Why do we need the Rich?

TheCrusader

Member
Dec 30, 2015
682
43
18
Why is it the only argument right-wingers come up with is we need the rich to invest in things?

So we need the rich for their...money?

Do they provide NOTHING else to all of civilization except they "provide the capital"?

Why not just take their money then...and redistribute it accordingly?

How is it by letting the Rich have it all (and living exorbitant life styles) better than social welfare states such as Germany? Where they limit the rich, tax the hell out of them, and give them money to everyone else?
 
Why is it the only argument right-wingers come up with is we need the rich to invest in things?

So we need the rich for their...money?

Do they provide NOTHING else to all of civilization except they "provide the capital"?

Why not just take their money then...and redistribute it accordingly?

How is it by letting the Rich have it all (and living exorbitant life styles) better than social welfare states such as Germany? Where they limit the rich, tax the hell out of them, and give them money to everyone else?

Why don't you ask Bill Gates' employees?
 
We need our successful and innovators to be a successful society.

The American dream is all about getting ahead and living the good life. Sure, I want them to pay their taxes and pay their workers better, but to say why do we need the rich is kind of like saying why do we need successful people?

Looking at Haiti or Zimbabwe we can see two systems that have very few successful people and a lot of people that just don't care. I don't want that for America. Think good and hard Op.

The fight needs to be about regulations and a hybrid system of capitalism.
 
Why is it the only argument right-wingers come up with is we need the rich to invest in things?

So we need the rich for their...money?

Do they provide NOTHING else to all of civilization except they "provide the capital"?

Why not just take their money then...and redistribute it accordingly?

How is it by letting the Rich have it all (and living exorbitant life styles) better than social welfare states such as Germany? Where they limit the rich, tax the hell out of them, and give them money to everyone else?
The real question is why do we need you?
Are you on speed or something? Posting thread after thread of anti capitalist dip shit lies.
 
Why is it the only argument right-wingers come up with is we need the rich to invest in things?

So we need the rich for their...money?

Do they provide NOTHING else to all of civilization except they "provide the capital"?

Why not just take their money then...and redistribute it accordingly?

How is it by letting the Rich have it all (and living exorbitant life styles) better than social welfare states such as Germany? Where they limit the rich, tax the hell out of them, and give them money to everyone else?

Somebody has to support your useless & lazy ass.
 
Why is it the only argument right-wingers come up with is we need the rich to invest in things?

So we need the rich for their...money?

Do they provide NOTHING else to all of civilization except they "provide the capital"?

Why not just take their money then...and redistribute it accordingly?

How is it by letting the Rich have it all (and living exorbitant life styles) better than social welfare states such as Germany? Where they limit the rich, tax the hell out of them, and give them money to everyone else?

No
 
Karl Marx and the Bolsheviks asked the same thing.

Get off the message boards and go read some HISTORY...before you take down the greatest society thus far created on this planet because some have more than you.

If you are an American, you are already luckier than 15 out of 16 people on this planet...don't vote to destroy that because you are envious and poorly educated.
 
Why is it the only argument right-wingers come up with is we need the rich to invest in things?

So we need the rich for their...money?

Do they provide NOTHING else to all of civilization except they "provide the capital"?

Why not just take their money then...and redistribute it accordingly?

How is it by letting the Rich have it all (and living exorbitant life styles) better than social welfare states such as Germany? Where they limit the rich, tax the hell out of them, and give them money to everyone else?
For the most part, they are the winners in the various competitions that life presents. Clearly, you are one of the losers.
 
Why is it the only argument right-wingers come up with is we need the rich to invest in things?

So we need the rich for their...money?

Do they provide NOTHING else to all of civilization except they "provide the capital"?

Why not just take their money then...and redistribute it accordingly?

How is it by letting the Rich have it all (and living exorbitant life styles) better than social welfare states such as Germany? Where they limit the rich, tax the hell out of them, and give them money to everyone else?


And this is the thought process of the liberal/progressive left? You have got to be kidding me, lol. He sounds more like Obama/Hillary/Bernie then they do.

I believe EVERY conservative should leave this thread alone, and let the lefties straighten this incompetent boob out. Even the far left knows that if there aren't any rich people to constantly fleece, they won't have any money to buy votes and give away goodies, lol.

Straighten this guy out lefties, before he lets the cat out of the bag how far left you people have actually gone-)
 
We need our successful and innovators to be a successful society.

The American dream is all about getting ahead and living the good life. Sure, I want them to pay their taxes and pay their workers better, but to say why do we need the rich is kind of like saying why do we need successful people?

Looking at Haiti or Zimbabwe we can see two systems that have very few successful people and a lot of people that just don't care. I don't want that for America. Think good and hard Op.

The fight needs to be about regulations and a hybrid system of capitalism.

Mathew,

There has been many surveys and I know some very successful self made $100m+ guys... And money is not what drives them in the morning.. A lot of them have developed a very interesting working environment for them to thrive... I noticed myself when I started to grow my own company, as soon as you get into a comfort lifestyle you are driven more by the challenge rather than greed.
Some complain about tax, some don't... I know a lifelong Republican who loved Clinton because he created an environment to do more business...

So can rich pay more? Off course they can and probably should... Empirical data used with the Laffer Curve strongly indicates that 70% taxation doesn't affect major earners. There is a large distance between 20% and 70%... I would think 55% would be far fairer...
 
We need our successful and innovators to be a successful society.

The American dream is all about getting ahead and living the good life. Sure, I want them to pay their taxes and pay their workers better, but to say why do we need the rich is kind of like saying why do we need successful people?

Looking at Haiti or Zimbabwe we can see two systems that have very few successful people and a lot of people that just don't care. I don't want that for America. Think good and hard Op.

The fight needs to be about regulations and a hybrid system of capitalism.

Mathew,

There has been many surveys and I know some very successful self made $100m+ guys... And money is not what drives them in the morning.. A lot of them have developed a very interesting working environment for them to thrive... I noticed myself when I started to grow my own company, as soon as you get into a comfort lifestyle you are driven more by the challenge rather than greed.
Some complain about tax, some don't... I know a lifelong Republican who loved Clinton because he created an environment to do more business...

So can rich pay more? Off course they can and probably should... Empirical data used with the Laffer Curve strongly indicates that 70% taxation doesn't affect major earners. There is a large distance between 20% and 70%... I would think 55% would be far fairer...

How is it fair for some to pay federal tax and not others?

If you truly want to be fair then tax everyone at the same rate, say 20 percent. That way everyone has skin in the game.
 
We need our successful and innovators to be a successful society.

The American dream is all about getting ahead and living the good life. Sure, I want them to pay their taxes and pay their workers better, but to say why do we need the rich is kind of like saying why do we need successful people?

Looking at Haiti or Zimbabwe we can see two systems that have very few successful people and a lot of people that just don't care. I don't want that for America. Think good and hard Op.

The fight needs to be about regulations and a hybrid system of capitalism.

Mathew,

There has been many surveys and I know some very successful self made $100m+ guys... And money is not what drives them in the morning.. A lot of them have developed a very interesting working environment for them to thrive... I noticed myself when I started to grow my own company, as soon as you get into a comfort lifestyle you are driven more by the challenge rather than greed.
Some complain about tax, some don't... I know a lifelong Republican who loved Clinton because he created an environment to do more business...

So can rich pay more? Off course they can and probably should... Empirical data used with the Laffer Curve strongly indicates that 70% taxation doesn't affect major earners. There is a large distance between 20% and 70%... I would think 55% would be far fairer...

How is it fair for some to pay federal tax and not others?

If you truly want to be fair then tax everyone at the same rate, say 20 percent. That way everyone has skin in the game.
People complain about "the rich" not paying enough but think it's OK that the bottom 40% of wage earners pay nothing. Most actually get back more than they pay in.
 
My business depends on those classified as wealthy, if they are gone who will our customers then be?

The government can pretend to lead and mobilize production but as most well versed individuals will attest the government is incapable of taking care the social programs it currently controls, talk to a vet!

Name one country that equals the technological, manufacturing, and medical advances developed by the United States?
 
My business depends on those classified as wealthy, if they are gone who will our customers then be?

The government can pretend to lead and mobilize production but as most well versed individuals will attest the government is incapable of taking care the social programs it currently controls, talk to a vet!

Name one country that equals the technological, manufacturing, and medical advances developed by the United States?

He actually claims that jobs are created when he demand a steak dinner and a cook shows up and cook s for him. He's a complete kook.
 
My business depends on those classified as wealthy, if they are gone who will our customers then be?

The government can pretend to lead and mobilize production but as most well versed individuals will attest the government is incapable of taking care the social programs it currently controls, talk to a vet!

Name one country that equals the technological, manufacturing, and medical advances developed by the United States?

He actually claims that jobs are created when he demand a steak dinner and a cook shows up and cook s for him. He's a complete kook.
You misspelled "ignoramus."
 
My business depends on those classified as wealthy, if they are gone who will our customers then be?

The government can pretend to lead and mobilize production but as most well versed individuals will attest the government is incapable of taking care the social programs it currently controls, talk to a vet!

Name one country that equals the technological, manufacturing, and medical advances developed by the United States?

He actually claims that jobs are created when he demand a steak dinner and a cook shows up and cook s for him. He's a complete kook.
You misspelled "ignoramus."

ha ha ha... he also claimed to illicit a response from me.
 

Forum List

Back
Top