War on The Rich: Dumbest Idea in History of Man

[Dad2three]

They are finding legal loopholes to get out of paying taxes. I disagree they pay the bulk of the taxes.

National Taxpayers Union - Who Pays Income Taxes

The top 10% of earners pay more than 70% of all income taxes. There aren't as many loopholes as you think

Again, it is the top 10% of WAGE EARNERS, not the top 10% of wealth!
Learn the difference, take a lesson from your MessiahRushie Limbola:

August 7, 2007
CALLER: And, you know, and the way our tax system works, we have an overly complex system, which in and of itself is a problem, but the way our tax system works and the way the tax laws are written, it's based on a few kind of like hinge numbers like adjusted gross income and taxable income, and while the soak the rich -- or however you choose to describe it -- really doesn't come down that way. It really comes down to much lower income levels.

RUSH: It does, exactly, and here's the dirty little secret if you ever to pull it off. It's hard. This is why most people don't understand the tax-the-rich business. You've got to structure your life so you have no "earned" income. I'm out of time. I'll explain that. There's a category called earned income versus other kinds of income. Earned income is what the income tax rate is on. That's how "the rich" do it. They don't have "earned" income.
END TRANSCRIPT

You listen to Rush. i don't

And it's the people on this thread confusing income and wealth. But capital gains are reported on income tax filings so the so called wealthy that pay capital gains are paying income taxes.

Maybe you should figure out what you're talking about.

But only when the Cap Gains are REALIZED, and then at a lower rate then wage income. Until the Cap Gain is realized/cashed in, it grows TAX FREE like an unlimited IRA but with no early withdrawal penalty and at a lower tax rate when cashed in no matter what your age. If you lose money on your Cap Gains you get to deduct it from your taxes, so Cap Gains are a risk free investment. And still the wealthy bitch that they are over taxed. They should have their taxes raised 1% automatically every time they bitch!

January 09, 2013
RUSH: Taxing wages at a higher rate than profits is wealth redistribution.

I know how capital gains work. They are still income taxes and are taxed more than some earned income and less than other earned income.

And you really should wonder who is screwing the middle class when the government taxes all the gains in a retirement plan as regular income and not capital gains.

And your max deduction for losses is only 3000 a year or didn't you know that either. You can't take a bath and write off millions in losses.

And I have to ask how much of your day do you spend taking notes on what Rush Limbaugh says?

Actual losses ABOVE your capital gains? lol

 

[Skull Pilot]

National Taxpayers Union - Who Pays Income Taxes

The top 10% of earners pay more than 70% of all income taxes. There aren't as many loopholes as you think

Again, it is the top 10% of WAGE EARNERS, not the top 10% of wealth!
Learn the difference, take a lesson from your MessiahRushie Limbola:

August 7, 2007
CALLER: And, you know, and the way our tax system works, we have an overly complex system, which in and of itself is a problem, but the way our tax system works and the way the tax laws are written, it's based on a few kind of like hinge numbers like adjusted gross income and taxable income, and while the soak the rich -- or however you choose to describe it -- really doesn't come down that way. It really comes down to much lower income levels.

RUSH: It does, exactly, and here's the dirty little secret if you ever to pull it off. It's hard. This is why most people don't understand the tax-the-rich business. You've got to structure your life so you have no "earned" income. I'm out of time. I'll explain that. There's a category called earned income versus other kinds of income. Earned income is what the income tax rate is on. That's how "the rich" do it. They don't have "earned" income.
END TRANSCRIPT

You listen to Rush. i don't

And it's the people on this thread confusing income and wealth. But capital gains are reported on income tax filings so the so called wealthy that pay capital gains are paying income taxes.

Maybe you should figure out what you're talking about.

But only when the Cap Gains are REALIZED, and then at a lower rate then wage income. Until the Cap Gain is realized/cashed in, it grows TAX FREE like an unlimited IRA but with no early withdrawal penalty and at a lower tax rate when cashed in no matter what your age. If you lose money on your Cap Gains you get to deduct it from your taxes, so Cap Gains are a risk free investment. And still the wealthy bitch that they are over taxed. They should have their taxes raised 1% automatically every time they bitch!

January 09, 2013
RUSH: Taxing wages at a higher rate than profits is wealth redistribution.

I know how capital gains work. They are still income taxes and are taxed more than some earned income and less than other earned income.

And you really should wonder who is screwing the middle class when the government taxes all the gains in a retirement plan as regular income and not capital gains.

And your max deduction for losses is only 3000 a year or didn't you know that either. You can't take a bath and write off millions in losses.

And I have to ask how much of your day do you spend taking notes on what Rush Limbaugh says?

Actual losses ABOVE your capital gains? lol

Realized losses. at least get the lingo right.

And realized losses and realized gains can happen in the same tax year.

See if you can figure that out.

 

[Dad2three]

In 2008, we unleashed the power of capitalism and it collapsed the economy

In 2008 , you fuckers released welfarism , aka "compassionate conservatism" and militarism aka, the UNNecessary invasion of Iraq and AfPak.

Welfarism + Militarism = Fascism

.

Bullshit, it was WORLD WIDE BANKSTER CREATED CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. One Dubya cheered on in the US and removed regulators from the beat EVEN AFTER BEING WARNED BY THE FBI IN 2004 OF AN EPIDEMIC THAT COULD RIVAL THE S&L CRISIS!!


Regulators and policymakers enabled this process at virtually every turn. Part of the reason they failed to understand the housing bubble was willful ignorance: they bought into the argument that the market would equilibrate itself. In particular, financial actors and regulatory officials both believed that secondary and tertiary markets could effectively control risk through pricing.


http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf

 

[Dad2three]

My example is yet to be addressed. Are the workers at a MacDonald's affected by how much of the profits the owner decides to keep?

It's because your example was an exercise in complete ignorance of how any business works. I think my 8-year-old granddaughter can come up with a better explanation of how business operates than you can.

NO OWNER "decides to keep" any damn thing! You act like they go to the bank at the end of the fiscal year and the banker plops out $600k on the table and says... "So, what are ya gonna do with all of it man?" And then the owner says, "Oh, I haven't decided yet... thought about giving my peasant workers a little raise... but nahhh... I think I'll jet off down to the Bahamas and blow it on coke and whores!"

That's not how businesses work in the real world. Maybe that's how it works on The Simpsons? Maybe in Jon Stewart's little universe, that's how business works, but not in the real world.

Actually, the final numbers on profits aren't known until usually a month or more after the close of the fiscal year because of the red tape in calculating it. Almost every successful business considers less than 10% increase in profit from last year as a LOSS. This is because every capitalist competitor is growing. Less than 10% growth and you're not keeping up with your competition.

Now the money goes to all kinds of different things, it's illiterate to think this $600k profit you exemplified is going into the owner's pocket and simply increased his wealth by $600k. A chunk of it was probably reinvested in the franchise. Maybe some of it went to the venture capitalist who loaned the owner the money to open the franchise? Perhaps it simply repaid the money that was lost last year when there was a profit loss of $600k? We don't know because this is a bonehead hypothetical that never exists in the real universe.

What simply does not happen in any free market capitalist business is, the capitalist saying; "We're going to run our business like communists where everyone here is in a commune, and we're going to evenly divide up all the profit gains between everyone here because we're all cool like that! ...Pass the bong, man!" Now... IF you want to try a business model like that here, I am all for it! I think you need to go for it! You open your capitalist business that equally divides up all the profits it generates between everyone working in the business, and I will support you as long as you're in business. But I have to say this, I bet such a business would fail. Why? Because there is a reason we don't see such businesses in a free market capitalist system.

Seriously you don't realize PROFIT on a Biz is AFTER deducting those things

"A chunk of it was probably reinvested in the franchise. Maybe some of it went to the venture capitalist who loaned the owner the money to open the franchise? Perhaps it simply repaid the money that was lost last year when there was a profit loss of $600k?"

lol, SERIOUSLY?

 

[Dad2three]

In 2008, we unleashed the power of capitalism and it collapsed the economy

In 2008 , you fuckers released welfarism , aka "compassionate conservatism" and militarism aka, the UNNecessary invasion of Iraq and AfPak.

Welfarism + Militarism = Fascism

.

I have no idea of what you are babbling about

What does any of that have to do with Democrats, capitalism, 2008 or the wars?

Conservative conservatism is just the massive democrat sponsored welfarism in effect since it was created by FDR and LBJ.

Bush II lower taxes but then engaged in the massively expensive Iraq and AfPak invasions.

Capitalists do NOT promote welfare or warfare. Fascists do.

.

Really? It was Dems who fought all 50 states who wanted to reign in 'predatory lenders'? It wasn't Dubya invoking a civil war era rule in 2003?

Was it Dems who gutted 1,800 FBI agents from white collar crimes, even after the warning in 2004 of an epidemic of mortgage fraud?, NOT Dubya/GOP?


How about the SEC rule change Dubya allowed that tripled leverage on thee 5 investment banks? Was that the Dems too?


I bet it was the Dems forcing GSE's (F/F) to buy $440 BILLION in MBS's to meet the affordable housing goals in 2004? Or upped the required 'low income' from 50% to 56% in 2004?

Hell no it was Dubya, who cheered on the Banksters as they had a WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST!

 

[Dad2three]

Because they are paying sales taxes, medicare taxes, social security taxes, fees, excise and a bunch of other taxes.

Why is it that plutocrat apologists like to pretend the income tax is the only one we have?

But they dont pay income taxes.
How is it fair for libs to scream that "the rich" ought to pay more of their income when many middle class people and working class people aren't paying anything?

If I receive 10 million dollars a year in capital gains, that is my "income".It is what I show on my tax returns. By law I get to pay a specific tax known as the "capital gains tax". By bribing politicians I get to pay a lower tax on my capital gains than you do on your W2 income. But income is income. W2 or capital gains.

What the fuck is wrong with you people. Just plain stupid or what? That's twice where I've read the capital gains isn't "income". What the fuck you think it is; outgo?

Again, it is only "income" if it is REALIZED, so if your capital assets grew by 10 million and you only cashed in 1 million, you are taxed ONLY on that 1 million and at a lower rate than wages depending on how long you held the capital asset before you realized any income from it. The remaining 9 million are untaxed.

Again, it is the top 10% of WAGE EARNERS, not the top 10% of wealth!
Learn the difference, take a lesson from your MessiahRushie Limbola:

August 7, 2007
CALLER: And, you know, and the way our tax system works, we have an overly complex system, which in and of itself is a problem, but the way our tax system works and the way the tax laws are written, it's based on a few kind of like hinge numbers like adjusted gross income and taxable income, and while the soak the rich -- or however you choose to describe it -- really doesn't come down that way. It really comes down to much lower income levels.

RUSH: It does, exactly, and here's the dirty little secret if you ever to pull it off. It's hard. This is why most people don't understand the tax-the-rich business. You've got to structure your life so you have no "earned" income. I'm out of time. I'll explain that. There's a category called earned income versus other kinds of income. Earned income is what the income tax rate is on. That's how "the rich" do it. They don't have "earned" income.
END TRANSCRIPT

You listen to Rush. i don't

And it's the people on this thread confusing income and wealth. But capital gains are reported on income tax filings so the so called wealthy that pay capital gains are paying income taxes.

Maybe you should figure out what you're talking about.

But only when the Cap Gains are REALIZED, and then at a lower rate then wage income. Until the Cap Gain is realized/cashed in, it grows TAX FREE like an unlimited IRA but with no early withdrawal penalty and at a lower tax rate when cashed in no matter what your age. If you lose money on your Cap Gains you get to deduct it from your taxes, so Cap Gains are a risk free investment. And still the wealthy bitch that they are over taxed. They should have their taxes raised 1% automatically every time they bitch!

January 09, 2013
RUSH: Taxing wages at a higher rate than profits is wealth redistribution.

I know how capital gains work. They are still income taxes and are taxed more than some earned income and less than other earned income.

And you really should wonder who is screwing the middle class when the government taxes all the gains in a retirement plan as regular income and not capital gains.

And your max deduction for losses is only 3000 a year or didn't you know that either. You can't take a bath and write off millions in losses.

And I have to ask how much of your day do you spend taking notes on what Rush Limbaugh says?

You can deduct $3,000 each and every year until all your loss is deducted, all loss not deducted in a year is carried over forever until all of it is deducted.

Because they are paying sales taxes, medicare taxes, social security taxes, fees, excise and a bunch of other taxes.

Why is it that plutocrat apologists like to pretend the income tax is the only one we have?

But they dont pay income taxes.
How is it fair for libs to scream that "the rich" ought to pay more of their income when many middle class people and working class people aren't paying anything?

If I receive 10 million dollars a year in capital gains, that is my "income".It is what I show on my tax returns. By law I get to pay a specific tax known as the "capital gains tax". By bribing politicians I get to pay a lower tax on my capital gains than you do on your W2 income. But income is income. W2 or capital gains.

What the fuck is wrong with you people. Just plain stupid or what? That's twice where I've read the capital gains isn't "income". What the fuck you think it is; outgo?

Again, it is only "income" if it is REALIZED, so if your capital assets grew by 10 million and you only cashed in 1 million, you are taxed ONLY on that 1 million and at a lower rate than wages depending on how long you held the capital asset before you realized any income from it. The remaining 9 million are untaxed.

Again, it is the top 10% of WAGE EARNERS, not the top 10% of wealth!
Learn the difference, take a lesson from your MessiahRushie Limbola:

August 7, 2007
CALLER: And, you know, and the way our tax system works, we have an overly complex system, which in and of itself is a problem, but the way our tax system works and the way the tax laws are written, it's based on a few kind of like hinge numbers like adjusted gross income and taxable income, and while the soak the rich -- or however you choose to describe it -- really doesn't come down that way. It really comes down to much lower income levels.

RUSH: It does, exactly, and here's the dirty little secret if you ever to pull it off. It's hard. This is why most people don't understand the tax-the-rich business. You've got to structure your life so you have no "earned" income. I'm out of time. I'll explain that. There's a category called earned income versus other kinds of income. Earned income is what the income tax rate is on. That's how "the rich" do it. They don't have "earned" income.
END TRANSCRIPT

You listen to Rush. i don't

And it's the people on this thread confusing income and wealth. But capital gains are reported on income tax filings so the so called wealthy that pay capital gains are paying income taxes.

Maybe you should figure out what you're talking about.

But only when the Cap Gains are REALIZED, and then at a lower rate then wage income. Until the Cap Gain is realized/cashed in, it grows TAX FREE like an unlimited IRA but with no early withdrawal penalty and at a lower tax rate when cashed in no matter what your age. If you lose money on your Cap Gains you get to deduct it from your taxes, so Cap Gains are a risk free investment. And still the wealthy bitch that they are over taxed. They should have their taxes raised 1% automatically every time they bitch!

January 09, 2013
RUSH: Taxing wages at a higher rate than profits is wealth redistribution.

I know how capital gains work. They are still income taxes and are taxed more than some earned income and less than other earned income.

And you really should wonder who is screwing the middle class when the government taxes all the gains in a retirement plan as regular income and not capital gains.

And your max deduction for losses is only 3000 a year or didn't you know that either. You can't take a bath and write off millions in losses.

And I have to ask how much of your day do you spend taking notes on what Rush Limbaugh says?

You can deduct $3,000 each and every year until all your loss is deducted, all loss not deducted in a year is carried over forever until all of it is deducted.

and how long will it take to deduct millions in losses?

Hint you won't live that long.

Capital loss deductions are small potatoes

Hint, ABOVE any capital gains you made in any year, you get to deduct up to $3,000. But in right wing world, they'll never, ever have cap gains after the $10,000,000 loss, lol

 

[Dad2three]

Once again, if the distribution of wealth is not a zero sum game, why do businesses fight so hard against raising the minimum wage, I mean,

according to you people, it's not going to come of their pockets!

Once again tell me how someone else's net worth affects your net worth.

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.


Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game


Conservative damagogues like Limbaugh have been able to convince the public that the huge incomes of the wealthiest Americans are irrelevant to those who make moderate-to-low incomes. They even suggest that the more money the wealthiest Americans make, the more wealth will trickle down to the lower classes.

If you've swallowed this line of conservative garbage, get ready to vomit. As all conservative economists know, and deny to the public that they know, wealth is a zero-sum game. That is true at both the front end—when income is divided up, and the back end—when it is spent.

The Front End of Zero-Sum: Dividing the Loot

There is only so much corporate income in a given year.


The Zero-sum Nature of economics

 

[Dad2three]

Again, it is the top 10% of WAGE EARNERS, not the top 10% of wealth!
Learn the difference, take a lesson from your MessiahRushie Limbola:

August 7, 2007
CALLER: And, you know, and the way our tax system works, we have an overly complex system, which in and of itself is a problem, but the way our tax system works and the way the tax laws are written, it's based on a few kind of like hinge numbers like adjusted gross income and taxable income, and while the soak the rich -- or however you choose to describe it -- really doesn't come down that way. It really comes down to much lower income levels.

RUSH: It does, exactly, and here's the dirty little secret if you ever to pull it off. It's hard. This is why most people don't understand the tax-the-rich business. You've got to structure your life so you have no "earned" income. I'm out of time. I'll explain that. There's a category called earned income versus other kinds of income. Earned income is what the income tax rate is on. That's how "the rich" do it. They don't have "earned" income.
END TRANSCRIPT

You listen to Rush. i don't

And it's the people on this thread confusing income and wealth. But capital gains are reported on income tax filings so the so called wealthy that pay capital gains are paying income taxes.

Maybe you should figure out what you're talking about.

But only when the Cap Gains are REALIZED, and then at a lower rate then wage income. Until the Cap Gain is realized/cashed in, it grows TAX FREE like an unlimited IRA but with no early withdrawal penalty and at a lower tax rate when cashed in no matter what your age. If you lose money on your Cap Gains you get to deduct it from your taxes, so Cap Gains are a risk free investment. And still the wealthy bitch that they are over taxed. They should have their taxes raised 1% automatically every time they bitch!

January 09, 2013
RUSH: Taxing wages at a higher rate than profits is wealth redistribution.

I know how capital gains work. They are still income taxes and are taxed more than some earned income and less than other earned income.

And you really should wonder who is screwing the middle class when the government taxes all the gains in a retirement plan as regular income and not capital gains.

And your max deduction for losses is only 3000 a year or didn't you know that either. You can't take a bath and write off millions in losses.

And I have to ask how much of your day do you spend taking notes on what Rush Limbaugh says?

Actual losses ABOVE your capital gains? lol

Realized losses. at least get the lingo right.

And realized losses and realized gains can happen in the same tax year.

See if you can figure that out.

Oh I understand it low informed one, but unlike you I am not distorting the $3,000 loss carryover limits ....

 

[Dad2three]

False....

every two bit banana republic has a concentration of wealth in the top percentage of society.

so yes, what you're saying is a proven lie.

So you think wealth is finite, then?

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game


Conservative damagogues like Limbaugh have been able to convince the public that the huge incomes of the wealthiest Americans are irrelevant to those who make moderate-to-low incomes. They even suggest that the more money the wealthiest Americans make, the more wealth will trickle down to the lower classes.

If you've swallowed this line of conservative garbage, get ready to vomit. As all conservative economists know, and deny to the public that they know, wealth is a zero-sum game. That is true at both the front end—when income is divided up, and the back end—when it is spent.

The Front End of Zero-Sum: Dividing the Loot

There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. Profit equals income minus expenses. No more, no less. Subtract the right side of the equation from the left side and the answer is always zero. Hence the term, “zero-sum.”

The Zero-sum Nature of economics

Yeah that works if you only live for one year but most people live a lot longer than that.

There is no limit to how high your net worth can be and no one is stopping you from increasing yours.

To bad most credible economists agree with me and think you are full of it!

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory

The conclusion?

Lowering the tax rates on the wealthy and top earners in America do not appear to have any impact on the nation’s economic growth.

This paragraph from the report says it all—

“The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.”

These three sentences do nothing less than blow apart the central tenet of modern conservative economic theory, confirming that lowering tax rates on the wealthy does nothing to grow the economy while doing a great deal to concentrate more wealth in the pockets of those at the very top of the income chain.

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory-GOP Suppresses Study - Forbes

What does my statement about net worth have to do with any of the drivel you just posted?

Now tell me who is stopping you from increasing your net worth?

Well since you keep positing the pie is infinite, and yet in any given year it's not, and as Adam Smith correctly points out, wealth is the yearly income of a nation, you are conflating net worth with wealth!


And conservatives argues tax increases on the 'job creators' will not trickle down to the workers, though the study and history say cons are wrong!

 

[Dad2three]

No need in chronicling the various left-wing memes, we see them daily being presented as "arguments" for justifying this insidious war against the wealthy. Form the anti-capitalists bemoaning "multi-national corporations" to the Occutards who seem to think "Wall Street" is this lumbering out-of-control monster that is gobbling up everyone's wealth except for the wealthiest. Oh... and those evil "bankers" who simply have all this unlimited supply of money and won't willingly hand it out to deadbeat liberals because they are just mean and greedy.

On and on, these people have convinced themselves that it's a great idea and 'noble cause' to wage all-out war on the rich. It is arguably the most stupid political idea ever in the history of mankind, and I am here to tell you why.

The first and foremost reason is, it's a losing strategy. In fact, it is worse of a boondoggle than Vietnam ever could have hoped to be. It's literally a war that cannot ever be won. Rich people, it just so happens, are very smart when it comes to their wealth. This fact of the matter has prompted the formation of such sayings as... "A fool and his money are soon parted." Their ability to be one step ahead of you is astonishing and impressive to say the least. No matter how much you may believe that we can use the forces of government to confiscate the wealth of the rich, it ain't ever going to happen. The more you try, the more you fail.

What you manage to do in the process is bomb your own facilities and resources. You plant land mines for unsuspecting middle-income people trying to obtain wealth through small business. You rig booby-traps for poor people who are struggling to get to middle-income with better jobs. The so-called "rich" are rarely ever affected by your actions. They simply remain a few moves ahead of you, and we never touch their wealth.

Okay, so we're going to "punish" these wealthy people and corporations by burdening them with high income taxes and corporate tax, more regulations and fines, more penalties and fees... but it never works. Tax the rich person's earned income more and they stop earning income, because they are rich and don't have to earn income anymore. Make it harder for a corporation and they close the doors or move someplace else. More regulations, mandates, burdens... they simply eliminate jobs. Obamacare alone is responsible for trillions of dollars in potential raises and bonuses for the middle-income that will never be realized now. You see, you gifted to them the ultimate excuse... "no pay raise this year... Obamacare!"

Wall Street is a location in New York City, it's where capitalists go to trade public stocks with each other in our free market capitalist system. All the crap we hear about Wall Street would lead one to believe a silver stake is needed to kill this horrible evil creature who is destroying us all. If we don't have this location in NYC where capitalists can freely trade their public stocks, what do you think will take the place of it? Because, capitalists are still going to be capitalists, it's what they do. So think about that for a moment, and explain to me what you envision the alternative would be to a Wall Street?

Okay, so we're going to "punish" all these greedy capitalists on Wall Street by implementing all sorts of trade restrictions and penalties, heap more hassle and burden on them to prevent them capitalizing TOO much... Wrong! What you are going to do is force capitalists away from your market and allow foreign markets to obtain a portion of their wealth instead. *You see, as much as you may hate the rich, other countries seem to really LIKE the rich. (*I mention this for the sheeple out there who like to follow what other countries do.)

For the past 8 years of this de facto "war against the rich" being waged by the left, we've managed to keep the economy floating by borrowing and printing more money. We've infused trillions of dollars so far, and will continue to do this as long as Obama and the Democrats are in charge politically. Now this is all money we will have to repay at some point, but for now, it's keeping the economy of America from going tits up. As this has happened, the screws have been tightened on the 'rich greedy capitalists' but the results are not forthcoming. In fact, they are moving in the opposite direction rather rapidly. Wealthy capitalists are at least two moves ahead at all times. It's how they got to be rich, for the most part.

So, ostensibly, you are waging a war you can't win against an enemy who cannot be defeated. In the process, you are destroying yourself and your only remaining resources. You will only be able to borrow and print for so long to float the economy. The only proven thing in the history of man to ever recover any failing economy is free market capitalism. Some will brazenly claim "Keynesianism" has worked, but the only times where Keynes policies ever were successful, were under a ripe and ready capitalist economy. You can't have Keynesianism without Capitalism, the numbers simply don't work.

Oh, but what about the terrible growing disparity in wealth? Well, what about that? Okay, imagine a marathon race... this represents the acquisition of wealth. In the marathon are competitors who are well-trained athletes, who know how to win, who have trained hard to win, and will ultimately be in a position to win. Also, we have some couch potatoes who have never had much interest in the race, they are just there for the free gatorade. Then there are a whole bunch of people in the middle, who are not couch potatoes or athletes, but honestly hope to be able to compete and do well in the race. Now.... logically speaking, who is going to likely lead this race and extend their lead as the race progresses? Is there ever going to be a time where the couch potatoes are gaining more ground on the athletes and catching up, or are the athletes always going to be pulling away?

The point of the analogy is, the wealthy naturally become wealthier at a faster rate than the poor. So, this "gap" is normal in a free capitalist system and it's normal for the "gap" to continue to grow. Now, what can be done about this? Well, one thing that doesn't ever work is to hobble the athlete so the couch potatoes can catch up, because the couch potato is only interested in free gatorade, they had just as soon not race at all. The best alternative to deal with this growing disparity is to motivate the couch potato. Get them into the race. They may not ever win, they may not ever catch the athlete, but if they are at least competing, they are improving the situation and limiting the growing disparity. At the same time, you encourage the athletes to mentor the competitors in the middle who earnestly want to learn to be a better athlete. There are any number of free market ways to do this, we just need to explore those possibilities. But we first need to take the ball and chain off the legs of the athletes and admit this is a stupid idea.

Or now.... We CAN do as Chairman Mao tried to do in China... Gather all the rich greedy capitalists in front of an open ditch and put a bullet in their head, confiscate their assets and try to implement anti-capitalism as a legitimate form of government. Last time, it resulted in 70 million deaths and still didn't work.

I guess the dopey OP didn't get the memo --

Sorry, Folks, Rich People Don't Create The Jobs

So, if rich people don't create the jobs, what does?

A healthy economic ecosystem — one in which most participants (especially the middle class) have plenty of money to spend. This ecosystem starts with the company's customers.

The company's customers buy the company's products. This, in turn, channels money to the company and allows the company to hire employees to produce, sell, and service those products. If the company's customers and potential customers go broke, the demand for the company's products will collapse. And the company's jobs will disappear, regardless of what the entrepreneurs or investors do.

Yes, entrepreneurs are an important part of the company-creation process. And, yes, so are investors, who risk capital in the hope of earning returns. But, ultimately, whether a new company continues growing and creates self-sustaining jobs is a function of the company's customers' ability to pay for the company's products, not the entrepreneur's vision or risk-tolerance or the investor's capital.

Saying "rich people create the jobs" is like saying that seeds create trees. Seeds do not create trees. Seeds start trees. But what actually grows and sustains trees is the combination of the DNA in the seed and the soil, sunshine, water, atmosphere, nutrients, and other factors in the environment that nurture them. If you think seeds create trees, try planting seeds in an inhospitable environment. Plant a seed in a desert or on Mars, and the seed won't create anything. It will die.

HMM a poor person never gave me a job

Only by buying the product or service. Does that help you understand?

 

[Dad2three]

Yeah that works if you only live for one year but most people live a lot longer than that.

There is no limit to how high your net worth can be and no one is stopping you from increasing yours.

To bad most credible economists agree with me and think you are full of it!

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory

The conclusion?

Lowering the tax rates on the wealthy and top earners in America do not appear to have any impact on the nation’s economic growth.

This paragraph from the report says it all—

“The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.”

These three sentences do nothing less than blow apart the central tenet of modern conservative economic theory, confirming that lowering tax rates on the wealthy does nothing to grow the economy while doing a great deal to concentrate more wealth in the pockets of those at the very top of the income chain.

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory-GOP Suppresses Study - Forbes

What does my statement about net worth have to do with any of the drivel you just posted?

Now tell me who is stopping you from increasing your net worth?

You must be. If you have more money, someone else must have less. Right? And if you have more then you must have exploited someone or fucked them over to get it.
Libecon 101.

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.

How did you make a million?

Did you just take it by force?
Did people just give it to you for nothing in return?

If a guy you don't know gets a million dollar raise next year that means you will make less?

If a guy you don't know sells his house and increases his net worth by a quarter million your net worth goes down?

If you pay off all your credit cards next year and your net worth goes up whose goes down?

Doesn't matter HOW I made it, the fact is money IS finite, like wealth


Try as you might, you can't get past basic math

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing

 

[The Rabbi]

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game


Conservative damagogues like Limbaugh have been able to convince the public that the huge incomes of the wealthiest Americans are irrelevant to those who make moderate-to-low incomes. They even suggest that the more money the wealthiest Americans make, the more wealth will trickle down to the lower classes.

If you've swallowed this line of conservative garbage, get ready to vomit. As all conservative economists know, and deny to the public that they know, wealth is a zero-sum game. That is true at both the front end—when income is divided up, and the back end—when it is spent.

The Front End of Zero-Sum: Dividing the Loot

There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. Profit equals income minus expenses. No more, no less. Subtract the right side of the equation from the left side and the answer is always zero. Hence the term, “zero-sum.”

The Zero-sum Nature of economics

Yeah that works if you only live for one year but most people live a lot longer than that.

There is no limit to how high your net worth can be and no one is stopping you from increasing yours.

To bad most credible economists agree with me and think you are full of it!

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory

The conclusion?

Lowering the tax rates on the wealthy and top earners in America do not appear to have any impact on the nation’s economic growth.

This paragraph from the report says it all—

“The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.”

These three sentences do nothing less than blow apart the central tenet of modern conservative economic theory, confirming that lowering tax rates on the wealthy does nothing to grow the economy while doing a great deal to concentrate more wealth in the pockets of those at the very top of the income chain.

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory-GOP Suppresses Study - Forbes

What does my statement about net worth have to do with any of the drivel you just posted?

Now tell me who is stopping you from increasing your net worth?

You must be. If you have more money, someone else must have less. Right? And if you have more then you must have exploited someone or fucked them over to get it.
Libecon 101.

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.

Darn. I posted that as a parody. But here is someone who actually believes it.
Yes, you are right. That is why the GDP in this country has not changed one bit since the American Revolution. It's everyone just trading money around, no wealth created.
The stupid just hurts around here.

 

[JoeNormal]

Here's a little food for thought for those of you who still think there are no limits to growth.

Limits to Growth vindicated World headed towards economic environmental collapse RT News

 

[The Rabbi]

Here's a little food for thought for those of you who still think there are no limits to growth.

Limits to Growth vindicated World headed towards economic environmental collapse RT News

Now you are introducing limits on natural resources as equivalent to wealth. The fallacies just pile up here.
NEver mind the limits to growth bullshit was thoroughly discredited. People are living longer, living healthier, living with more than they were 40 years ago.

 

[Dad2three]

Yeah that works if you only live for one year but most people live a lot longer than that.

There is no limit to how high your net worth can be and no one is stopping you from increasing yours.

To bad most credible economists agree with me and think you are full of it!

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory

The conclusion?

Lowering the tax rates on the wealthy and top earners in America do not appear to have any impact on the nation’s economic growth.

This paragraph from the report says it all—

“The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.”

These three sentences do nothing less than blow apart the central tenet of modern conservative economic theory, confirming that lowering tax rates on the wealthy does nothing to grow the economy while doing a great deal to concentrate more wealth in the pockets of those at the very top of the income chain.

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory-GOP Suppresses Study - Forbes

What does my statement about net worth have to do with any of the drivel you just posted?

Now tell me who is stopping you from increasing your net worth?

You must be. If you have more money, someone else must have less. Right? And if you have more then you must have exploited someone or fucked them over to get it.
Libecon 101.

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.

Darn. I posted that as a parody. But here is someone who actually believes it.
Yes, you are right. That is why the GDP in this country has not changed one bit since the American Revolution. It's everyone just trading money around, no wealth created.
The stupid just hurts around here.

Got it, you are an ignorant tool who wants to conflate things. Let me help you Bubba

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game


Conservative damagogues like Limbaugh have been able to convince the public that the huge incomes of the wealthiest Americans are irrelevant to those who make moderate-to-low incomes. They even suggest that the more money the wealthiest Americans make, the more wealth will trickle down to the lower classes.

If you've swallowed this line of conservative garbage, get ready to vomit. As all conservative economists know, and deny to the public that they know, wealth is a zero-sum game. That is true at both the front end—when income is divided up, and the back end—when it is spent.

The Front End of Zero-Sum: Dividing the Loot

There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. Profit equals income minus expenses. No more, no less. Subtract the right side of the equation from the left side and the answer is always zero. Hence the term, “zero-sum.”
The Zero-sum Nature of economics

 

[Darkwind]

Doesn't matter HOW I made it, the fact is money IS finite, like wealth


Try as you might, you can't get past basic math

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing

So speaks the moron....

If wealth did not grow, we'd all still be fighting over the first pig to be traded for an ear of corn.

You're too stupid to understand the difference between wealth and money.

BTW....You Boi has been printing money like its going out of style for 6 years.

Now go bother your mother for some cookies.

 

[The Rabbi]

Doesn't matter HOW I made it, the fact is money IS finite, like wealth


Try as you might, you can't get past basic math

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing

So speaks the moron....

If wealth did not grow, we'd all still be fighting over the first pig to be traded for an ear of corn.

You're too stupid to understand the difference between wealth and money.

BTW....You Boi has been printing money like its going out of style for 6 years.

Now go bother your mother for some cookies.

Amazingly they cannot grasp this simple concept. There is no more land than there was 200 years ago. There is pretty much no more gold and silver than there was 100 years ago. And yet the country by every measure is far wealthier than it was even 30 years ago. How is this possible if wealth is not only finite but fixed? They can't explain it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Zero-sum Nature of economics

I've told you before that I won't debate the moronic cut & paste from the hate sites.

That cut & paste is a level of stupidity beyond the pale. It deserves and will get no consideration at all.

 

[Contumacious]

In 2008, we unleashed the power of capitalism and it collapsed the economy

In 2008 , you fuckers released welfarism , aka "compassionate conservatism" and militarism aka, the UNNecessary invasion of Iraq and AfPak.

Welfarism + Militarism = Fascism

.

Bullshit, it was WORLD WIDE BANKSTER CREATED CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. One Dubya cheered on in the US and removed regulators from the beat EVEN AFTER BEING WARNED BY THE FBI IN 2004 OF AN EPIDEMIC THAT COULD RIVAL THE S&L CRISIS!!


Regulators and policymakers enabled this process at virtually every turn. Part of the reason they failed to understand the housing bubble was willful ignorance: they bought into the argument that the market would equilibrate itself. In particular, financial actors and regulatory officials both believed that secondary and tertiary markets could effectively control risk through pricing.


http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf

A response by a low life UNEMPLOYED retard whose credit score is negative 500 who nevertheless hopes to buy a West Palm mansion thanks to the fascistic
Community Reinvestment Act .

Stupid son-of-bitch.

.

 

[JoeNormal]

Here's a little food for thought for those of you who still think there are no limits to growth.

Limits to Growth vindicated World headed towards economic environmental collapse RT News

Now you are introducing limits on natural resources as equivalent to wealth. The fallacies just pile up here.
NEver mind the limits to growth bullshit was thoroughly discredited. People are living longer, living healthier, living with more than they were 40 years ago.

Limits to Growth was incorrectly dismissed as a new study by the University of Melbourne has shown. The analysis that was conducted around 40 years ago has shown greater correlation with current trends than any other.

As for your bullshit about MY fallacies, the innovation required for a new line of cell phones does indeed indicate increased wealth but will offer little comfort in a world in which agriculture, energy and water depletion are the new norms.