With only around 500 billionaires in the country

[Brain357]

Actually it seems to work fine, they are some of the happiest countries in the world.

Yeah, and in case it hasn't occurred to you, WE don't live in those countries precisely because WE would not be happy. If socialism is your cup of tea, go live somewhere socialist. Stop trying to force it on people who don't want it and telling them how "happy" it's going to make them.

Human beings aren't a "one size fits all" scenario. We're not an anthill or a beehive or the Borg Collective. What the hell is it about being an individual that scares you so?

We have socialism here.

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

Of course they do. Look at all the inequality. That's what happens when they hoard all the money.

 

[Brain357]

Why are republicans so against happy? Germany and Denmark are both doing well.

We're all for happiness. We believe that happiness is when one has total control over their destiny--not government. I'm happy. Do you want to see me happier? Take more government out of my life. That would make me happier.

Then why do you argue for more people to pay taxes? That is more government.

No, that's spreading the burden of government more equally. The idea that one half of the country should pay for the other half is not less government.

Yes it is. Expecting the very poor to pay taxes is silly. They will just get it back in welfare. It's inefficient and grows government.

The very poor? 47% of Americans pay no income taxes at all. Are they all very poor?

Sadly anyone poor enough to not pay income taxes is very poor.

 

[Brain357]

Actually it seems to work fine, they are some of the happiest countries in the world.

Yeah, and in case it hasn't occurred to you, WE don't live in those countries precisely because WE would not be happy. If socialism is your cup of tea, go live somewhere socialist. Stop trying to force it on people who don't want it and telling them how "happy" it's going to make them.

Human beings aren't a "one size fits all" scenario. We're not an anthill or a beehive or the Borg Collective. What the hell is it about being an individual that scares you so?

We have socialism here.

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

What about greed? People like the Waltons make billions not working while they pay so little to employees. If those employees made more we'd have a much better economy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, and in case it hasn't occurred to you, WE don't live in those countries precisely because WE would not be happy. If socialism is your cup of tea, go live somewhere socialist. Stop trying to force it on people who don't want it and telling them how "happy" it's going to make them.

Human beings aren't a "one size fits all" scenario. We're not an anthill or a beehive or the Borg Collective. What the hell is it about being an individual that scares you so?

We have socialism here.

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

What about greed? People like the Waltons make billions not working while they pay so little to employees. If those employees made more we'd have a much better economy.

Business doesn't operate by profit. Business operates by growth.

To put it another way, let's say you inherited a decent amount of money. We'll go with $500,000.

You have no bills. Everything is paid for, so what would be the logical thing to do with that money? Invest it.

You know nothing about investments, so you turn to professionals. You want a reasonable return but nothing too risky. A good conservative investment.

So your company boils it down to two companies to invest in. One has a growth rate of 5.6%. The other has a growth rate of 2.8%. Now which company do you want to put your money in?

Before you answer, you learn that the company with the 2.8% return grosses 3 billion dollars a year. The company with a 5.6% growth grosses about two million dollars a year. Does that change your decision any?

Of course not. Investors could care less what a company is worth, they care about growth. Companies heavily rely on investors for the success of their company. That's why they have jobs that pay minimum wage and offshore work.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We're all for happiness. We believe that happiness is when one has total control over their destiny--not government. I'm happy. Do you want to see me happier? Take more government out of my life. That would make me happier.

Then why do you argue for more people to pay taxes? That is more government.

No, that's spreading the burden of government more equally. The idea that one half of the country should pay for the other half is not less government.

Yes it is. Expecting the very poor to pay taxes is silly. They will just get it back in welfare. It's inefficient and grows government.

The very poor? 47% of Americans pay no income taxes at all. Are they all very poor?

Sadly anyone poor enough to not pay income taxes is very poor.

So you're saying that 47% of our population are very poor?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, and in case it hasn't occurred to you, WE don't live in those countries precisely because WE would not be happy. If socialism is your cup of tea, go live somewhere socialist. Stop trying to force it on people who don't want it and telling them how "happy" it's going to make them.

Human beings aren't a "one size fits all" scenario. We're not an anthill or a beehive or the Borg Collective. What the hell is it about being an individual that scares you so?

We have socialism here.

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

Of course they do. Look at all the inequality. That's what happens when they hoard all the money.

Sorry, I'm not following your logic: what happens when they hoard all the money?

 

[bripat9643]

It is working fine in many countries. Your claim is obviously false.

Wrong. The countries you call "socialist" are actually largely capitalist. The socialist portion of their economies doesn't work.

Actually it seems to work fine, they are some of the happiest countries in the world.

Yeah, and in case it hasn't occurred to you, WE don't live in those countries precisely because WE would not be happy. If socialism is your cup of tea, go live somewhere socialist. Stop trying to force it on people who don't want it and telling them how "happy" it's going to make them.

Human beings aren't a "one size fits all" scenario. We're not an anthill or a beehive or the Borg Collective. What the hell is it about being an individual that scares you so?

We have socialism here.

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

It has never worked for periods of even 10 years.

 

[bripat9643]

We have socialism here.

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

Of course they do. Look at all the inequality. That's what happens when they hoard all the money.

Sorry, I'm not following your logic: what happens when they hoard all the money?

According to liberal theory, people like Steve Jobs have billions of dollars because they "hoard all the money." However, their theory never explains who buys the hundreds of millions of cell phones that Apple sells.

 

[Dot Com]

Why are the expected to carry the weight of the other 300 million?

Why do you give a fuck about the problems of billionaires? As far as I am concerned they can take their precious money and take a hike if they feel that having full access to a compliant government in the best country in the world to be wealthy is just too expensive.

^ that

/end thread

 

[Brain357]

Then why do you argue for more people to pay taxes? That is more government.

No, that's spreading the burden of government more equally. The idea that one half of the country should pay for the other half is not less government.

Yes it is. Expecting the very poor to pay taxes is silly. They will just get it back in welfare. It's inefficient and grows government.

The very poor? 47% of Americans pay no income taxes at all. Are they all very poor?

Sadly anyone poor enough to not pay income taxes is very poor.

So you're saying that 47% of our population are very poor?

In income yes. You have to make very little to not pay income taxes. Many are retired.

 

[Brain357]

Wrong. The countries you call "socialist" are actually largely capitalist. The socialist portion of their economies doesn't work.

Actually it seems to work fine, they are some of the happiest countries in the world.

Yeah, and in case it hasn't occurred to you, WE don't live in those countries precisely because WE would not be happy. If socialism is your cup of tea, go live somewhere socialist. Stop trying to force it on people who don't want it and telling them how "happy" it's going to make them.

Human beings aren't a "one size fits all" scenario. We're not an anthill or a beehive or the Borg Collective. What the hell is it about being an individual that scares you so?

We have socialism here.

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

It has never worked for periods of even 10 years.

You can't be serious.

 

[Brain357]

We have socialism here.

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

Of course they do. Look at all the inequality. That's what happens when they hoard all the money.

Sorry, I'm not following your logic: what happens when they hoard all the money?

They are taking all the money rather than creating good paying jobs. If they are going to make all the money then there is nobody else to pay the taxes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

Of course they do. Look at all the inequality. That's what happens when they hoard all the money.

Sorry, I'm not following your logic: what happens when they hoard all the money?

They are taking all the money rather than creating good paying jobs. If they are going to make all the money then there is nobody else to pay the taxes.

How much money they make is irrelevant to what anybody else makes. Even if they took a huge pay cut (which they shouldn't) and divide that money out to the tens of thousands of employees they have, it wouldn't amount to much and not change a thing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, that's spreading the burden of government more equally. The idea that one half of the country should pay for the other half is not less government.

Yes it is. Expecting the very poor to pay taxes is silly. They will just get it back in welfare. It's inefficient and grows government.

The very poor? 47% of Americans pay no income taxes at all. Are they all very poor?

Sadly anyone poor enough to not pay income taxes is very poor.

So you're saying that 47% of our population are very poor?

In income yes. You have to make very little to not pay income taxes. Many are retired.

No, many middle-class people pay no actual income tax. Other taxes? Yes they do, we all do, but not income tax.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

Of course they do. Look at all the inequality. That's what happens when they hoard all the money.

Sorry, I'm not following your logic: what happens when they hoard all the money?

According to liberal theory, people like Steve Jobs have billions of dollars because they "hoard all the money." However, their theory never explains who buys the hundreds of millions of cell phones that Apple sells.

Liberals are bewildered by how the rich get rich. They get rich because we offer them our money in exchange for goods or services. If you want to stop a rich person from getting richer, then quit buying their products. Of course, no liberal would ever do that.

 

[bripat9643]

Actually it seems to work fine, they are some of the happiest countries in the world.

Yeah, and in case it hasn't occurred to you, WE don't live in those countries precisely because WE would not be happy. If socialism is your cup of tea, go live somewhere socialist. Stop trying to force it on people who don't want it and telling them how "happy" it's going to make them.

Human beings aren't a "one size fits all" scenario. We're not an anthill or a beehive or the Borg Collective. What the hell is it about being an individual that scares you so?

We have socialism here.

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

It has never worked for periods of even 10 years.

You can't be serious.

Please name a 10 year period when complete socialism "worked."

 

[bripat9643]

Yes we do, and what's happening with that socialism?

Most all of our programs are going broke. We are 18 trillion in the hole and quickly approaching 19 trillion. Half of the people depend partly or entirely on the support of governments.

Back in the 60's and 70's we had communes. Communes were entirely socialist. Some went out to get supplies and necessities for the rest in the commune and others stayed in the commune having babies, smoking pot and watching television if they had one.

After a while, the people supporting the commune grew sick of taking care of everybody else. That's why communes disappeared.

Socialsim has a short fuse. Sure, it may work for a while. It may work 30 years, 60 years, even 100 years. But eventually, it will collapse much like our social programs are.

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

Of course they do. Look at all the inequality. That's what happens when they hoard all the money.

Sorry, I'm not following your logic: what happens when they hoard all the money?

They are taking all the money rather than creating good paying jobs. If they are going to make all the money then there is nobody else to pay the taxes.

How are they making all this money? Who gives it to them?

 

[bripat9643]

Yes it is. Expecting the very poor to pay taxes is silly. They will just get it back in welfare. It's inefficient and grows government.

The very poor? 47% of Americans pay no income taxes at all. Are they all very poor?

Sadly anyone poor enough to not pay income taxes is very poor.

So you're saying that 47% of our population are very poor?

In income yes. You have to make very little to not pay income taxes. Many are retired.

No, many middle-class people pay no actual income tax. Other taxes? Yes they do, we all do, but not income tax.

I paid the feds over $60,000 last year. That's enough to support 3 families on welfare.

 

[Brain357]

Well the problem is the rich have gotten lots of breaks and there has been nothing in return. Lots of inequality leads to a stagnant economy, that is where we are now.

The top 10% of wage earners in the US pay over 70% of all collected income taxes. Do you call that equity?

I call equity everybody paying the same or at the very least, the same percentage in taxes. Our stagnant economy is due to foreigners coming here and taking jobs away from Americans because they will work for next to nothing. That keeps wages down for everybody in this country.

The other part of a stagnant economy is when living off of taxpayers works out better than getting a job and working. We have more people of working age today not working since the early 70's. It's no accident either.

Of course they do. Look at all the inequality. That's what happens when they hoard all the money.

Sorry, I'm not following your logic: what happens when they hoard all the money?

They are taking all the money rather than creating good paying jobs. If they are going to make all the money then there is nobody else to pay the taxes.

How much money they make is irrelevant to what anybody else makes. Even if they took a huge pay cut (which they shouldn't) and divide that money out to the tens of thousands of employees they have, it wouldn't amount to much and not change a thing.

They could afford to pay enough employees aren't on welfare. Now that would help the economy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The very poor? 47% of Americans pay no income taxes at all. Are they all very poor?

Sadly anyone poor enough to not pay income taxes is very poor.

So you're saying that 47% of our population are very poor?

In income yes. You have to make very little to not pay income taxes. Many are retired.

No, many middle-class people pay no actual income tax. Other taxes? Yes they do, we all do, but not income tax.

I paid the feds over $60,000 last year. That's enough to support 3 families on welfare.

Not today. They do way better than that because they are on more than just welfare.

When you consider free healthcare, a home in the suburbs, SNAP's, welfare, utility assistance and so on, many of these people do better than working Americans.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be too surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh