Why are Republicans desperate to have a billionaire "elite" to run their lives?

Manufacturing is going overseas because our government is more interested in protecting corporate profits than American workers. Period.

Put appropriate tariffs and require labelling that tells folks what they are buying, and they won't. (I'd personally like to see "Made in China" labels with a tortured dissident on them being required for all items manufactured in China.)

Anyone who blames regulations for corporations screwing America and Americans are as contemptable as those who blame rape vicitms for dressing slutty. they almost don't deserve to be talked to.

Sorry, a 40% tax rate on someone making 300K is NOT unreasonable. They still have plenty of money. Especially since Social Security and Medicare are capped out at 100K.

Who are you to say they have plenty of money? How are you somehow qualified to say someone makes too much money? They've worked hard and became successful, just for you to think you're somehow intellectually superior and decide to redistribute their wealth. That, in my opinion, makes you no better than any thief. You have no idea how many children they are putting through college education, or how much they owe every year in propery taxes. Yet you'll vote for legislation to approve a 40% tax rate only because they make more money than you. Sickening.

The problem with the "I deserve these billions because I worked hard" is absolue bullshit.

No, someone else worked hard, you just collected the rewards because an unfair system allows you to.

Nobody is personally doing 12 million worth of work.

And this is a distinctly American thing, BTW. In Europe or Japan, you would never have a CEO making an 8 figure salary.

In Japan or Germany, CEO pay was only 11 or 12 times what an average worker makes. In the US it was 475 times.

Ratio of CEO Pay to Average Worker by Country | Creativeconflictwisdom's Blog

In 1980, the average CEO made 44 times what the average worker made. By 2005, it had grown to 411 times. It shrank breifly to 263 by 2009, but it has been creeping up again since.

CEO Compensation: US and other countries
)Once again...It's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
Stop the "Labor is God" bullshit.
Nobody is listening to you.
Funny how you lefties never say a fucking word about all the people in the entertainment business who make far more money than those EVIL CEO's you vilify. And why is this? Because most Hollywood elites and other entertainers are LIBERALS.
 
Manufacturing is going overseas because our government is more interested in protecting corporate profits than American workers. Period.

Put appropriate tariffs and require labelling that tells folks what they are buying, and they won't. (I'd personally like to see "Made in China" labels with a tortured dissident on them being required for all items manufactured in China.)

Anyone who blames regulations for corporations screwing America and Americans are as contemptable as those who blame rape vicitms for dressing slutty. they almost don't deserve to be talked to.

Sorry, a 40% tax rate on someone making 300K is NOT unreasonable. They still have plenty of money. Especially since Social Security and Medicare are capped out at 100K.

Who are you to say they have plenty of money? How are you somehow qualified to say someone makes too much money? They've worked hard and became successful, just for you to think you're somehow intellectually superior and decide to redistribute their wealth. That, in my opinion, makes you no better than any thief. You have no idea how many children they are putting through college education, or how much they owe every year in propery taxes. Yet you'll vote for legislation to approve a 40% tax rate only because they make more money than you. Sickening.

The problem with the "I deserve these billions because I worked hard" is absolue bullshit.

No, someone else worked hard, you just collected the rewards because an unfair system allows you to.

Nobody is personally doing 12 million worth of work.

And this is a distinctly American thing, BTW. In Europe or Japan, you would never have a CEO making an 8 figure salary.

In Japan or Germany, CEO pay was only 11 or 12 times what an average worker makes. In the US it was 475 times.

Ratio of CEO Pay to Average Worker by Country | Creativeconflictwisdom's Blog

In 1980, the average CEO made 44 times what the average worker made. By 2005, it had grown to 411 times. It shrank breifly to 263 by 2009, but it has been creeping up again since.

CEO Compensation: US and other countries

Once again. I do not care what European countries are doing. I think you may have noticed that a lot of them are failing economically. We shouldn't model after them. We are not completely socialist, yet. It is none of your business what they make, how they make it, or how much of it they have. Just because someone has more money than you, should not give you the right to take it. It is that simple.
 
I really want to know. They defend someone who says he likes to fire people. They want leaders who promise to throw grandma under the bus and slash education. What is the goal? To "undiscover" fire? Cause it sure seems that way.

Maybe they think it will help them to be rich someday. Who knows. It's a mystery to me why people that most certainly make only average money would vote for Mitt Romney!!! He doesn't care about helping anybody but the rich. And he looks down on everybody else. You can tell!!!

Yet all of these average working class people are supporting him. Weird.
 
I really want to know. They defend someone who says he likes to fire people. They want leaders who promise to throw grandma under the bus and slash education. What is the goal? To "undiscover" fire? Cause it sure seems that way.

Maybe they think it will help them to be rich someday. Who knows. It's a mystery to me why people that most certainly make only average money would vote for Mitt Romney!!! He doesn't care about helping anybody but the rich. And he looks down on everybody else. You can tell!!!

Yet all of these average working class people are supporting him. Weird.

Simple..We want to get out of office the most radical leftist president in the history of the United States.
 
I really want to know. They defend someone who says he likes to fire people. They want leaders who promise to throw grandma under the bus and slash education. What is the goal? To "undiscover" fire? Cause it sure seems that way.

Maybe they think it will help them to be rich someday. Who knows. It's a mystery to me why people that most certainly make only average money would vote for Mitt Romney!!! He doesn't care about helping anybody but the rich. And he looks down on everybody else. You can tell!!!

Yet all of these average working class people are supporting him. Weird.

While you support a President that has absolutely no respect for the Supreme Court, and would obviously rather disband the republic and become a democracy. Who needs checks and balances? He may care about the middle class and poor, but that does not mean he could, or would do anything to help them without a basic understanding of economics or the way our government works. Threatening the Supreme Court? Oh yes he did.

I will never be rich, I'm happy being middle class and working hard to support my family. I just do not think it is fair to tax someone more simply because they have more than me.
 
I really want to know. They defend someone who says he likes to fire people. They want leaders who promise to throw grandma under the bus and slash education. What is the goal? To "undiscover" fire? Cause it sure seems that way.

Maybe they think it will help them to be rich someday. Who knows. It's a mystery to me why people that most certainly make only average money would vote for Mitt Romney!!! He doesn't care about helping anybody but the rich. And he looks down on everybody else. You can tell!!!

Yet all of these average working class people are supporting him. Weird.

While you support a President that has absolutely no respect for the Supreme Court, and would obviously rather disband the republic and become a democracy. Who needs checks and balances? He may care about the middle class and poor, but that does not mean he could, or would do anything to help them without a basic understanding of economics or the way our government works. Threatening the Supreme Court? Oh yes he did.

I will never be rich, I'm happy being middle class and working hard to support my family. I just do not think it is fair to tax someone more simply because they have more than me.

He did not threaten the supreme court. Why must you people persist in telling that lie?? If you cannot criticize him for things that really happened, then perhaps you shouldn't criticize him at all.
 
Oh he did. He questioned their validity based on their findings. Sounds like a threat to me, or intimidation. Either one is unacceptable.

Obama said, "Ultimately I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress."

He continued, "And I'd just remind conservative commentators that for years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law."

In response to these astounding comments, Judge Jerry Smith sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder. Smith asked, "Does the Department of Justice recognize that federal courts have the authority in appropriate circumstances to strike federal statutes because of one or more constitutional infirmities?"

An attorney for the Department of Justice (DOJ) replied, "Yes" but that did not satisfy Smith who was very concerned about Obama's reference to the Justices as an "unelected group."

It's obvious offense was taken

Following this, he gave what amounts to a literal essay assignment to the DOJ.
"I would like to have from you by noon on Thursday - that's about 48 hours from now - a letter stating what is the position of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice, in regard to the recent statements by the president."

This is one of Obama's biggest mistakes. There are three branches of government in our constitution for a reason, checks and balances. Obama appears to not like some of these measures, and handled it in the worst way.



Video proof



Judge Jerry Smith's response and essay order. Her said, "It's not a small matter."

But you liberals will never admit that your dear leader could make a mistake.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[
)Once again...It's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
Stop the "Labor is God" bullshit.
Nobody is listening to you.
Funny how you lefties never say a fucking word about all the people in the entertainment business who make far more money than those EVIL CEO's you vilify. And why is this? Because most Hollywood elites and other entertainers are LIBERALS.

wow, guy, you seem to have some anger problems.

I'd listen to this guy on the subject of labor vs. Capital.

"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."- Abraham Lincoln.

Not a leftie, and frankly, I do think that some of what hollywood actors/directors get paid is obscene, and most of them did their best work when they made far less. However, that said, the non-elites in Hollywood are unionized. The writers, the actors, the grips, they all have unions that keep them from being exploited.
 
Once again. I do not care what European countries are doing. I think you may have noticed that a lot of them are failing economically. We shouldn't model after them. We are not completely socialist, yet. It is none of your business what they make, how they make it, or how much of it they have. Just because someone has more money than you, should not give you the right to take it. It is that simple.

Actually, we have every right to take it. It's called "Democracy".

As a practical matter, the more the CEO's cheat the folks who work for them, the more likely that we are going to get to the point where folks are going to vote for exactly that.
 
Once again. I do not care what European countries are doing. I think you may have noticed that a lot of them are failing economically. We shouldn't model after them. We are not completely socialist, yet. It is none of your business what they make, how they make it, or how much of it they have. Just because someone has more money than you, should not give you the right to take it. It is that simple.

Actually, we have every right to take it. It's called "Democracy".


As a practical matter, the more the CEO's cheat the folks who work for them, the more likely that we are going to get to the point where folks are going to vote for exactly that.

wow, you're becoming more unhinged every day...
You sign up for you brown shit and jack boots yet?
 
Once again. I do not care what European countries are doing. I think you may have noticed that a lot of them are failing economically. We shouldn't model after them. We are not completely socialist, yet. It is none of your business what they make, how they make it, or how much of it they have. Just because someone has more money than you, should not give you the right to take it. It is that simple.

Actually, we have every right to take it. It's called "Democracy".


As a practical matter, the more the CEO's cheat the folks who work for them, the more likely that we are going to get to the point where folks are going to vote for exactly that.

wow, you're becoming more unhinged every day...
You sign up for you brown shit and jack boots yet?

It's not jackboots at all.

Fact is, we used to have a reasonable rate of taxation on the wealthy, we all bought into some snake oil called "Supply Side" and it failed, miserably.

Insanity is trying the same thing and expecting different results.

But as a practical matter... when a CEO drives down wages so he can get a bigger golden parachute, the more likely you are going to get to a point where people are going to vote for higher taxes because they won't give up their social security and medicare and unemployment.

They're doing it to themselves...
 
Funny how you lefties never say a fucking word about all the people in the entertainment business who make far more money than those EVIL CEO's you vilify. And why is this? Because most Hollywood elites and other entertainers are LIBERALS.


Not a lefty. But you wrote bull shit. I bitch all the time that to listen to the Rethugs protect the wealth of an athlete playing a game, and making tens of millions, is plain stupid.

But them the entire tax argument that the rethugs try and make is stupid.

And to those that don't think the American people can decide to tax the ultra wealthy more. well we can. Simply be electing the correct politicians. Isn't that what you Rethugs are all trying to do. Elect politicians that will not raise taxes? Except on poorer people.
 
Funny how you lefties never say a fucking word about all the people in the entertainment business who make far more money than those EVIL CEO's you vilify. And why is this? Because most Hollywood elites and other entertainers are LIBERALS.


Not a lefty. But you wrote bull shit. I bitch all the time that to listen to the Rethugs protect the wealth of an athlete playing a game, and making tens of millions, is plain stupid.

But them the entire tax argument that the rethugs try and make is stupid.

And to those that don't think the American people can decide to tax the ultra wealthy more. well we can. Simply be electing the correct politicians. Isn't that what you Rethugs are all trying to do. Elect politicians that will not raise taxes? Except on poorer people.

lets see, who signed the LARGEST increase on cigarette taxes when he first took office?
I guess that was a tax to hit the RICH..
 
Funny how you lefties never say a fucking word about all the people in the entertainment business who make far more money than those EVIL CEO's you vilify. And why is this? Because most Hollywood elites and other entertainers are LIBERALS.


Not a lefty. But you wrote bull shit. I bitch all the time that to listen to the Rethugs protect the wealth of an athlete playing a game, and making tens of millions, is plain stupid.

But them the entire tax argument that the rethugs try and make is stupid.

And to those that don't think the American people can decide to tax the ultra wealthy more. well we can. Simply be electing the correct politicians. Isn't that what you Rethugs are all trying to do. Elect politicians that will not raise taxes? Except on poorer people.

lets see, who signed the LARGEST increase on cigarette taxes when he first took office?
I guess that was a tax to hit the RICH..

Well, you see, WHY do you raise taxes on Cigarettes? BEcause it's the path of least resistance. Smokers hate their own habit, and non-smokers hate their habit.

Personally, I'd drop all cigarette taxes, and instead make tobacco a prescription drug. Your doctor can write you prescriptions, but the minute it starts effecting your health, he's obligated to get you off it.
 
Not a lefty. But you wrote bull shit. I bitch all the time that to listen to the Rethugs protect the wealth of an athlete playing a game, and making tens of millions, is plain stupid.

But them the entire tax argument that the rethugs try and make is stupid.

And to those that don't think the American people can decide to tax the ultra wealthy more. well we can. Simply be electing the correct politicians. Isn't that what you Rethugs are all trying to do. Elect politicians that will not raise taxes? Except on poorer people.

lets see, who signed the LARGEST increase on cigarette taxes when he first took office?
I guess that was a tax to hit the RICH..

Well, you see, WHY do you raise taxes on Cigarettes? BEcause it's the path of least resistance. Smokers hate their own habit, and non-smokers hate their habit.

Personally, I'd drop all cigarette taxes, and instead make tobacco a prescription drug. Your doctor can write you prescriptions, but the minute it starts effecting your health, he's obligated to get you off it.

LOL, more brown shirts...you really hate that thing we have called, freedom
 
lets see, who signed the LARGEST increase on cigarette taxes when he first took office?
I guess that was a tax to hit the RICH..

Well, you see, WHY do you raise taxes on Cigarettes? BEcause it's the path of least resistance. Smokers hate their own habit, and non-smokers hate their habit.

Personally, I'd drop all cigarette taxes, and instead make tobacco a prescription drug. Your doctor can write you prescriptions, but the minute it starts effecting your health, he's obligated to get you off it.

LOL, more brown shirts...you really hate that thing we have called, freedom

How come you guys always seem to think that "Freedom" involves rich people fucking over poor people?

Let's be blunt about the Tobacco industry. It's an industry whose entire business model is selling people a known carcinogen, and because adults are smart enough not to get addicted to that, they have put their entire marketting scheme on addicting people when they are CHILDREN.

And only Republicans think they are worth 'Defending".

Sane People- "Wow, we think you shouldn't sell carcinogens to children."

Conservatards- "YOu're against FREEDOM!!!!!!!"

Do you realize how absolutely retarded you sound most of the time?

Now, incidently, I think the Democrats are just as much hypocrites as REpublicans on the tobacco issue. They see smokers as a quick source of cash, and much like Maria Teresa at the partitions of Poland, "The more she wept, the more she took."

My solution is a simple one. Don't monetarily penalize smokers, but threat their addiction medically.
 
Well, you see, WHY do you raise taxes on Cigarettes? BEcause it's the path of least resistance. Smokers hate their own habit, and non-smokers hate their habit.

Personally, I'd drop all cigarette taxes, and instead make tobacco a prescription drug. Your doctor can write you prescriptions, but the minute it starts effecting your health, he's obligated to get you off it.

LOL, more brown shirts...you really hate that thing we have called, freedom

How come you guys always seem to think that "Freedom" involves rich people fucking over poor people?

Let's be blunt about the Tobacco industry. It's an industry whose entire business model is selling people a known carcinogen, and because adults are smart enough not to get addicted to that, they have put their entire marketting scheme on addicting people when they are CHILDREN.

And only Republicans think they are worth 'Defending".

Sane People- "Wow, we think you shouldn't sell carcinogens to children."

Conservatards- "YOu're against FREEDOM!!!!!!!"

Do you realize how absolutely retarded you sound most of the time?

Now, incidently, I think the Democrats are just as much hypocrites as REpublicans on the tobacco issue. They see smokers as a quick source of cash, and much like Maria Teresa at the partitions of Poland, "The more she wept, the more she took."

My solution is a simple one. Don't monetarily penalize smokers, but threat their addiction medically.

maybe smokers don't want your fucking help..or you suggestions of how, THEY should be treated...
all I was saying is you all accuse Republicans of raising taxes on the POOR...and shoved that notion back in your faces..
now carry on, I have to go to work
 
Last edited:
maybe smokers don't want your fucking help..or you suggestions of how, THEY should be treated...
all I was saying is you all accuse Republicans of raising taxes on the POOR...and shoved that notion back in your faces..
now carry on, I have to go to work

Okay, then exempt all smoking related illnesses from insurance or government health care programs that I'm paying into. You see, the point of the smoker tax was to offset all the additional costs the health care system incurs because of smokers.

Which again, I think is a bad idea unless you are putting that money- or a least part of it- towards getting people off tobacco.

Incidently, the tax was on the tobacco companies as part of a larger settlement. They just passed the tax on to the consumer.
 
I understand Deany now.

Do you see how much Obama loves Julia and takes care of her and her family? That's what Deany wants for himself, a loving government that will tend to his every need
 
I understand Deany now.

Do you see how much Obama loves Julia and takes care of her and her family? That's what Deany wants for himself, a loving government that will tend to his every need

And Romney's goal is to have Julia work for as little as possible, on two jobs, to make a douchebag like himself richer.

How about we have a society where Julia is fairly compensated for her work and doesn't have to depend on governemnt at all?
 

Forum List

Back
Top