steal from the rich to give to the......(not poor)

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Grampa Murked U, Dec 4, 2011.

  1. Grampa Murked U
    Offline

    Grampa Murked U Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    Messages:
    47,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,778
    Trophy Points:
    2,055
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Ratings:
    +23,779
    Democrats clearly hate the rich and despise their success. Now they want to take from the rich to give to the MIDDLE CLASS on a payroll tax cut.

    It's no longer for the poor. They simply want to punish the rich at every opportunity.

    Here's a novel idea......CUT THE FUCKING SPENDING!

    Democrats in DC should be known as the Real Houswives of DC.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2011
  2. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    you people have no shame do you?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. PredFan
    Offline

    PredFan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2011
    Messages:
    29,191
    Thanks Received:
    4,422
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    In Liberal minds, rent free.
    Ratings:
    +11,623
    We have nothing to be ashamed of.
     
  4. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    Wealth inequality in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    According to the Congressional Budget Office, between 1979 and 2007 incomes of the top 1% of Americans grew by an average of 275%. During the same time period, the 60% of Americans in the middle of the income scale saw their income rise by 40%. Since 1979 the average pre-tax income for the bottom 90% of households has decreased by $900, while that of the top 1% increased by over $700,000, as federal taxation became less progressive. From 1992-2007 the top 400 income earners in the U.S. saw their income increase 392% and their average tax rate reduced by 37%.[7] In 2009, the average income of the top 1% was $960,000 with a minimum income of $343,927.[8][9][10]

    In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[11] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[11][12][13] During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2011
  5. Grampa Murked U
    Offline

    Grampa Murked U Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    Messages:
    47,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,778
    Trophy Points:
    2,055
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Ratings:
    +23,779
    Here is a novel idea for you TM.

    Let people keep what THEY earned and quit promising one persons money to another.
     
  6. PredFan
    Offline

    PredFan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2011
    Messages:
    29,191
    Thanks Received:
    4,422
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    In Liberal minds, rent free.
    Ratings:
    +11,623
    So what?

    You libs function on the false notion that there is a finite amount of wealth and that the only reason someone isn't wealthy is because another person is. You believe that so that you don't have to face the fact that those people aren't wealthy because of the poor choices they have made in their lives.

    Another stupid idea that is bounced around is this 99% bullshit. I'm not in the 1% but I'm not in YOUR 99%. I have the money I have because it's the amount of money that I have earned. I could be making more money right now had I chose to get more education and make the sacrifices, I chose not to. Money and wealth wasn't important enough to me to go further than I did.

    Congrats to the 1%, my hat's off to you.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. imbalance
    Offline

    imbalance Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,202
    Thanks Received:
    163
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +163
    QFT

    As far as the 1% expanding wealth/ownership; that's a direct result of crony socialism. When you have so many federal regulatory agencies, the regulation laws inevitably become legislated by the highest bidders with the most entrenched lobbyists so that they can be used to eliminate market competition creating virtual monopolists with an overwhelming gravitational pull on capital.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2011
  8. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    Yes your right those CEOs of the lending industry so deserved and earned those bounuses they gave themselves after FUCKING the entire country in their scam.

    You people are insane if you think your historically failed arguments are going to get ANY traction in this country after the Complete FUCKING of our economy.
     
  9. Katzndogz
    Offline

    Katzndogz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    65,659
    Thanks Received:
    7,418
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +8,337
    At the heart of the left's complaint isn't only that someone isn't wealthy because someone else is. It's that if someone has wealth or assets, they FORCIBLY wrested it from some other person. This allows them justification to use force to "take it back".
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. mudwhistle
    Offline

    mudwhistle Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Messages:
    65,251
    Thanks Received:
    11,923
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Wetwang With Fimber, Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +26,186
    I don't believe Democrats hate the rich.

    First of all every one of them is rich, or became rich from insider trading while in office.

    Secondly, all of their friends are rich. George Soros, Steven Speilberg, the late Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, 70% percent of Hollywood, Oprah, David Letterman, etc.

    Thirdly, under their watch the rich got richer and the poor got poorer.

    Last of all, in a free country there will always be wealth inequality. In a communist country the leaders are the rich, everyone else is poor. There is no country on Earth where there isn't inequality. Anyone who believes this Marxist drivel is ether living in denial or hopelessly stupid.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2

Share This Page