k's and mutual funds are invested in Blue Chip stocks such as Exxon/Mobil, Walmart, Coca Cola, Pepsico, AT&T and others?

 

[Newby]

The choices I've made since 1980 haven't changed GDP growth or productivity gains or how they have not "trickled down":

"From 1980 to 2005 the economy grew by more than 120 percent. Productivity, the amount of goods and services produced in an average hour of work, rose by almost 70 percent. Yet the wage for a typical worker changed little over this period, after adjusting for inflation.

"Furthermore, workers had far less security at the end of this period than the beginning, as access to health insurance and pension coverage dwindled, and layoffs and downsizing became standard practices. In short, most workers saw few gains from a quarter century of economic growth."

What makes you think I haven't paid my own way?
For the last 25 years workers in the middle and lower economic classes have been paying the way of those in the top 5% of the population.

The Conservative Nanny State

If you can't afford an apartment for yourself, then who is paying for your housing?

And what would you know about 'workers' whenever you haven't made any effort to become a contributing factor to the work force to begin with? I'm just going by what you've stated about yourself in prior posts. That you can't afford an apartment or a car, and that you only work part time? Of course you're never going to get ahead or make any more money unless you put the effort into doing so, it's not going to come and land in your lap. Sounds like you expect a lot of something for doing nothing from what you've described of yourself.

 

[georgephillip]

The single minimum wage job I held in the '70s "covered the rent on a brand new one-bedroom apartment with enough left over to maintain a six year old (car)".

In the '70s a new one-bedroom rented for $175 to $200 per month.
Many rent for ten times that much today, at least where I'm living.
During that same time GDP as more than doubled and productivity has increased by 70% yet most of those gains have gone to investors, not labor.

Since I "retired" in 2009 I've even been effectively priced out of single apartments that charge market-based rents, and part-time work was all I was able to find.

I'm not trying to white-wash the many mistakes I've made since the 1970s; however, I'm also not willing to ignore the redistribution of wealth that's taken place during that time either.