Let's Tax the Rich More!

[Iriemon]

We defintely need to tax the rich more.

Raise their rate to 40%.

That was enough in 2000 when that tax rate gave us a small surplus budget.

With the debt orgy that happened since, it probably needs to be higher.

 

[Iriemon]

I see that some of my comments have been misread here.

My position is that a government should only collect enough in taxable revenue to protect its people from foreign invasion. They should not reallocate these funds into investments in individuals or corporations that fail miserably at contributing to the nation.

Our country focuses more on bailing out failure companies and people who will never push for any level of success. Betting on the failures is not the way to stay number one in the world.

Instead, this post was designed to point out how the target of annual income levels as earning the label of "rich" is ignorant and designed to oppress those in the middle class from using their hard efforts to make a better life for their families.

I agree with you. Incomes below $250k should be taxed less. Incomes above that more. Incomes above $1 million even more.

Sounds like Obama's plan, except for the last part. Maybe he'll come around.

 

[sealybobo]

Actually, raising taxes is bad for the economy, always has been, always will be. Raise it on the rich only and they will find ways to screw us more while no one will ever want to get rich, thus growth fails and we become third world. It's a razors edge and you fail to see that.

These morons and their class envy think they are going to somehow alter the lifestyles of the wealthy. Fact is, the wealthy will just come up with other ways to maintain the status quo. The first thing to go is their investment capital. That's the money they use to invest in ventures that keep people in the construction industry employed.

In effect, they're just screwing the little guy and deluding themselves that they aren't.

The new Democrat way: instead of spending taxes on education programs and job training, things like that, just tax the hell out of the rich and hand it to the poor in the way of welfare.

I'm poor, but if they raise the taxes on the rich I think I'll stay poor. I am already getting a bonus from Obama this month thanks to being on state medical insurance (Medicaid) ... hell, if they keep that up I may as well stay on it as long as I can.

Fuck education. We want an economy so even uneducated people live above the poverty line. You didn't have to go to college to work at GM.

You'll always be poor because you are dumb. Under Bushanomics, more people got poorer than got richer. Under Clinton, more people got out of poverty and made something of themselves. And it wasn't government handouts. It was a good economy. Remember those?

And remember, the mega corporations made record profits in 2004-2007. Remember they kept telling broke asses like you that the economy was strong? And then they made money bankrupting the country. So they make out in good and bad times.

Here's the difference and maybe this you will understand. Do you want a risky economy that goes bust and boom every 10 years, or would you like a nice 50 years of slow/steady growth where you can save enough for retirement?

Do you want healthcare to become too expensive that your broke ass can't afford it?

Do you want your wages lowered more when the company can't find any other ways to cut costs?

 

[Care4all]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

 

[dilloduck]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

I think because poor people dont' provide jobs and opportunites for anyone else.

 

[Care4all]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

I think because poor people dont' provide jobs and opportunites for anyone else.

But IF they are so smart, WHY DO THEY NEED OUR TAX DOLLARS....? What did they do with all the money they were hording in during their hayday?

WHY should we bail the rischest suckers in the world OUT OF THEIR MESS?

Sure they can create jobs in FAKE BOOMS that THEY MANIPULATE, but they can CRASH our economy like there is no tomorrow with their schemes and leave us with the bill and without a job....

I feel NO PITY for these people and no one should feel any pity for these people....

THEY DICKED US, BIG TIME...and it was not a pleasurable screw....imo....

Care

 

[KittenKoder]

These morons and their class envy think they are going to somehow alter the lifestyles of the wealthy. Fact is, the wealthy will just come up with other ways to maintain the status quo. The first thing to go is their investment capital. That's the money they use to invest in ventures that keep people in the construction industry employed.

In effect, they're just screwing the little guy and deluding themselves that they aren't.

The new Democrat way: instead of spending taxes on education programs and job training, things like that, just tax the hell out of the rich and hand it to the poor in the way of welfare.

I'm poor, but if they raise the taxes on the rich I think I'll stay poor. I am already getting a bonus from Obama this month thanks to being on state medical insurance (Medicaid) ... hell, if they keep that up I may as well stay on it as long as I can.

Fuck education. We want an economy so even uneducated people live above the poverty line. You didn't have to go to college to work at GM.

You'll always be poor because you are dumb. Under Bushanomics, more people got poorer than got richer. Under Clinton, more people got out of poverty and made something of themselves. And it wasn't government handouts. It was a good economy. Remember those?

And remember, the mega corporations made record profits in 2004-2007. Remember they kept telling broke asses like you that the economy was strong? And then they made money bankrupting the country. So they make out in good and bad times.

Here's the difference and maybe this you will understand. Do you want a risky economy that goes bust and boom every 10 years, or would you like a nice 50 years of slow/steady growth where you can save enough for retirement?

Do you want healthcare to become too expensive that your broke ass can't afford it?

Do you want your wages lowered more when the company can't find any other ways to cut costs?

Explain how taxing the rich more will make it so that you won't need an education to get a job?

Well, I'll answer that myself, it won't. It will actually do the exact opposite and make the higher paying jobs more elitist than they already are. Many businesses have just recently realized that more education does not mean better, but if you make them pay more taxes they'll just hire fewer people and since those who have schooling will be in ample supply they will only hire them for those few positions they are willing to pay for. Then they'll ship all the jobs over seas or raise the costs of their products to cover the new tax rates. Also they will stop supporting organizations that actually do help people (Gates donated a billion to one project recently and another 100 mill to another) without that money these groups will fail to help anyone. Our tech industry will completely crash, or at the least become stagnant since they won't want to spend any money on development and any products they do sell will be made with inferior parts. That's only the beginning of what would happen. Start looking at the big picture instead of just what you want to happen.

 

[sealybobo]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

I think because poor people dont' provide jobs and opportunites for anyone else.

No, we just do all the work.

Let us know if the rich ever want to trade positions.

Bet you that we won't complain as much as they do and THEY will complain more than we do. BET!!!

 

[editec]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

I think because poor people dont' provide jobs and opportunites for anyone else.

I find it rather amazing that this MYTH continues to confuse people.

You think the poor don't provide jobs and opportunities for anyone else?

They do when they're not too poor to support themselves, don't they?

How?

By being consumers, that's how.

Businesses that the wealthy might invest in need consumers who can buy from them.

When too many people get too poor, the rich start getting less rich.

How anyone can miss that mutual need between capital and labor, the investor and the consumer I simply cannot understand.

Especially given that the root source of this economic meltdown has at it's very roots, the fact that too many people are finding themselves ABLE to consumer enough to keep the system going.

a classist society is either symbiolotic, or it is doomed to fall apart.

Every time the rich forget the need the workers, or the workers forget they need capital formation, societies stop working efficiently.

And that is what has been happened to this society since the early 1970s.

The scales of reward leaned too heavily in the favor of the capital formations, leaving the hosts (the working class) unable to support the industries which capital formation made with it's newfound wealth.

 

[KittenKoder]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

I think because poor people dont' provide jobs and opportunites for anyone else.

No, we just do all the work.

Let us know if the rich ever want to trade positions.

Bet you that we won't complain as much as they do and THEY will complain more than we do. BET!!!

You have this hang up that rich people are the "office staffers", don't you. Here's the facts: Most of the truly wealthy people started off with very little, most who are handed a fortune blow it long before they are old enough to retire and wind up broke as a joke with no punchline. "Office staffers", the morons who sit on their asses all day doing nothing but getting paid for it just because they have a degree, are not rich, they are actually middle class. These office staffers could be blamed for the state of the economy, most won't live within their means and know too little about budgeting money, so they get credit and spend money that doesn't even exist. The rich people, the truly wealthy, then have to bail them out all the time to keep their employees since they were conned into thinking that a degree actually means something. Some are now hiring people like me, though I remain freelance I still get the calls from business owners looking to get something fixed that a person with a degree fucked up. I could get wealthy, I'm just happy where I am and trying to increase my workload isn't something I am yet ready to handle (baby steps as they say). I was well off before, just at the middle class level, and lost it all ... and I mean ALL of it. So I have seen this from all sides, all angles, and guess what? The richest of the rich were the ones that were there to help, not the middle class who were in too much debt to cover their own asses. Tax the rich more and fewer people like me will be able to get anywhere.

 

[Care4all]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

I think because poor people dont' provide jobs and opportunites for anyone else.

How so, btw? Poor Working people PRODUCE....and make the business grow....grow enough that the owner HAS TO HIRE another individual to take on the extra work load....people, the workers, are who produce....and their productivity is key to ANY RICH GUY'S business or corporation's business....without these people, doing their jobs and producing, there is no expanding business that can hire another individual because of it's growth imo.

I think it is more, "somewhere inbetween"....The poor working guy/gal should be an equal partner, or on the same, level footing as the owners.....it is a partnership, and should NOT be a ONE SIDED partnership.

Care

 

[sealybobo]

The new Democrat way: instead of spending taxes on education programs and job training, things like that, just tax the hell out of the rich and hand it to the poor in the way of welfare.

I'm poor, but if they raise the taxes on the rich I think I'll stay poor. I am already getting a bonus from Obama this month thanks to being on state medical insurance (Medicaid) ... hell, if they keep that up I may as well stay on it as long as I can.

Fuck education. We want an economy so even uneducated people live above the poverty line. You didn't have to go to college to work at GM.

You'll always be poor because you are dumb. Under Bushanomics, more people got poorer than got richer. Under Clinton, more people got out of poverty and made something of themselves. And it wasn't government handouts. It was a good economy. Remember those?

And remember, the mega corporations made record profits in 2004-2007. Remember they kept telling broke asses like you that the economy was strong? And then they made money bankrupting the country. So they make out in good and bad times.

Here's the difference and maybe this you will understand. Do you want a risky economy that goes bust and boom every 10 years, or would you like a nice 50 years of slow/steady growth where you can save enough for retirement?

Do you want healthcare to become too expensive that your broke ass can't afford it?

Do you want your wages lowered more when the company can't find any other ways to cut costs?

Explain how taxing the rich more will make it so that you won't need an education to get a job?

Well, I'll answer that myself, it won't. It will actually do the exact opposite and make the higher paying jobs more elitist than they already are. Many businesses have just recently realized that more education does not mean better, but if you make them pay more taxes they'll just hire fewer people and since those who have schooling will be in ample supply they will only hire them for those few positions they are willing to pay for. Then they'll ship all the jobs over seas or raise the costs of their products to cover the new tax rates. Also they will stop supporting organizations that actually do help people (Gates donated a billion to one project recently and another 100 mill to another) without that money these groups will fail to help anyone. Our tech industry will completely crash, or at the least become stagnant since they won't want to spend any money on development and any products they do sell will be made with inferior parts. That's only the beginning of what would happen. Start looking at the big picture instead of just what you want to happen.

I can't follow your logic, so I'll just reply to what I understand. You were all over the place and I don't agree with most of what you said. You make connections I don't see.

I do agree that if they make getting a college degree mandatory, then it won't carry any weight and then to get more money you'll have to go get a masters.

If education is the thing that divides classes, I'm ok with that.

Companies only hire as many people as they need and they only pay as much as they think they have to.

If rich people only donate for the tax write offs, that's pathetic. Its also not true. So we gave them 18 cents back for every dollar they donated, rather than 20 cents. You think that 2 pennies per dollar are going to to stop philanthropy?

Charity became more necessary under Bush.

Companies are already sending jobs overseas for the cheaper labor. We can't cut taxes enough to stop them because their labor is cheaper too.

I don't care about all the reasons why we can't. YES WE CAN, and yes we will raise their taxes. We are not buying your threats/warnings anymore. We're in charge. And we'll deal with you if you threaten us or try to send more jobs overseas.

Or the free market and competition will take care of your asses. Its a lot harder to cut wages in a good economy, which is why i truly believe the GOP created this mess on purpose. And stole $700 billion right before bush left office.

 

[sealybobo]

I think because poor people dont' provide jobs and opportunites for anyone else.

No, we just do all the work.

Let us know if the rich ever want to trade positions.

Bet you that we won't complain as much as they do and THEY will complain more than we do. BET!!!

You have this hang up that rich people are the "office staffers", don't you. Here's the facts: Most of the truly wealthy people started off with very little, most who are handed a fortune blow it long before they are old enough to retire and wind up broke as a joke with no punchline. "Office staffers", the morons who sit on their asses all day doing nothing but getting paid for it just because they have a degree, are not rich, they are actually middle class. These office staffers could be blamed for the state of the economy, most won't live within their means and know too little about budgeting money, so they get credit and spend money that doesn't even exist. The rich people, the truly wealthy, then have to bail them out all the time to keep their employees since they were conned into thinking that a degree actually means something. Some are now hiring people like me, though I remain freelance I still get the calls from business owners looking to get something fixed that a person with a degree fucked up. I could get wealthy, I'm just happy where I am and trying to increase my workload isn't something I am yet ready to handle (baby steps as they say). I was well off before, just at the middle class level, and lost it all ... and I mean ALL of it. So I have seen this from all sides, all angles, and guess what? The richest of the rich were the ones that were there to help, not the middle class who were in too much debt to cover their own asses. Tax the rich more and fewer people like me will be able to get anywhere.

The rich I'm talking about, you can not make it yourself. Ok, Bill Gates did, but most of the people that own/control the mega corporations, banks and oil companies have had it handed down to them.

"Death Tax" Deception Who's behind the movement to repeal the nation's only tax on inherited wealth?

 

[KittenKoder]

Fuck education. We want an economy so even uneducated people live above the poverty line. You didn't have to go to college to work at GM.

You'll always be poor because you are dumb. Under Bushanomics, more people got poorer than got richer. Under Clinton, more people got out of poverty and made something of themselves. And it wasn't government handouts. It was a good economy. Remember those?

And remember, the mega corporations made record profits in 2004-2007. Remember they kept telling broke asses like you that the economy was strong? And then they made money bankrupting the country. So they make out in good and bad times.

Here's the difference and maybe this you will understand. Do you want a risky economy that goes bust and boom every 10 years, or would you like a nice 50 years of slow/steady growth where you can save enough for retirement?

Do you want healthcare to become too expensive that your broke ass can't afford it?

Do you want your wages lowered more when the company can't find any other ways to cut costs?

Explain how taxing the rich more will make it so that you won't need an education to get a job?

Well, I'll answer that myself, it won't. It will actually do the exact opposite and make the higher paying jobs more elitist than they already are. Many businesses have just recently realized that more education does not mean better, but if you make them pay more taxes they'll just hire fewer people and since those who have schooling will be in ample supply they will only hire them for those few positions they are willing to pay for. Then they'll ship all the jobs over seas or raise the costs of their products to cover the new tax rates. Also they will stop supporting organizations that actually do help people (Gates donated a billion to one project recently and another 100 mill to another) without that money these groups will fail to help anyone. Our tech industry will completely crash, or at the least become stagnant since they won't want to spend any money on development and any products they do sell will be made with inferior parts. That's only the beginning of what would happen. Start looking at the big picture instead of just what you want to happen.

I can't follow your logic, so I'll just reply to what I understand. You were all over the place and I don't agree with most of what you said. You make connections I don't see.

I do agree that if they make getting a college degree mandatory, then it won't carry any weight and then to get more money you'll have to go get a masters.

If education is the thing that divides classes, I'm ok with that.

Companies only hire as many people as they need and they only pay as much as they think they have to.

If rich people only donate for the tax write offs, that's pathetic. Its also not true. So we gave them 18 cents back for every dollar they donated, rather than 20 cents. You think that 2 pennies per dollar are going to to stop philanthropy?

Charity became more necessary under Bush.

Companies are already sending jobs overseas for the cheaper labor. We can't cut taxes enough to stop them because their labor is cheaper too.

I don't care about all the reasons why we can't. YES WE CAN, and yes we will raise their taxes. We are not buying your threats/warnings anymore. We're in charge. And we'll deal with you if you threaten us or try to send more jobs overseas.

Or the free market and competition will take care of your asses. Its a lot harder to cut wages in a good economy, which is why i truly believe the GOP created this mess on purpose. And stole $700 billion right before bush left office.

Um ... no, charity became more appealing under Bush, that's the "tax cuts" you rant about, they aren't really cuts, they are a way to allow the rich to choose which organizations get their money through donations instead. Actually, when Bush got elected the second time I though we were doomed, because he is still a moron. But someone had to have been advising him well, because during that time our welfare system in this state got so damned good I found a way out of the shelters. So no, he made it better. Justifying Obama's theft of trillions by claiming the GOP stoll 700 billion doesn't work on me. I can add you see, so math isn't as alien to me as it is to you.

As for companies only hiring what they need, completely bass-ackwards as hell. In order for a company to grow they have to hire and train first, then grow after, so no, they hire more than they need so long as there is a chance they will grow. I'm not even good enough to run a company on my own and I know that, seems you actually need the schooling.

Now, the part that is truly so fucked up that any true Democrat or liberal would stone you for, "I don't care about all the reasons why we can't. YES WE CAN, and yes we will raise their taxes." ... that is what was wrong with the Republicans and is completely against anything true Democrats and true liberals would EVER say, think, or do. Go back to school, study American history. The Republicans have improved a lot, while the Democrats are deteriorating. Right now they are about even so I support neither, but if the trend continues I will be a Republican supporter in a few years.

 

[sealybobo]

Explain how taxing the rich more will make it so that you won't need an education to get a job?

Well, I'll answer that myself, it won't. It will actually do the exact opposite and make the higher paying jobs more elitist than they already are. Many businesses have just recently realized that more education does not mean better, but if you make them pay more taxes they'll just hire fewer people and since those who have schooling will be in ample supply they will only hire them for those few positions they are willing to pay for. Then they'll ship all the jobs over seas or raise the costs of their products to cover the new tax rates. Also they will stop supporting organizations that actually do help people (Gates donated a billion to one project recently and another 100 mill to another) without that money these groups will fail to help anyone. Our tech industry will completely crash, or at the least become stagnant since they won't want to spend any money on development and any products they do sell will be made with inferior parts. That's only the beginning of what would happen. Start looking at the big picture instead of just what you want to happen.

I can't follow your logic, so I'll just reply to what I understand. You were all over the place and I don't agree with most of what you said. You make connections I don't see.

I do agree that if they make getting a college degree mandatory, then it won't carry any weight and then to get more money you'll have to go get a masters.

If education is the thing that divides classes, I'm ok with that.

Companies only hire as many people as they need and they only pay as much as they think they have to.

If rich people only donate for the tax write offs, that's pathetic. Its also not true. So we gave them 18 cents back for every dollar they donated, rather than 20 cents. You think that 2 pennies per dollar are going to to stop philanthropy?

Charity became more necessary under Bush.

Companies are already sending jobs overseas for the cheaper labor. We can't cut taxes enough to stop them because their labor is cheaper too.

I don't care about all the reasons why we can't. YES WE CAN, and yes we will raise their taxes. We are not buying your threats/warnings anymore. We're in charge. And we'll deal with you if you threaten us or try to send more jobs overseas.

Or the free market and competition will take care of your asses. Its a lot harder to cut wages in a good economy, which is why i truly believe the GOP created this mess on purpose. And stole $700 billion right before bush left office.

Um ... no, charity became more appealing under Bush, that's the "tax cuts" you rant about, they aren't really cuts, they are a way to allow the rich to choose which organizations get their money through donations instead. Actually, when Bush got elected the second time I though we were doomed, because he is still a moron. But someone had to have been advising him well, because during that time our welfare system in this state got so damned good I found a way out of the shelters. So no, he made it better. Justifying Obama's theft of trillions by claiming the GOP stoll 700 billion doesn't work on me. I can add you see, so math isn't as alien to me as it is to you.

As for companies only hiring what they need, completely bass-ackwards as hell. In order for a company to grow they have to hire and train first, then grow after, so no, they hire more than they need so long as there is a chance they will grow. I'm not even good enough to run a company on my own and I know that, seems you actually need the schooling.

Now, the part that is truly so fucked up that any true Democrat or liberal would stone you for, "I don't care about all the reasons why we can't. YES WE CAN, and yes we will raise their taxes." ... that is what was wrong with the Republicans and is completely against anything true Democrats and true liberals would EVER say, think, or do. Go back to school, study American history. The Republicans have improved a lot, while the Democrats are deteriorating. Right now they are about even so I support neither, but if the trend continues I will be a Republican supporter in a few years.

Theft? Who's benefitting from Obama's "theft"? American people? Who benefitted from Bush? The top 1%. So because you made it out of poverty under bush, you don't care about the people who fell into it under him? I can do math too, and more people went backwards than went forward. Middle class went further into debt, more people lost their health insurance, etc. What if you got sick? The rich healthcare giants don't give a fuck about you. Pro lifers do, but the corporations don't.

And did you know that after Rockafellor, JP Morgan, J Gould, Carnege, etc. The richest men back in the early 1900's. Did you know that when they were successful in taking over our treasury, they gave away MILLIONS to charity. So what? They gained billions. So they looked like good guys to people like you. So Bush gave billions to charity? He stole trillions from us. And it all went to Haloburton/KBR/Blackwater/Oil companies/etc.

Let me rephrase. The company will only hire as many people as they need, TO GROW. And if the economy is bad, like it is now, then the company cuts back becaue there is no growth in a bad economy.

So who created the bad economy? The GOP. NAFTA. I know, Clinton signed it.

 

[KittenKoder]

I can't follow your logic, so I'll just reply to what I understand. You were all over the place and I don't agree with most of what you said. You make connections I don't see.

I do agree that if they make getting a college degree mandatory, then it won't carry any weight and then to get more money you'll have to go get a masters.

If education is the thing that divides classes, I'm ok with that.

Companies only hire as many people as they need and they only pay as much as they think they have to.

If rich people only donate for the tax write offs, that's pathetic. Its also not true. So we gave them 18 cents back for every dollar they donated, rather than 20 cents. You think that 2 pennies per dollar are going to to stop philanthropy?

Charity became more necessary under Bush.

Companies are already sending jobs overseas for the cheaper labor. We can't cut taxes enough to stop them because their labor is cheaper too.

I don't care about all the reasons why we can't. YES WE CAN, and yes we will raise their taxes. We are not buying your threats/warnings anymore. We're in charge. And we'll deal with you if you threaten us or try to send more jobs overseas.

Or the free market and competition will take care of your asses. Its a lot harder to cut wages in a good economy, which is why i truly believe the GOP created this mess on purpose. And stole $700 billion right before bush left office.

Um ... no, charity became more appealing under Bush, that's the "tax cuts" you rant about, they aren't really cuts, they are a way to allow the rich to choose which organizations get their money through donations instead. Actually, when Bush got elected the second time I though we were doomed, because he is still a moron. But someone had to have been advising him well, because during that time our welfare system in this state got so damned good I found a way out of the shelters. So no, he made it better. Justifying Obama's theft of trillions by claiming the GOP stoll 700 billion doesn't work on me. I can add you see, so math isn't as alien to me as it is to you.

As for companies only hiring what they need, completely bass-ackwards as hell. In order for a company to grow they have to hire and train first, then grow after, so no, they hire more than they need so long as there is a chance they will grow. I'm not even good enough to run a company on my own and I know that, seems you actually need the schooling.

Now, the part that is truly so fucked up that any true Democrat or liberal would stone you for, "I don't care about all the reasons why we can't. YES WE CAN, and yes we will raise their taxes." ... that is what was wrong with the Republicans and is completely against anything true Democrats and true liberals would EVER say, think, or do. Go back to school, study American history. The Republicans have improved a lot, while the Democrats are deteriorating. Right now they are about even so I support neither, but if the trend continues I will be a Republican supporter in a few years.

Theft? Who's benefitting from Obama's "theft"? American people? Who benefitted from Bush? The top 1%. So because you made it out of poverty under bush, you don't care about the people who fell into it under him? I can do math too, and more people went backwards than went forward. Middle class went further into debt, more people lost their health insurance, etc. What if you got sick? The rich healthcare giants don't give a fuck about you. Pro lifers do, but the corporations don't.

And did you know that after Rockafellor, JP Morgan, J Gould, Carnege, etc. The richest men back in the early 1900's. Did you know that when they were successful in taking over our treasury, they gave away MILLIONS to charity. So what? They gained billions. So they looked like good guys to people like you. So Bush gave billions to charity? He stole trillions from us. And it all went to Haloburton/KBR/Blackwater/Oil companies/etc.

Let me rephrase. The company will only hire as many people as they need, TO GROW. And if the economy is bad, like it is now, then the company cuts back becaue there is no growth in a bad economy.

So who created the bad economy? The GOP. NAFTA. I know, Clinton signed it.

Actually, no, more people did not become homeless and broke under Bush, but a LOT of people got out of the shelters because of donations from the rich while he was in Presidency. You didn't eve read the whole thing, and you cannot make abstract mental connections at all. People did not start "falling" backwards because of Bush, they did because of a world wide recession, a normal occurrence of the economy, he did screw up by spending more money (same exact thing Obama is doing now), but it wasn't his fault. Now, as I said, get back to school, you clearly did not learn how to learn the first time.

 

[Iriemon]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

The wealthiest didn't. The banks that keep the economy going did.

 

[Care4all]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

The wealthiest didn't. The banks that keep the economy going did.

6 or one half dozen, they are one and the same...imo....and if you look in to it, I believe I am correct.

 

[Iriemon]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

The wealthiest didn't. The banks that keep the economy going did.

6 or one half dozen, they are one and the same...imo....and if you look in to it, I believe I am correct.

The banks weren't rich because their assets were worth crap. That was the problem.

 

[KittenKoder]

Why did the very wealthiest need our bail out money if they are so smart and wise and handle their money so well?

Why are we trying to PROTECT THEM, if that is what this is all about...?

The wealthiest didn't. The banks that keep the economy going did.

6 or one half dozen, they are one and the same...imo....and if you look in to it, I believe I am correct.

Nope:

Bill Gates - Still worth a fortune, no bailout needed.

Steve Jobs - Still worth a fortune, no bail out needed.

Google - Still making money, no bail out needed.

etc.

Banks are usually owned by more than one person, and they are usually not the top 1%.