James Madison, a framer of our constitution, warned of the dangers of extreme...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Billy000, Mar 3, 2014.

  1. Billy000
    Offline

    Billy000 Moderate Liberal

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    3,859
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    50
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +449 / 27 / -0
    ...wealth inequality.

    "The day will come when our Republic will be an impossibility because wealth will be concentrated in the hands of a few. When that day comes, we must rely upon the wisdom of the best elements in the country to readjust the laws of the nation."

    - James Madison

    FACT: the top 1% of earners own 40% of the nation's wealth. The bottom 80% of earners own 7% of the nation's wealth.

    A few things can be taken away from the above information.

    The founding fathers wouldn't even have lunch with someone from the rightwing teabaggers or republicans in general for that matter. They obviously believed in government intervention where today's republicans are very much against. Truth be told the framers were the equivalent of modern day liberals.

    Republicanism is one giant political lie.
    • Like Like x 3
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2014
  2. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,031
    Likes Received:
    5,461
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,461 / 0 / -0
    He didn't mean Government Centralized control...and that is the point YOU are trying to make. Your premise is FALSE.
  3. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    53,601
    Likes Received:
    5,383
    Trophy Points:
    135
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +5,418 / 30 / -0
    No it's not.

    James Madison?s Prescient Warning | JONATHAN TURLEY

    You seem to know very little about this country.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Billy000
    Offline

    Billy000 Moderate Liberal

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    3,859
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    50
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +449 / 27 / -0
    Then what did he mean? What else could possibly solve such a problem?
  5. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    53,601
    Likes Received:
    5,383
    Trophy Points:
    135
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +5,418 / 30 / -0
    What happened to Tommy?

    He had such a good start!

    :lol:
  6. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    34,512
    Likes Received:
    4,317
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +4,345 / 6 / -0
    Yes because Freedom is so well defined by the seizing illegally of peoples assets because you think they have to much.

    Who gets to decide what is too much? Who gets to decide what to do with the stolen goods and cash?

    Of course in order to seize these goods and cash one must first strip those we deem to wealthy of their rights all across the board. That would take an amendment to the Constitution. Several actually. And would stifle growth and prosperity for all.

    Further even if you take the seized goods and cash and distribute it to the poor it will only help them until they spend it or use it as they still do not have the means to produce more themselves. So then you would need to lower the bar on who is to wealthy and strip them as well. Until everyone is poor and has no means to make more.

    Great plan.
  7. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    53,601
    Likes Received:
    5,383
    Trophy Points:
    135
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +5,418 / 30 / -0
    It's all here.

    In black and white. English too.

    What part of that don't you understand? :eusa_whistle:
  8. KNB
    Offline

    KNB Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,327
    Likes Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +379 / 2 / -0
    You obviously don't understand how wrong you are. Of course it won't do any good to explain it to you because you aren't willing to listen, but let's try anyway.

    When the richest 1% of the population reap 95% of financial gains:
    https://www.google.com/search?q=1%25+95%25+financial+gains&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:eek:fficial&client=firefox-a&channel=sb

    then how are 99% of people supposed to make a living for their selves and their families? When corporate 1% "job creators" create all of the jobs in China so they don't have to pay Americans (or Chinese) a real living wage, then how are 99% of people supposed to earn a living?

    No one is suggesting to "take" anything from rich people. We simply want the laws of our nation enforced on the wealthy as they are on the rest of us. No one on this board is "too big to fail", so why would anyone defend these rich criminals?

    HSBC directly funded terrorism against our soldiers, and Teabaggers are still claiming that "Liberals just hate success."
  9. Billy000
    Offline

    Billy000 Moderate Liberal

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    3,859
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    50
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +449 / 27 / -0
    Productivity of the lower classes has grown exponentially since the 30s yet wages have remained flat while the wealthy have only grown more wealthy. Don't you think people should be paid based on productivity?

    What's the solution? Pay people fairly. What's fair? That's something economists can easily determine mathematically. Higher wages means more economic demand. The economy, and rich people will continue to thrive. Everybody wins.
  10. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    34,512
    Likes Received:
    4,317
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +4,345 / 6 / -0
    Taxes can not be back dated. So again seizing wealth is illegal. All you can do via the legislature is change the tax rates. That does not get you their money or their property.

    Further most rich people do not make taxable income.
  11. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    53,601
    Likes Received:
    5,383
    Trophy Points:
    135
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +5,418 / 30 / -0

    Who wants to seize everyone's wealth?

    And it's not taxable, now.

    Doesn't mean that can't change.
  12. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    34,512
    Likes Received:
    4,317
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +4,345 / 6 / -0
    Any change to what is and is not taxable will effect those you claim you want to help.
  13. KNB
    Offline

    KNB Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,327
    Likes Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +379 / 2 / -0
    What happens to the economy if multi-billion dollar corporations spend their trillions of dollars that are sitting in bank vaults?
  14. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    34,512
    Likes Received:
    4,317
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +4,345 / 6 / -0
    And how do you force a Corporation to spend its resources? There is no legal means to do that. Nor can Congress create a law forcing them to do so.
  15. TemplarKormac
    Offline

    TemplarKormac Hero of The Templar Order Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2013
    Messages:
    22,201
    Likes Received:
    3,085
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Athens, GA
    Ratings:
    +3,094 / 1 / -0
    Yeah, but that's only 81% of earners and 47% of the wealth. Do you know any math? Am I to assume that the middle class (the middle 19%) owns the other 53% of the wealth? If that is the case, your argument is one "giant political lie."

    Please. And the founding fathers were nothing close to modern day liberals. They were the exact opposite. Just how many lies can you tell at once?
  16. KNB
    Offline

    KNB Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,327
    Likes Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +379 / 2 / -0
    Who said anything about "forcing" anyone to do anything? I simply asked what would happen to the economy if corporations spent their trillions of dollars in cash.

    International corporations that break record profits year after year now have trillions of dollars in cash sitting in untaxed overseas bank vaults, not being spent, not fueling our economy, but you think it's unfair for billions of struggling working families all over the world to request higher wages and health care? Like these corporations that profit billions every year and have trillions of dollars in cash can't afford it?
  17. Billy000
    Offline

    Billy000 Moderate Liberal

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    3,859
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    50
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +449 / 27 / -0
    Nothing you said here makes any sense, but obviously I am not surprised. :cuckoo:
  18. Mac1958
    Offline

    Mac1958 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    10,146
    Likes Received:
    2,183
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Location:
    My computer
    Ratings:
    +2,352 / 19 / -0
    .

    From the perspective of someone who is neck deep in this stuff 365 days a year, there's no way that the income/net worth inequality that we're seeing can be considered anything other than dangerous, on multiple levels.

    But here's the bad (worse?) news: This issue, like so many others, has become political, and that's now the death knell for any kind of reasonable discourse on the topic. Once any issue becomes political now, it becomes terribly simplistic, binary, black & white, shallow, us vs. them, all or nothing, and life just ain't like that, gang.

    My (unsolicited) opinion? Drop corporate tax rates but establish minimums, add two (2) new marginal personal income tax rates on the top end and push them up, also with minimums, and strengthen but significantly change the nature of unions. I'll be happy to provide specifics if anyone gives a flying fuck about my opinion, but I'll bet my ideas taken as a whole would piss off both ends of the spectrum, and I generally look at that as a very good thing.

    :rock:

    .
  19. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    43,999
    Likes Received:
    3,793
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +3,958 / 33 / -0
    You obviously dont understand you are an arrogant ignorant fucker who beats the same drum over and over.
    Living standards have improved for everyone over the last 50 years. So take your class warfare shit and shove it back up where it came from. Little envious snot.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Billy000
    Offline

    Billy000 Moderate Liberal

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    3,859
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    50
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +449 / 27 / -0
    The republican dogma really has you by the balls.

Share This Page