Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No.
Redistributing wealth does not lower all wealth. In fact, when correctly done, all wealth can go up.
But again, this was not caused by Obama, as you would know if you read.
wow!
Show me how redistributing wealth can cause all wealth to go up.
Simple.
Person A increases his wealth $1B a year. If we tax him, and slow down his growth to only $500M a year, we use the $500M in revenue to provide tax credits to families with kids, thus freeing up money for them to increase their wealth.
All wealth goes up.
No.
Redistributing wealth does not lower all wealth. In fact, when correctly done, all wealth can go up.
But again, this was not caused by Obama, as you would know if you read.
wow!
Show me how redistributing wealth can cause all wealth to go up.
Simple.
Person A increases his wealth $1B a year. If we tax him, and slow down his growth to only $500M a year, we use the $500M in revenue to provide tax credits to families with kids, thus freeing up money for them to increase their wealth.
All wealth goes up.
No.
Redistributing wealth does not lower all wealth. In fact, when correctly done, all wealth can go up.
But again, this was not caused by Obama, as you would know if you read.
wow!
Show me how redistributing wealth can cause all wealth to go up.
Simple.
Person A increases his wealth $1B a year. If we tax him, and slow down his growth to only $500M a year, we use the $500M in revenue to provide tax credits to families with kids, thus freeing up money for them to increase their wealth.
All wealth goes up.
I understand the point you're making. But Obama did have the power to appoint a motivated and honest Attorney General and direct him to take aggressive action in investigating the Bush Administration and prosecuting every item of criminal activity by every one of those individuals and complicit legislators who could be convicted -- and there would be many.Sometimes I wish the president had the dictatorial power over the economy that some seem to think he has.
Frightening that you must ask that.Which policies that Obama has enacted has caused this to happen? Specifically and how?
Ok.....
A projected $15 trillion deficit over the next ten years.
A lagging economy which is held back by uncertainty produced by Administration's policies.
Obamacare. New and higher taxes. The federal reserve's inability or unwillingness to stay out of the way of the economy. This proposal of another round of "quantitative easing" has the markets in limbo.
The Administration's unwillingness to allow the housing market to bottom out.
"The private sector is doing fine"...Obama's words.
In other words ... you can't name one Obama policy that led to this affect.
I understand the point you're making. But Obama did have the power to appoint a motivated and honest Attorney General and direct him to take aggressive action in investigating the Bush Administration and prosecuting every item of criminal activity by every one of those individuals and complicit legislators who could be convicted -- and there would be many.Sometimes I wish the president had the dictatorial power over the economy that some seem to think he has.
That would have completely changed the atmosphere in Washington and the effect would have been sterilizing.
Prosecution is what is needed. Crooked officials exposed and imprisoned. We quietly hoped Obama would move in that direction --
-- but this is what we got.
Actually his health care reform contributed mightily. He could have waited for recovery. He could have been personally involved instead of making it a bill of Pelosi and Reid. He didn't.
How? How did the Healthcare Law wipe out 2 decades of wealth growth in a year and a half?
A healthcare law that isn't even close to being fully implemented yet even now, nevermind in 2010.
No blaming Bush here.....This is all on Obama's watch..
Family Net Worth Drops to Level of Early
The crash of housing prices explained three-quarters of the loss.
I am no Obama fan but let's not deny factual reality. This economic crisis was prepped by the Reagan Administration and the Bush Administration nearly put the finishing touches on it. I fault Obama for not taking more aggressive action to repair the damage but there is no question that the Republicans in Congress have done all they could to impede him and to sabotage everything they could in the way of repair.Which policies that Obama has enacted has caused this to happen? Specifically and how?
Correct: This is what Obama meant by change....
Obama is no FDR but he is a vast improvement over the elitist, corporatist sonofabitch he succeeded. With another Republican in Office we would be doing a lot worse.
What America needs now is a very strong socialist agenda to reverse the efforts of the right-wing corporatocracy, to constrain the bankers, and to rid us of the Wall Street sharks. We need to stop locking up pot dealers and start prosecuting those white-collar criminals who have methodically undermined the American Middle Class and damaged our Nation. Obama failed to do these things but I'm quite sure McCain wouldn't have done them either, nor would Romney. The only presidential candidate whom I believe would have and could have done those things is Dennis Kucinich. But he is an angry, unattractive little man.
No.
Redistributing wealth does not lower all wealth. In fact, when correctly done, all wealth can go up.
But again, this was not caused by Obama, as you would know if you read.
wow!
Show me how redistributing wealth can cause all wealth to go up.
Simple.
Person A increases his wealth $1B a year. If we tax him, and slow down his growth to only $500M a year, we use the $500M in revenue to provide tax credits to families with kids, thus freeing up money for them to increase their wealth.
All wealth goes up.
wow!
Show me how redistributing wealth can cause all wealth to go up.
Simple.
Person A increases his wealth $1B a year. If we tax him, and slow down his growth to only $500M a year, we use the $500M in revenue to provide tax credits to families with kids, thus freeing up money for them to increase their wealth.
All wealth goes up.
By taking from Person A...
No blaming Bush here.....This is all on Obama's watch..
Family Net Worth Drops to Level of Early
Yeah right.
The crash of housing prices explained three-quarters of the loss.
Yeah, that's Obama's fault. I suppose that Obama crashed the stock market as well.
Sometimes I wish the president had the dictatorial power over the economy that some seem to think he has.
Sometimes I wish the president had the dictatorial power over the economy that some seem to think he has.
Oh? By which means and to what end?
Simple.
Person A increases his wealth $1B a year. If we tax him, and slow down his growth to only $500M a year, we use the $500M in revenue to provide tax credits to families with kids, thus freeing up money for them to increase their wealth.
All wealth goes up.
By taking from Person A...
Correct.
You seem to suggest that if person A gets everything and his employees get nothing, that will be the best outcome. It isn't.
Isn't reducing the net worth of individuals right in line with thinking that redistribution of wealth is the goal. Look at how it's already worked. If you want individual net worth reduced to where it was in the 70s or 60s, reelect obama.
No.
Redistributing wealth does not lower all wealth. In fact, when correctly done, all wealth can go up.
But again, this was not caused by Obama, as you would know if you read.
wow!
Show me how redistributing wealth can cause all wealth to go up.
By taking from Person A...
Correct.
You seem to suggest that if person A gets everything and his employees get nothing, that will be the best outcome. It isn't.
Nowhere did you suggest that Person A was an employer...
If Person A is an employer, his employees are receiveing a paycheck, probably medical insurance, and in many cases some sort of retirement plan. If said employees are not satisfied with this arrangement, they are free to move on.
On the other hand, if Person A is not an employer what would you suggest?
How does one justify hobbling the success of one person to give to another?
Isn't reducing the net worth of individuals right in line with thinking that redistribution of wealth is the goal. Look at how it's already worked. If you want individual net worth reduced to where it was in the 70s or 60s, reelect obama.
No.
Redistributing wealth does not lower all wealth. In fact, when correctly done, all wealth can go up.
But again, this was not caused by Obama, as you would know if you read.
No blaming Bush here.....This is all on Obama's watch..
Family Net Worth Drops to Level of Early
President Obama....the private sector is doing fine....
Isn't reducing the net worth of individuals right in line with thinking that redistribution of wealth is the goal. Look at how it's already worked. If you want individual net worth reduced to where it was in the 70s or 60s, reelect obama.
No.
Redistributing wealth does not lower all wealth. In fact, when correctly done, all wealth can go up.
But again, this was not caused by Obama, as you would know if you read.
Ok..How is the taking of wealth from one and giving it to another create more wealth? This oughta be good.
Oh, and you can skip the nonsense about the wealthy who "hoard" their money and thus deserve to lose some of it at the hands of government. And you can also forget the nonsense that suggests if the wealthy were robbed by government and the government turned around and gave all of your politically correct desirables a check that it would stimulate the economy.
Wealth is created through investment in new and existing business. Creation of jobs is the result. Increasing income from work is what creates wealth. Not moving the chess pieces around the board.
