Rule of the Rich

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Flopper, May 26, 2010.

  1. Flopper
    Online

    Flopper Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,178
    Thanks Received:
    2,695
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Washington
    Ratings:
    +5,267
    "Sitting in with Rush Limbaugh yesterday economics professor George Mason suggested that perhaps on top of the single vote every American is already entitled to, for every additional $20,000 in income tax a person pays he should get one additional vote."

    So people like Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs get's 100 votes. The CEO of United Healthcare get's 500 votes. And there is Bernie Madoff with 800 votes if he hadn't gotten caught.

    Wouldn't be much point in rest of us voting.

    The Limbaugh Wire for 05/25/2010
     
  2. 2Parties
    Offline

    2Parties Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,048
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Tennis Sea
    Ratings:
    +123
    How is this any different than now?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Flopper
    Online

    Flopper Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,178
    Thanks Received:
    2,695
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Washington
    Ratings:
    +5,267
    It saves the wealthy a lot of money. Instead of having to shell out billions to buy off politicians, they can can get the job done by just voting. Think of the money it saves the political parties. No need to do all those TV commercials and ads, just throw cocktail parties for rich.
     
  4. ihopehefails
    Offline

    ihopehefails BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Messages:
    3,384
    Thanks Received:
    228
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +228
    What about companies that the government declare as to big to fail but other companies can go by the wayside? It seems that the government will be protecting the rich and well connected while the less rich and less well protected will be squashed by the government. That to me seems like rule of the rich.
     
  5. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,155
    Thanks Received:
    19,792
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,243
    Right now, the richest 10% of Americans already control 90% of the wealth

    This would give them 90% of the vote

    The rich don't need it, they already control 100% of the lobbyists
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,772
    Thanks Received:
    2,361
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,281
    This is one of those laugh out loud threads - soon the righties and libertarians will be yelling without the rich we'd all be poor - while then saying the reason you are poor is your own fault and then the irony thickens... :lol:


    "On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."

    UBI and the Flat Tax

    "The Walton family, heirs to the Wal-Mart fortune and one of the wealthiest families in the United States, eventually could receive an estimated tax break of $32.7 billion under a proposal in the budget that President Bush submitted to Congress. The Waltons would win from a repeal of the inheritance tax. In fact, the top 1 percent of income earners would continue to benefit from tax breaks in the budget.The losers: seniors on Medicare, veterans seeking health care, home owners struggling to pay heating bills, grandchildren stuck with cleaning up all the red ink Bush has spilled... It is a "disastrous budget" Senator Bernie Sanders told the White House budget chief at a Senate hearing. The senator lamented what he called the budget's "lack of moral values."


    What Should a Billionaire Give – and What Should You?, by Peter Singer

    "What is a human life worth? You may not want to put a price tag on a it. But if we really had to, most of us would agree that the value of a human life would be in the millions. Consistent with the foundations of our democracy and our frequently professed belief in the inherent dignity of human beings, we would also agree that all humans are created equal, at least to the extent of denying that differences of sex, ethnicity, nationality and place of residence change the value of a human life."
     
  7. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Sure, grand idea.

    And when the rich start another war to rob some native people of their land and resources, let the fucking rich fight it for themselves, instead of sending all us nobodies to do their dirty work for them.

    Social contract?

    Screw it.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2010
  8. Shorebreak
    Offline

    Shorebreak Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    395
    Thanks Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +102
    The difference is that this makes it legal.

    It's part of the age old question of who should control government. There have always been folks with money and power who claim that since they have money, they should be in charge of everyone else.

    The American Revolution turned that elite perspective on it's head and declared that everyone is equal - including our voice in politics.

    Protecting this American perspective of individual liberty and the power of the people is our predominant struggle, and it's ongoing, as demonstrated by this economics professor - who belongs in some fascist country where the wealthy are the decision makers.
     
  9. bucs90
    Offline

    bucs90 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    26,548
    Thanks Received:
    5,995
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +19,210
    Hey, all the ACORN babies are voting 10-20 times per election, why not the rest of us!!!!!?????

    I do however feel there should be some type of academic test when one registers to vote. The higher the score, the higher the weight your vote counts. Include questions about politics, history, current events, economics, etc.

    That way, we wouldn't have Shaquanda and her 17 welfare babies living off the government going to the polls just to vote for whoever promises to give her a higher welfare check. But rather, we'd have the most educated people who are aware of consequences of political actions that have more influence on votes.

    If the most educated Americans votes carried higher weight, Obama never would've won.
     
  10. Soggy in NOLA
    Offline

    Soggy in NOLA Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    32,679
    Thanks Received:
    4,316
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,411
    And how many more votes would Dem darlings like Pelosi, Sorros, Clinton, Gore, Obama, Rich, Moore, etc. get?
     

Share This Page