Bill de Blasio Reveals That He Wants To Steal From You Using Socialism

[danielpalos]

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics; propaganda and rhetoric is all they know.

Being able to apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is as market friendly as it gets. We could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; but, the Poor may benefit.

And there's your favorite fallacy on display. You still haven't shown where you're going to get the additional trillions you'll need every year.

people with recourse to an income can pay taxes. the costs can be recovered.

What you understand about economics would fit in a thimble. You're embarrassing yourself

even women can gossip; you may need to oil wrestle me if you want your "even chance".

I have a degree in economics.

You're clueless...trust me

you need an economic argument not just economic gossip, chic.

 

[Soupnazi630]

a general tax on employers.

As employers are already taxed, I'm assuming you mean an additional tax.

So, you tax an employer, here are his options:

1. Hire fewer employees ... putting more people on unemployment benefits
2. Raise the price of his goods or services ... making the minimum wage / unemployment benefits worth less
3. Keep the existing number of employees and paying them less ... meaning his best employees will leave and the quality of his goods and services (for which he now has to charge more) will decrease.
4. Go out of business
5. Take the hit and explain to his existing or potential investors (including the banks which give him operating credit) that their investment will now have less return than before and hope they will be understanding -- given that most investors have employees of their own, this reduction in ROI will only compound the same issues into a cascade effect.

In the mean time, we're paying people to stay home and watch reality TV because there are fewer jobs in the free market.

What's wrong with the employer making less by being taxed more?

Many things are wrong with it.

It discourages jobs and investment, it is immoral and inefficient.

It is historically an unworkable idea.

 

[danielpalos]

a general tax on employers.

As employers are already taxed, I'm assuming you mean an additional tax.

So, you tax an employer, here are his options:

1. Hire fewer employees ... putting more people on unemployment benefits
2. Raise the price of his goods or services ... making the minimum wage / unemployment benefits worth less
3. Keep the existing number of employees and paying them less ... meaning his best employees will leave and the quality of his goods and services (for which he now has to charge more) will decrease.
4. Go out of business
5. Take the hit and explain to his existing or potential investors (including the banks which give him operating credit) that their investment will now have less return than before and hope they will be understanding -- given that most investors have employees of their own, this reduction in ROI will only compound the same issues into a cascade effect.

In the mean time, we're paying people to stay home and watch reality TV because there are fewer jobs in the free market.

I am saying our current regime is expensive and prone to the additional expense of litigation.

A general tax is less expensive than our current regime.

 

[BWK]

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can solve for in a market friendly manner. The infrastructure already exists in our Republic.

Raising the minimum wage could solve the cost of living issue.

Wrong

Socialism has universally been a massive failure and the idea of a natural unemployment rate is delusional crap

Are there always unemployed people in every society? Yes! But it is not natural it is the result of volitional choice.

There is no living wage issue. Any wage is a living wage depending on how one chooses to live

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics; propaganda and rhetoric is all they know.

Being able to apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is as market friendly as it gets. We could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; but, the Poor may benefit.

That's great except I am not a republican and my post still stands as fact

Unemployment compensation is not market friendly as it takes from those actually trying to buy and sell in the market

Redistribution by force is never market friendly under any circumstances and never has been

We have solved poverty through capitalism

We solved poverty when the rich were taxed 70 and 80%. Since 1979, wages have been flat, while giving the wealthy a 270% raise.. That isn't solving poverty.

We solved it long before then.

Taxation of any kind solved nothing

Exactly! In the forties, fifties, sixties, and part of the seventies there was a middle class because corporations were taxed 70 to 80%. Taxation back then gave people dignity, a sense of worth, and money in their pockets. It definitely solved the problem.

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can solve for in a market friendly manner. The infrastructure already exists in our Republic.

Raising the minimum wage could solve the cost of living issue.

Your stupidity hurts...

we needed a midget anaconda plan at Gettysburg to go along with the giant anaconda plan.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

And there's your favorite fallacy on display. You still haven't shown where you're going to get the additional trillions you'll need every year.

people with recourse to an income can pay taxes. the costs can be recovered.

What you understand about economics would fit in a thimble. You're embarrassing yourself

even women can gossip; you may need to oil wrestle me if you want your "even chance".

I have a degree in economics.

You're clueless...trust me

you need an economic argument not just economic gossip, chic.

Save it, fag. You're not impressing anyone but yourself

You are utterly clueless in economic matters and fun to mock. That's about it

Now take your meager attempts at being a condescending jackass and try to snow someone else. I know better

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can solve for in a market friendly manner. The infrastructure already exists in our Republic.

Raising the minimum wage could solve the cost of living issue.

Wrong

Socialism has universally been a massive failure and the idea of a natural unemployment rate is delusional crap

Are there always unemployed people in every society? Yes! But it is not natural it is the result of volitional choice.

There is no living wage issue. Any wage is a living wage depending on how one chooses to live

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics; propaganda and rhetoric is all they know.

Being able to apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is as market friendly as it gets. We could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; but, the Poor may benefit.

That's great except I am not a republican and my post still stands as fact

Unemployment compensation is not market friendly as it takes from those actually trying to buy and sell in the market

Redistribution by force is never market friendly under any circumstances and never has been

We have solved poverty through capitalism

You don't know what you are talking about like usual, right winger. Nobody takes y'all seriously about economics. Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment must engender a positive multiplier effect upon our economy. Only the right wing would complain about solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of compensation for being unemployed.

Just so it's clear what you are talking about, you want to be paid $15/hr even when you refuse available employment.

it is less expensive than means tested welfare and requires no fraud.

And, it ensures local governments still have recourse to steady revenue.

 

[2aguy]

The blinders are off:

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio slammed the current economic model in New York City and the world-at-large during a recent speech; bizarrely claiming there’s “plenty of money,” it’s just not properly distributed. The Big Apple Democrat was speaking at his State of the City address when he made the stunning admission; vowing to redistribute the wealth throughout the nation’s largest metropolis.

"There’s plenty of money in the world. Plenty of money in this city," Mayor de Blasio said. "It’s just in the wrong hands!"
​

Yup........like most socialists....they want your money. They feel they have the right to just take it whenever they can manufacture a reason....or manufacture a crisis that warrants taking more.​

Has he started digging the mass graves yet?

 

[BWK]

a general tax on employers.

As employers are already taxed, I'm assuming you mean an additional tax.

So, you tax an employer, here are his options:

1. Hire fewer employees ... putting more people on unemployment benefits
2. Raise the price of his goods or services ... making the minimum wage / unemployment benefits worth less
3. Keep the existing number of employees and paying them less ... meaning his best employees will leave and the quality of his goods and services (for which he now has to charge more) will decrease.
4. Go out of business
5. Take the hit and explain to his existing or potential investors (including the banks which give him operating credit) that their investment will now have less return than before and hope they will be understanding -- given that most investors have employees of their own, this reduction in ROI will only compound the same issues into a cascade effect.

In the mean time, we're paying people to stay home and watch reality TV because there are fewer jobs in the free market.

What's wrong with the employer making less by being taxed more?

Many things are wrong with it.

It discourages jobs and investment, it is immoral and inefficient.

It is historically an unworkable idea.

Historically you are very wrong. Do your due diligence history lesson and get a clue. My parents did very well in the fifties, sixties, and seventies, with corporations being taxed high. It works. You are lying to yourself.

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can solve for in a market friendly manner. The infrastructure already exists in our Republic.

Raising the minimum wage could solve the cost of living issue.

Wrong

Socialism has universally been a massive failure and the idea of a natural unemployment rate is delusional crap

Are there always unemployed people in every society? Yes! But it is not natural it is the result of volitional choice.

There is no living wage issue. Any wage is a living wage depending on how one chooses to live

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics; propaganda and rhetoric is all they know.

Being able to apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is as market friendly as it gets. We could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; but, the Poor may benefit.

That's great except I am not a republican and my post still stands as fact

Unemployment compensation is not market friendly as it takes from those actually trying to buy and sell in the market

Redistribution by force is never market friendly under any circumstances and never has been

We have solved poverty through capitalism

You don't know what you are talking about like usual, right winger. Nobody takes y'all seriously about economics. Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment must engender a positive multiplier effect upon our economy. Only the right wing would complain about solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of compensation for being unemployed.

You are more right wing than I am and yes I do.

You are massively ignorant and delusional here.

Once again there is no natural rate of unemployment

Redistribution and entitlements for doing nothing does nothing for our economy and never has.

It only increases dependency and creates welfare queens.

Once again. We have solved poverty through capitalism your idiotic ideas would only bring it back

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can easily solve for in a market friendly manner with existing infrastructure in our Republic.

The right wing has a problem with it Because the Poor may benefit.

 

[2aguy]

The blinders are off:

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio slammed the current economic model in New York City and the world-at-large during a recent speech; bizarrely claiming there’s “plenty of money,” it’s just not properly distributed. The Big Apple Democrat was speaking at his State of the City address when he made the stunning admission; vowing to redistribute the wealth throughout the nation’s largest metropolis.

"There’s plenty of money in the world. Plenty of money in this city," Mayor de Blasio said. "It’s just in the wrong hands!"
​

Yup........like most socialists....they want your money. They feel they have the right to just take it whenever they can manufacture a reason....or manufacture a crisis that warrants taking more.​

Capitalist want yer money also, so do crooks of which their is not much difference between a socialist or a capitalist when it comes to taking away yer dough

A capitalist has to earn your money by making or doing something that you want or need....big freaking difference..... a socialist just needs guns and shovels.....

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can solve for in a market friendly manner. The infrastructure already exists in our Republic.

Raising the minimum wage could solve the cost of living issue.

You're still saying the same things and you're still wrong.

i gainsay your contention. you need a valid argument.

Where are you going to get the money?

Let's consider getting it from employers via a general tax instead of our current regime.

How much more are you going to increase the cost of doing business?

Cost savings through efficiency. The right wing is simply not national capitalist enough and overly national socialist.

 

[2aguy]

a general tax on employers.

As employers are already taxed, I'm assuming you mean an additional tax.

So, you tax an employer, here are his options:

1. Hire fewer employees ... putting more people on unemployment benefits
2. Raise the price of his goods or services ... making the minimum wage / unemployment benefits worth less
3. Keep the existing number of employees and paying them less ... meaning his best employees will leave and the quality of his goods and services (for which he now has to charge more) will decrease.
4. Go out of business
5. Take the hit and explain to his existing or potential investors (including the banks which give him operating credit) that their investment will now have less return than before and hope they will be understanding -- given that most investors have employees of their own, this reduction in ROI will only compound the same issues into a cascade effect.

In the mean time, we're paying people to stay home and watch reality TV because there are fewer jobs in the free market.

What's wrong with the employer making less by being taxed more?

Many things are wrong with it.

It discourages jobs and investment, it is immoral and inefficient.

It is historically an unworkable idea.

Historically you are very wrong. Do your due diligence history lesson and get a clue. My parents did very well in the fifties, sixties, and seventies, with corporations being taxed high. It works. You are lying to yourself.

It only worked after World War 2 when the rest of the worlds industrial base had been destroyed and millions of their men had been killed.....and after Kennedy reduced the tax rates our economy boomed......

 

[danielpalos]

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics; propaganda and rhetoric is all they know.

Being able to apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is as market friendly as it gets. We could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; but, the Poor may benefit.

And there's your favorite fallacy on display. You still haven't shown where you're going to get the additional trillions you'll need every year.

people with recourse to an income can pay taxes. the costs can be recovered.

Not in the trillions and now you are only impoverishing people who have jobs

most, of not all is already being collected via less efficient means. we could be lowering costs via a general tax on employers.

Yes and the result is an unworkable economic mess.

Your stupid and ignorant ideas would only make the problem worse.

anybody can gossip. i merely gainsay your contention since you have no economic argument.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Wrong

Socialism has universally been a massive failure and the idea of a natural unemployment rate is delusional crap

Are there always unemployed people in every society? Yes! But it is not natural it is the result of volitional choice.

There is no living wage issue. Any wage is a living wage depending on how one chooses to live

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics; propaganda and rhetoric is all they know.

Being able to apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is as market friendly as it gets. We could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; but, the Poor may benefit.

That's great except I am not a republican and my post still stands as fact

Unemployment compensation is not market friendly as it takes from those actually trying to buy and sell in the market

Redistribution by force is never market friendly under any circumstances and never has been

We have solved poverty through capitalism

You don't know what you are talking about like usual, right winger. Nobody takes y'all seriously about economics. Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment must engender a positive multiplier effect upon our economy. Only the right wing would complain about solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of compensation for being unemployed.

You are more right wing than I am and yes I do.

You are massively ignorant and delusional here.

Once again there is no natural rate of unemployment

Redistribution and entitlements for doing nothing does nothing for our economy and never has.

It only increases dependency and creates welfare queens.

Once again. We have solved poverty through capitalism your idiotic ideas would only bring it back

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can easily solve for in a market friendly manner with existing infrastructure in our Republic.

The right wing has a problem with it Because the Poor may benefit.

Venzuela.....now sit down and shut up

 

[2aguy]

Wrong

Socialism has universally been a massive failure and the idea of a natural unemployment rate is delusional crap

Are there always unemployed people in every society? Yes! But it is not natural it is the result of volitional choice.

There is no living wage issue. Any wage is a living wage depending on how one chooses to live

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics; propaganda and rhetoric is all they know.

Being able to apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is as market friendly as it gets. We could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; but, the Poor may benefit.

That's great except I am not a republican and my post still stands as fact

Unemployment compensation is not market friendly as it takes from those actually trying to buy and sell in the market

Redistribution by force is never market friendly under any circumstances and never has been

We have solved poverty through capitalism

We solved poverty when the rich were taxed 70 and 80%. Since 1979, wages have been flat, while giving the wealthy a 270% raise.. That isn't solving poverty.

We solved it long before then.

Taxation of any kind solved nothing

Exactly! In the forties, fifties, sixties, and part of the seventies there was a middle class because corporations were taxed 70 to 80%. Taxation back then gave people dignity, a sense of worth, and money in their pockets. It definitely solved the problem.

Again...it only worked because the rest of the world had been destroyed in World War 2 with millions of their men dead in the war.....now they can compete with us, and lower their own tax rates taking our businesses out of our country...

 

[2aguy]

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics; propaganda and rhetoric is all they know.

Being able to apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is as market friendly as it gets. We could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; but, the Poor may benefit.

That's great except I am not a republican and my post still stands as fact

Unemployment compensation is not market friendly as it takes from those actually trying to buy and sell in the market

Redistribution by force is never market friendly under any circumstances and never has been

We have solved poverty through capitalism

You don't know what you are talking about like usual, right winger. Nobody takes y'all seriously about economics. Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment must engender a positive multiplier effect upon our economy. Only the right wing would complain about solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of compensation for being unemployed.

You are more right wing than I am and yes I do.

You are massively ignorant and delusional here.

Once again there is no natural rate of unemployment

Redistribution and entitlements for doing nothing does nothing for our economy and never has.

It only increases dependency and creates welfare queens.

Once again. We have solved poverty through capitalism your idiotic ideas would only bring it back

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can easily solve for in a market friendly manner with existing infrastructure in our Republic.

The right wing has a problem with it Because the Poor may benefit.

Venzuela.....now sit down and shut up

I raise you Cuba.......

 

[danielpalos]

a general tax on employers.

As employers are already taxed, I'm assuming you mean an additional tax.

So, you tax an employer, here are his options:

1. Hire fewer employees ... putting more people on unemployment benefits
2. Raise the price of his goods or services ... making the minimum wage / unemployment benefits worth less
3. Keep the existing number of employees and paying them less ... meaning his best employees will leave and the quality of his goods and services (for which he now has to charge more) will decrease.
4. Go out of business
5. Take the hit and explain to his existing or potential investors (including the banks which give him operating credit) that their investment will now have less return than before and hope they will be understanding -- given that most investors have employees of their own, this reduction in ROI will only compound the same issues into a cascade effect.

In the mean time, we're paying people to stay home and watch reality TV because there are fewer jobs in the free market.

What's wrong with the employer making less by being taxed more?

a general tax is simpler than our current regime and would be more cost effective and better ensure equal protection of the law.

 

[BWK]

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can solve for in a market friendly manner. The infrastructure already exists in our Republic.

Raising the minimum wage could solve the cost of living issue.

Your stupidity hurts...

Your hate rant is a pretty pitiful excuse for a counter argument.

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that socialism can solve for in a market friendly manner. The infrastructure already exists in our Republic.

Raising the minimum wage could solve the cost of living issue.

Wrong

Socialism has universally been a massive failure and the idea of a natural unemployment rate is delusional crap

Are there always unemployed people in every society? Yes! But it is not natural it is the result of volitional choice.

There is no living wage issue. Any wage is a living wage depending on how one chooses to live

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics; propaganda and rhetoric is all they know.

Being able to apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is as market friendly as it gets. We could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; but, the Poor may benefit.

And there's your favorite fallacy on display. You still haven't shown where you're going to get the additional trillions you'll need every year.

people with recourse to an income can pay taxes. the costs can be recovered.

Sounds like you really do believe you can fill a swimming pool by pumping water from the deep end to the shallow end.

lol. Only the Right Wing, never gets it.

We are discussing the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage.

Only the right wing has a capital problem with the rock bottom cost of a form of Minimum wage.