Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?

[there4eyeM]

American English has been corrupted by British and European meanings of the word. Since they refer to government meaning Parliament and those who enforce laws they pass, the use has crept into the American sense. American government is the clearly written description in the Constitution (England does not have one) that all can see and read. It is not the people who fill the posts.
The two party dictatorship conducted a coup d'état slowly over a long period. They do what they decide to do and leave the explanations for later (if ever).
The only solutions, for politics as well as other current crises) is to try something not done before.
'Rinse and repeat' is only making the stain more permanent now.

 

[justinacolmena]

Wealth is earned, not distributed.

Oh. Well then don't shit us out of your damned socialist labor force on the NICS mental health blacklist.

Merely giving money to poor people with poor attitudes on spending, thrift, and accumulation of wealth will never lift them out of poverty.

When you don't let us keep or defend the money we earn or the property we buy with it, there is no possibility of accumulation of wealth for us without the destruction of the ill-gotten gains of our enemies.

People who live in glass houses and all that.

so youre butthurt,,,just dont call a tranny by the wrong pronoun or you go to jail,,,

great country you have there

Compelling prostitution is against the law and butt-for-money is not available to patrons of prostitutes.

Texas Compelling Prostitution Attorneys

This is where you fuckers lose the "moral" game you play against us.

 

[Oddball]

"income equality":

From the tone of your post, you had that in mind and I assure you that that is false.

I do favor equal opportunity but, like you, would be totally against equality of outcome. I am talking fairness in taxation. Not turning the tax system into a demographic pyramid destabilizing system.

Don't forget that we are talking loose change at the top.

Regards
DL

Taxation is theft.

That "loose change at the top" isn't yours to take.

Your pious twaddle about morality is laughable.

 

[Oddball]

Wealth is earned, not distributed.

Not inherited wealth, which is the bulk of the wealth in question.

I have a couple of good links should you not be able to verify that on your own.

Regards
DL

None of your business and irrelevant...Beside that, over 90% of millionaires made their own money.

You are desperately attempting to rationalize looting.

You are immoral as fuck.

 

[justinacolmena]

That "loose change at the top" isn't yours to take.

The "loose change" in the hands of gun control fascists like Michael Bloomberg, Tom Steyer, George Soros and company is definitely ours for the taking.

Your pious twaddle about morality is laughable.

You can't talk morality when you ban guns.

 

[progressive hunter]

Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?

Taxation determines what poverty levels will exist within it’s demographic form. It controls the graph shown below. Governments control taxation and thus control poverty levels directly.

Imagine if you will, the real truth of that taxation, if used correctly, to move the wealth shown in this graph wherever it wants to, with minimal effect on the whole. The fact is, experts say that such a reality would be a win win for everyone.

https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

Not how little of a change would be needed to reach the ideal.

Wise and moral people throughout history, as well as most religious movements, put poverty as the number one enemy to man’s first priority, which is security.

For perhaps the first time in history, we have the wealth where we could end poverty quite easily, --- just with our collective loose change.

It would seem to me that governments are not acting ethically and should be chastised.

I guess that George Carlin, a wise person, was correct in what he said of what Americans cannot feel in their anal orifices. I apply the same condition to the vast majority of the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-14SllPPLxY

If true that we are being willfully ignorant, and do not even care about each other to insure we live in a moral environment, then our owners have succeeded in cowering man’s moral nature to a state of subservience. We have given up our freedom. If we ever had any.

We have all accepted to be slaves. Shame on us all.

We do not live in a Democracy. We live in a Hypocrisy.

We can easily rid ourselves of poverty.

Should we?

Morality says yes.

Will we do the right thing?

Not till hell freezes over.

Regards

DL

speak for yourself,,,

its not government doing it, its democrats and republicans,,,

and I have resisted for my whole life and will die resisting them,,,

In your Hypocrisy, what government rules you if not a Republican or Democratic government and master?

Regards
DL

the constitution is the government and the dems and repubes are political partys,,,

What rules a nation is the hearts of the people and Americans have lost theirs somewhere and are not living in as moral of a way as they could.

Most of the world is in the same position of self imposed tolerance of the evil of governments imposing poverty.

Regards
DL

what rules a country are their laws,,,morals vary from person to person,,,

just like socialist thinks it moral to steal from one and give to another,,,and some just give from the goodness of their hearts,,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

Wealth is earned, not distributed.

Not inherited wealth, which is the bulk of the wealth in question.

I have a couple of good links should you not be able to verify that on your own.

Regards
DL

that wealth was still earned,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

American English has been corrupted by British and European meanings of the word. Since they refer to government meaning Parliament and those who enforce laws they pass, the use has crept into the American sense. American government is the clearly written description in the Constitution (England does not have one) that all can see and read. It is not the people who fill the posts.
The two party dictatorship conducted a coup d'état slowly over a long period. They do what they decide to do and leave the explanations for later (if ever).
The only solutions, for politics as well as other current crises) is to try something not done before.
'Rinse and repeat' is only making the stain more permanent now.

we can try following the constitution,,,that hasnt been tried in over 150 yrs

 

[Oddball]

That "loose change at the top" isn't yours to take.

The "loose change" in the hands of gun control fascists like Michael Bloomberg, Tom Steyer, George Soros and company is definitely ours for the taking.

Irrelevant.

Your pious twaddle about morality is laughable.

You can't talk morality when you ban guns.

Indeed...I'm all for freedom to arm yourself, up to and including recreational McNukes™.

 

[flacaltenn]

Taxation determines what poverty levels will exist within it’s demographic form. It controls the graph shown below. Governments control taxation and thus control poverty levels directly.

You're so far from solving ANYTHING with this approach.. Redistribution of money NEVER fixes the underlying problems of poverty... Having a FUNCTIONAL govt at city/state/fed levels that PRIORITIZES it's duties does..

It's education, health care, crime, addiction, and mental disorders that affect poverty... Making folks "comfortable" in poverty is NOT humane.. Getting them functional and making better decisions does....

 

[Dekster]

Taxation ain't the problem. It is that I don't get to sell bootleg Louis V knockoffs stuffed with bags of weed on the street corner that is the problem.

So sell weed, lazy.

Regards
DL

Ain't the same without the LV bags man.

 

[GreatestIam]

Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?

Taxation determines what poverty levels will exist within it’s demographic form. It controls the graph shown below. Governments control taxation and thus control poverty levels directly.

Imagine if you will, the real truth of that taxation, if used correctly, to move the wealth shown in this graph wherever it wants to, with minimal effect on the whole. The fact is, experts say that such a reality would be a win win for everyone.

https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

Not how little of a change would be needed to reach the ideal.

Wise and moral people throughout history, as well as most religious movements, put poverty as the number one enemy to man’s first priority, which is security.

For perhaps the first time in history, we have the wealth where we could end poverty quite easily, --- just with our collective loose change.

It would seem to me that governments are not acting ethically and should be chastised.

I guess that George Carlin, a wise person, was correct in what he said of what Americans cannot feel in their anal orifices. I apply the same condition to the vast majority of the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-14SllPPLxY

If true that we are being willfully ignorant, and do not even care about each other to insure we live in a moral environment, then our owners have succeeded in cowering man’s moral nature to a state of subservience. We have given up our freedom. If we ever had any.

We have all accepted to be slaves. Shame on us all.

We do not live in a Democracy. We live in a Hypocrisy.

We can easily rid ourselves of poverty.

Should we?

Morality says yes.

Will we do the right thing?

Not till hell freezes over.

Regards

DL

Interesting concept, wealth redistribution through taxation. So taxing higher wage earners more will encourage them to work harder to earn more, while at the same time giving the tax money to low (or no) income earners will encourage them to work harder to earn more....what friggen planet do you live on?

Goof.

Wealth is already distributed and you do not see the things you allude to.

Try again.

And do remember that this is a moral question. Don't be shy.

Regards
DL

 

[Oddball]

And do remember that this is a moral question. Don't be shy.

When you're a proponent of looting one group of people in order to feather the nests of other people, you're as far removed from morality as you can get.

Covetousness is a sin, not a virtue.

 

[GreatestIam]

"income equality":

From the tone of your post, you had that in mind and I assure you that that is false.

I do favor equal opportunity but, like you, would be totally against equality of outcome. I am talking fairness in taxation. Not turning the tax system into a demographic pyramid destabilizing system.

Don't forget that we are talking loose change at the top.

Regards
DL

Taxation is theft.

That "loose change at the top" isn't yours to take.

Your pious twaddle about morality is laughable.

Stop. Please. You make me blush.

I will be please to have you defend the widening gap between rich and poor.
Let's have it, bright boy.

Regards
DL

 

[Thinker101]

Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?

Taxation determines what poverty levels will exist within it’s demographic form. It controls the graph shown below. Governments control taxation and thus control poverty levels directly.

Imagine if you will, the real truth of that taxation, if used correctly, to move the wealth shown in this graph wherever it wants to, with minimal effect on the whole. The fact is, experts say that such a reality would be a win win for everyone.

https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

Not how little of a change would be needed to reach the ideal.

Wise and moral people throughout history, as well as most religious movements, put poverty as the number one enemy to man’s first priority, which is security.

For perhaps the first time in history, we have the wealth where we could end poverty quite easily, --- just with our collective loose change.

It would seem to me that governments are not acting ethically and should be chastised.

I guess that George Carlin, a wise person, was correct in what he said of what Americans cannot feel in their anal orifices. I apply the same condition to the vast majority of the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-14SllPPLxY

If true that we are being willfully ignorant, and do not even care about each other to insure we live in a moral environment, then our owners have succeeded in cowering man’s moral nature to a state of subservience. We have given up our freedom. If we ever had any.

We have all accepted to be slaves. Shame on us all.

We do not live in a Democracy. We live in a Hypocrisy.

We can easily rid ourselves of poverty.

Should we?

Morality says yes.

Will we do the right thing?

Not till hell freezes over.

Regards

DL

Interesting concept, wealth redistribution through taxation. So taxing higher wage earners more will encourage them to work harder to earn more, while at the same time giving the tax money to low (or no) income earners will encourage them to work harder to earn more....what friggen planet do you live on?

Goof.

Wealth is already distributed and you do not see the things you allude to.

Try again.

And do remember that this is a moral question. Don't be shy.

Regards
DL

Yes, I do realize it is currently distributed. I also realize you're whining because you don't feel it's fair and you want more...dumbass.

 

[GreatestIam]

Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?

Taxation determines what poverty levels will exist within it’s demographic form. It controls the graph shown below. Governments control taxation and thus control poverty levels directly.

Imagine if you will, the real truth of that taxation, if used correctly, to move the wealth shown in this graph wherever it wants to, with minimal effect on the whole. The fact is, experts say that such a reality would be a win win for everyone.

https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

Not how little of a change would be needed to reach the ideal.

Wise and moral people throughout history, as well as most religious movements, put poverty as the number one enemy to man’s first priority, which is security.

For perhaps the first time in history, we have the wealth where we could end poverty quite easily, --- just with our collective loose change.

It would seem to me that governments are not acting ethically and should be chastised.

I guess that George Carlin, a wise person, was correct in what he said of what Americans cannot feel in their anal orifices. I apply the same condition to the vast majority of the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-14SllPPLxY

If true that we are being willfully ignorant, and do not even care about each other to insure we live in a moral environment, then our owners have succeeded in cowering man’s moral nature to a state of subservience. We have given up our freedom. If we ever had any.

We have all accepted to be slaves. Shame on us all.

We do not live in a Democracy. We live in a Hypocrisy.

We can easily rid ourselves of poverty.

Should we?

Morality says yes.

Will we do the right thing?

Not till hell freezes over.

Regards

DL

speak for yourself,,,

its not government doing it, its democrats and republicans,,,

and I have resisted for my whole life and will die resisting them,,,

In your Hypocrisy, what government rules you if not a Republican or Democratic government and master?

Regards
DL

the constitution is the government and the dems and repubes are political partys,,,

What rules a nation is the hearts of the people and Americans have lost theirs somewhere and are not living in as moral of a way as they could.

Most of the world is in the same position of self imposed tolerance of the evil of governments imposing poverty.

Regards
DL

what rules a country are their laws,,,morals vary from person to person,,,

just like socialist thinks it moral to steal from one and give to another,,,and some just give from the goodness of their hearts,,,,

Please show which socialist country thinks that way please and which law, if any, they have in place to allow it.

I think you are lying.

Further, most of us use about the same moral code based on reciprocity rules. If you do not, you are in the small minority.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

Wealth is earned, not distributed.

Not inherited wealth, which is the bulk of the wealth in question.

I have a couple of good links should you not be able to verify that on your own.

Regards
DL

that wealth was still earned,,,

At the cost of markets and labor. In other words, at the cost of taxpayers.

Regards
DL

 

[progressive hunter]

speak for yourself,,,

its not government doing it, its democrats and republicans,,,

and I have resisted for my whole life and will die resisting them,,,

In your Hypocrisy, what government rules you if not a Republican or Democratic government and master?

Regards
DL

the constitution is the government and the dems and repubes are political partys,,,

What rules a nation is the hearts of the people and Americans have lost theirs somewhere and are not living in as moral of a way as they could.

Most of the world is in the same position of self imposed tolerance of the evil of governments imposing poverty.

Regards
DL

what rules a country are their laws,,,morals vary from person to person,,,

just like socialist thinks it moral to steal from one and give to another,,,and some just give from the goodness of their hearts,,,,

Please show which socialist country thinks that way please and which law, if any, they have in place to allow it.

I think you are lying.

Further, most of us use about the same moral code based on reciprocity rules. If you do not, you are in the small minority.

Regards
DL

all of them,,,to steal from one and give to another is the very basis of socialism

 

[GreatestIam]

American English has been corrupted by British and European meanings of the word. Since they refer to government meaning Parliament and those who enforce laws they pass, the use has crept into the American sense. American government is the clearly written description in the Constitution (England does not have one) that all can see and read. It is not the people who fill the posts.
The two party dictatorship conducted a coup d'état slowly over a long period. They do what they decide to do and leave the explanations for later (if ever).
The only solutions, for politics as well as other current crises) is to try something not done before.
'Rinse and repeat' is only making the stain more permanent now.

we can try following the constitution,,,that hasnt been tried in over 150 yrs

It seeks to be more perfect amendment after amendment, showing how flawed it is. It has worked to the detriment of the country as epitomized by the election of Trump.

Regards
DL

 

[progressive hunter]

Wealth is earned, not distributed.

Not inherited wealth, which is the bulk of the wealth in question.

I have a couple of good links should you not be able to verify that on your own.

Regards
DL

that wealth was still earned,,,

At the cost of markets and labor. In other words, at the cost of taxpayers.

Regards
DL

to the benefit of market and labor,,,if not for the rich none of it would exist in abundance,,,

in a true free market the tax payer is separate,,, taxs are for the purpose of paying the countries bills nothing else,,