The ClassWar Has Officially Begun

[oreo]

The shot heard round the world from the podium in DC










yay demonRats.. yay for youse

Well--I guess why not try it again. It worked in 2008. We're going to clobber the filthy rich in this country--UPS--I mean those that are making 200K and over.

FUNNY THOUGH--Obama had a FULL HOUSE for TWO SOLID YEARS. Republicans were such a minority--they couldn't even round up a filibuster. IOW--Democrats REFUSED to RAISE TAXES on those EVIL RICH when they had a 24 month opportunity to do so.

Which brings me to the conclusion--this SPEECH is meant to RALLY the far out Left.

It appears that our Harvard Graduate--community organizer--and now amateur golfer--hasn't learned anything--in his on the job training program.

BTW--The Stock Market is getting CLOBBERED today after his speech.




"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."Winston Churchill

 

[Wiseacre]

The ignorance is glaring on this site !

This regime is making it so that those that have money dont want to risk it.... so they sit on it

Yeah, that's powerful ignorant, all right.

The reason why those who have money are sitting on it has nothing to do with "the regime," except insofar as Obama is continuing the failed Reagan policies of the past 30 years. It has to do with the fact that too many people have too little money and so can't buy anything, which means that investing their money would be a waste of time.

If you want the rich to invest their money, take some of it from them and give it to the rest of us. I'm dead serious here. If the rest of us had more money to spend, there would be a reason to invest capital in producing more for us to spend our money on. Otherwise, there is no reason and it won't be done.

Priceless! There you have it folks...an honest liberal telling everyone what it really is about. It all about the redistribution of wealth.

So, let me see if I got this right. We take money from rich people and give it to poor people, who spend it. Actually a lot of people are saving as much as possible right now, they ain't spending but instead are paying down debt. But what happens when the extra money is spent? Sure, we created some new jobs, but now those jobs go away because the stimulus money is gone. Then what, take more money from the rich people? Ever hear the story about killing the golden goose?

Rich people didn't get to be rich by being stupid. They're going to find ways to pay less taxes, you may not like it but that's the way it is. They'll put it into tax shelters of some kind, or invest overseas. More and more of 'em are selling out, packing up, and leaving. So now they not only are not investing here but they ain't spending here either. It's a global economy folks, not like it was back in the 50s when we were the only game in town.

 

[Vel]

"It's only right we ask everyone to pay their fair share," Obama said from the Rose Garden at the White House.

Fair share????? Would that amount be based upon the 50% of ppl NOT paying anything???

This whole thing is a ruse. The more you tax, the less money anyone has. And "0" knows Congress will not accept this and he will use it in his campaign to point fingers, but the public is onto him..... It's all a political ploy.

It's not even just that 50% pay nothing. With refundable tax credits, those paying taxes are also paying into the personal pockets of those that pay nothing,

So, quit your job and go to work for two or more businesses which provide less than full time employment so as to not pay benefits, and you too can benefit from poverty. You'll pay less taxes - don't pretend you won't pay any taxes - and can use the emergency room at your local county hospital for routine care.

Noted. One more fool using talking points as the basis for a political philosophy.

As a small business owner, I pay plenty of taxes already. And while I can see those low income people paying no taxes, why don't you explain to me why it's fair to " refund" money to people who never paid it in the first place.

 

[Dr.Drock]

The shot heard round the world from the podium in DC










yay demonRats.. yay for youse

Well--I guess why not try it again. It worked in 2008. We're going to clobber the filthy rich in this country--UPS--I mean those that are making 200K and over.

FUNNY THOUGH--Obama had a FULL HOUSE for TWO SOLID YEARS. Republicans were such a minority--they couldn't even round up a filibuster. IOW--Democrats REFUSED to RAISE TAXES on those EVIL RICH when they had a 24 month opportunity to do so.

Which brings me to the conclusion--this SPEECH is meant to RALLY the far out Left.

It appears that our Harvard Graduate--community organizer--and now amateur golfer--hasn't learned anything--in his on the job training program.

BTW--The Stock Market is getting CLOBBERED today after his speech.

View attachment 15243


"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."Winston Churchill

Great post.

I'm not one of these "tax the evil rich guys" types, but even if you are, Obama hasn't done what you've asked him to. If you want him to skyrocket taxes on rich people you don't like, he hasn't, and you should stop pretending like he wants to because when he had the opportunity he didn't do it.

 

[WillowTree]

it's not even just that 50% pay nothing. With refundable tax credits, those paying taxes are also paying into the personal pockets of those that pay nothing,

so, quit your job and go to work for two or more businesses which provide less than full time employment so as to not pay benefits, and you too can benefit from poverty. You'll pay less taxes - don't pretend you won't pay any taxes - and can use the emergency room at your local county hospital for routine care.

Noted. One more fool using talking points as the basis for a political philosophy.

as a small business owner, i pay plenty of taxes already. And while i can see those low income people paying no taxes, why don't you explain to me why it's fair to " refund" money to people who never paid it in the first place.

 

[Dragon]

So, let me see if I got this right. We take money from rich people and give it to poor people, who spend it. Actually a lot of people are saving as much as possible right now, they ain't spending but instead are paying down debt. But what happens when the extra money is spent? Sure, we created some new jobs, but now those jobs go away because the stimulus money is gone. Then what, take more money from the rich people? Ever hear the story about killing the golden goose?

Tell you a different story, a historical one, in which we were confronting a similar problem to what we have today only it had been going on for years longer.

From 1929 to 1940, presidents Hoover and Roosevelt had been told over and over by economists that what they needed to do was to use government spending to redistribute wealth on a massive scale. Neither of them believed it, and while both took some action to try to mend things, neither did anything close to enough.

In December 1941, the Japanese attacked our military base at Pearl Harbor and we were suddenly at war. Shortly thereafter, Adolf Hitler declared war on us and so we were at war on two fronts. The money that Roosevelt was unwilling to spend for economic reasons he finally did spend out of military necessity.

Taxes on the rich were raised to astronomical levels (92% maximum top marginal rate during the war years). The government also borrowed a lot of money, but there's no question taxes were set very high. Huge amounts of cash flowed into defense purchases, and the unemployed were sucked into jobs in a combination of the armed services and defense contractors. Payroll for all this work meant an immense transformation from wealthy taxpayers to military personnel and defense workers. With full employment, the pool of available labor shrank, and pressure of short supply raised wages across the board.

For four years or thereabouts, the U.S. had full employment at good wages. Compounding this was the fact that most industrial production was going into military goods, so there was a dearth of consumer goods on the market. By the end of the war, pent-up consumer demand was so high that the economy barely hiccuped over the military cutbacks, industry quickly retooling to produce consumer goods instead of military goods.

It's a matter of scale. We're nowhere near the point we need to be to reverse this economic reset, and there's no sign that Obama is any more willing to do what's necessary than FDR was -- even if Congress would go along, which it won't.

The current jobs bill will help some, but will not solve the problem.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Republicans were such a minority--they couldn't even round up a filibuster.

Your lack of knowledge of recent history is astounding.

I will say this though. The speech was about rallying his base. None of his policies will get passed in the House in the next 14 months.

 

[Mr Natural]

It's not even just that 50% pay nothing. With refundable tax credits, those paying taxes are also paying into the personal pockets of those that pay nothing,

So, quit your job and go to work for two or more businesses which provide less than full time employment so as to not pay benefits, and you too can benefit from poverty. You'll pay less taxes - don't pretend you won't pay any taxes - and can use the emergency room at your local county hospital for routine care.

Noted. One more fool using talking points as the basis for a political philosophy.

As a small business owner, I pay plenty of taxes already. And while I can see those low income people paying no taxes, why don't you explain to me why it's fair to " refund" money to people who never paid it in the first place.

And you got plenty of deductions and write-offs.

So quit your bellyaching. Owning a business is the best tax situation you can possibly be in.

 

[Wiseacre]

So, let me see if I got this right. We take money from rich people and give it to poor people, who spend it. Actually a lot of people are saving as much as possible right now, they ain't spending but instead are paying down debt. But what happens when the extra money is spent? Sure, we created some new jobs, but now those jobs go away because the stimulus money is gone. Then what, take more money from the rich people? Ever hear the story about killing the golden goose?

Tell you a different story, a historical one, in which we were confronting a similar problem to what we have today only it had been going on for years longer.

From 1929 to 1940, presidents Hoover and Roosevelt had been told over and over by economists that what they needed to do was to use government spending to redistribute wealth on a massive scale. Neither of them believed it, and while both took some action to try to mend things, neither did anything close to enough.

In December 1941, the Japanese attacked our military base at Pearl Harbor and we were suddenly at war. Shortly thereafter, Adolf Hitler declared war on us and so we were at war on two fronts. The money that Roosevelt was unwilling to spend for economic reasons he finally did spend out of military necessity.

Taxes on the rich were raised to astronomical levels (92% maximum top marginal rate during the war years). The government also borrowed a lot of money, but there's no question taxes were set very high. Huge amounts of cash flowed into defense purchases, and the unemployed were sucked into jobs in a combination of the armed services and defense contractors. Payroll for all this work meant an immense transformation from wealthy taxpayers to military personnel and defense workers. With full employment, the pool of available labor shrank, and pressure of short supply raised wages across the board.

For four years or thereabouts, the U.S. had full employment at good wages. Compounding this was the fact that most industrial production was going into military goods, so there was a dearth of consumer goods on the market. By the end of the war, pent-up consumer demand was so high that the economy barely hiccuped over the military cutbacks, industry quickly retooling to produce consumer goods instead of military goods.

It's a matter of scale. We're nowhere near the point we need to be to reverse this economic reset, and there's no sign that Obama is any more willing to do what's necessary than FDR was -- even if Congress would go along, which it won't.

The current jobs bill will help some, but will not solve the problem.

I don't think the current jobs bill will help much at all, it's nothing more than a temporary bandaid to make the president look good to his base and to as any independent voters as possible. Seriously, how can you believe a temporary payroll tax cut to employers that goes away in Jan 2013 and is replaced by a tax hike will help at all? Do you really think employers will sing halleluyah, I think I'll go hire somebody tomorrow?

As to the war, I strongly doubt there were many "good wages". No doubt those with more skill got paid more money, but few were living high on the hog. There were shortages, people stood in line for items such as butter, and people all over the country grew victory gardens to help put food on the table. There wasn't much of an increase inthe standard of living, although I have no data to back that up.

And the amount of debt the gov't rang up was truly extraordinary. We were not already in debt like we are now, approaching 15 trillion. My God, we went from spending a little over 9 billion in 1939 to over 90 billion in 1945, does anyone think we should increase our spending 10-fold?

We've kind of left the redistribution of wealth discussion here, whatever increase on rich people in tax rates during the war was dwarfted by the massive increase in spending. Not unlike what Obama has done, a 1.6 trillion deficit this year and he wants to get 70-80 billion a year in new taxes on the rich as though that'll solve the problem. Butif you're suggesting that raising taxes in the middle of a world war had anything whatsoever to do with getting out of the depression, that's really out there.

 

[Dot Com]

Willow's thread is getting thrashed OUCH!!! Are you a follower of CNBC's (corporately finded TeeVee ;-) Santelli? Tool.

 

[EriktheRed]

Republicans were such a minority--they couldn't even round up a filibuster.

Your lack of knowledge of recent history is astounding.

I will say this though. The speech was about rallying his base. None of his policies will get passed in the House in the next 14 months.

You really think so?

There are a lot of polls out there showing the idea of raising taxes on the wealthy being pretty popular. You think they're all just his base?

 

[Seawytch]

Felons are not supposed to vote, why shouldn't we make sure they don't?

Actually there are states that allow Felons to vote while in prison. Some states allow Felons to reregister when they are no longer in prison or on parole. A few permanently remove a felons right to vote (which I find heinous).

What I have found with the Felon lists is that 1-2% on the list were not convicted of a felony.

 

[Seawytch]

So it's not class warfare when corporate income has increased 88% while wages increased 1%? CEO and executive pay has increased 27% while worker salary has increased 2%.

Income inequality hasn't been this great since the 1920s.

 

[Dot Com]

So it's not class warfare when corporate income has increased 88% while wages increased 1%? CEO and executive pay has increased 27% while worker salary has increased 2%.

Income inequality hasn't been this great since the 1920s.

You are correct sir. Wonder if Willow knows this

 

[oreo]

Republicans were such a minority--they couldn't even round up a filibuster.

Your lack of knowledge of recent history is astounding.

I will say this though. The speech was about rallying his base. None of his policies will get passed in the House in the next 14 months.

You really think so?

There are a lot of polls out there showing the idea of raising taxes on the wealthy being pretty popular. You think they're all just his base?

No they're a bunch of morons that believe that if the Federal Government confiscates more money from the rich they will spend it wisely---

Kind of like that great investment Obama did with our 535 MILLION dollars into Solyndra--

It turns out that WARREN BUFFET has a serious problem. One of his companies have been fighting a federal tax bill to the tune of 1 BILLION dollars for the last 10 years--when you would think that Warren would gleefully break out his check book and give the government a check for what he owes.

Update: Warren Buffett’s Company Owes Nearly $1 Billion in Taxes | TheBlaze.com

 

[Meister]

QFT.

The red countries have greater income inequality, the blue countries less; the U.S. is purple.

I'm looking at a lot of the blue countries that are socialists and communists, of course they would be blue....and poor, with big ass governments.

Canada poor? don't think so.

Median household income is 60k.

Median total income, by family type, by province and territory

Canadians' disposable income growing two times faster than our American neighbours: CIBC

CIBC | Canadians' disposable income growing two times faster than our American neighbours: CIBC

Kiki, did I say every blue country?
What is the income tax structure for Canada?

 

[EriktheRed]

Your lack of knowledge of recent history is astounding.

I will say this though. The speech was about rallying his base. None of his policies will get passed in the House in the next 14 months.

You really think so?

There are a lot of polls out there showing the idea of raising taxes on the wealthy being pretty popular. You think they're all just his base?

No they're a bunch of morons that believe that if the Federal Government confiscates more money from the rich they will spend it wisely---

Kind of like that great investment Obama did with our 535 MILLION dollars into Solyndra--

It turns out that WARREN BUFFET has a serious problem. One of his companies have been fighting a federal tax bill to the tune of 1 BILLION dollars for the last 10 years--when you would think that Warren would gleefully break out his check book and give the government a check for what he owes.

Update: Warren Buffett’s Company Owes Nearly $1 Billion in Taxes | TheBlaze.com

So you don't actually have an answer to what I said, I take it...?

 

[Meister]

Yeah, that's powerful ignorant, all right.

The reason why those who have money are sitting on it has nothing to do with "the regime," except insofar as Obama is continuing the failed Reagan policies of the past 30 years. It has to do with the fact that too many people have too little money and so can't buy anything, which means that investing their money would be a waste of time.

If you want the rich to invest their money, take some of it from them and give it to the rest of us. I'm dead serious here. If the rest of us had more money to spend, there would be a reason to invest capital in producing more for us to spend our money on. Otherwise, there is no reason and it won't be done.

Priceless! There you have it folks...an honest liberal telling everyone what it really is about. It all about the redistribution of wealth.

Nice use of a talking point, pointless, but a good play. Too little money circulating in our economy benefits no one, not the rich, not the poor and not the many in the middle. The entire argument of the New Right is pure and simple demagoguery. If one puts aside emotion and takes a critical look at the economics the Tea Party movement isn't rational.

Try thinking through the hopes and dreams of the Tea Party; even you may be able to figure out the dream is a nightmare for the vast majority of Americans.

So your coming out and say the redistribution of wealth is a good thing, also? But, I already knew of your socialist politics, wry....you live in frisco.

You can call it what you like, but it's just the same as you coming out of the dem. echo chamber....you think your special? Your full of the leftwing talking points...

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

I'm looking at a lot of the blue countries that are socialists and communists, of course they would be blue....and poor, with big ass governments.

Canada poor? don't think so.

Median household income is 60k.

Median total income, by family type, by province and territory

Canadians' disposable income growing two times faster than our American neighbours: CIBC

CIBC | Canadians' disposable income growing two times faster than our American neighbours: CIBC

Kiki, did I say every blue country?

Ok, point taken but I don't think the inference makes me cuckoo.


What is the income tax structure for Canada?

The structure is parallel to that of USA in terms of corporate, personal, capital, payroll and so forth. The rate is between 22 & 32% on personal income. And their sales tax is notably higher than that of most of the USA.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Republicans were such a minority--they couldn't even round up a filibuster.

Your lack of knowledge of recent history is astounding.

I will say this though. The speech was about rallying his base. None of his policies will get passed in the House in the next 14 months.

You really think so?

There are a lot of polls out there showing the idea of raising taxes on the wealthy being pretty popular. You think they're all just his base?

Oh, it's a very popular idea, having everyone pay their fair share of taxes. You see it on this board a lot with "conservatives" calling for a flat tax. They just don't realize that it would be a tax increase for the top earners.

But regardless of whether it is popular or not, or whether it will help the economy or the budget, Obama is putting it forth. Therefore, no Republican in the House or Senate will vote for it. Which means it's DOA.