Wealthy Americans and Taxes

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear can you tell us what your point is? Do you know?

You're the one who tried to make one. And failed miserably by the way.
Bitch...

so you had no point?

You sure as fuck didnt,other than to show yourself to be a jealous loser.
I mean you're the one who started the shit,not sure why but ya did.....so in conclusion? Go fuck yourself.

fool without IQ for substance turns to violence like an animal.

Says the moron who doesn't know how to use capital letters......
Violence serves a very important role in society,it teaches idiots like yourself not to fuck with their betters.

violent liberal animal without IQ for substance

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

You're the one who tried to make one. And failed miserably by the way.
Bitch...

so you had no point?

You sure as fuck didnt,other than to show yourself to be a jealous loser.
I mean you're the one who started the shit,not sure why but ya did.....so in conclusion? Go fuck yourself.

fool without IQ for substance turns to violence like an animal.

Says the moron who doesn't know how to use capital letters......
Violence serves a very important role in society,it teaches idiots like yourself not to fuck with their betters.

violent liberal animal without IQ for substance

I'm so far right I walk with a lean ya dumbfuck.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

so you had no point?

You sure as fuck didnt,other than to show yourself to be a jealous loser.
I mean you're the one who started the shit,not sure why but ya did.....so in conclusion? Go fuck yourself.

fool without IQ for substance turns to violence like an animal.

Says the moron who doesn't know how to use capital letters......
Violence serves a very important role in society,it teaches idiots like yourself not to fuck with their betters.

violent liberal animal without IQ for substance

I'm so far right I walk with a lean ya dumbfuck.

violent animal without IQ for substance

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

You sure as fuck didnt,other than to show yourself to be a jealous loser.
I mean you're the one who started the shit,not sure why but ya did.....so in conclusion? Go fuck yourself.

fool without IQ for substance turns to violence like an animal.

Says the moron who doesn't know how to use capital letters......
Violence serves a very important role in society,it teaches idiots like yourself not to fuck with their betters.

violent liberal animal without IQ for substance

I'm so far right I walk with a lean ya dumbfuck.

violent animal without IQ for substance

Still haven't learned how to use caps yet I see.
Genius,pure genius...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

fool without IQ for substance turns to violence like an animal.

Says the moron who doesn't know how to use capital letters......
Violence serves a very important role in society,it teaches idiots like yourself not to fuck with their betters.

violent liberal animal without IQ for substance

I'm so far right I walk with a lean ya dumbfuck.

violent animal without IQ for substance

Still haven't learned how to use caps yet I see.
Genius,pure genius...

without IQ for substance trys to change subject to caps???

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Says the moron who doesn't know how to use capital letters......
Violence serves a very important role in society,it teaches idiots like yourself not to fuck with their betters.

violent liberal animal without IQ for substance

I'm so far right I walk with a lean ya dumbfuck.

violent animal without IQ for substance

Still haven't learned how to use caps yet I see.
Genius,pure genius...

without IQ for substance trys to change subject to caps???

dear, wealth is good for survival, fun, education, charity, politics, defense. To belittle it is nothing but pure ignorance or a way to excuse your failure to gain it.


Your post. Explain it genius.
You fucked up and called me a liberal and now you're trying to weasel your way out of it.
Admit fault and we can get past it. Or you can keep being a dick. Doesnt matter to me one way or another.

 

[OnePercenter]

1) notice the way the idiot liberal had to change the subject rather than respond directly to my post about the actual nature of supply side economics which I reduced to a kindergarten liberal level for him. .

2) you're like a Nazi in your passion for ignorance and disregard for the truth. You've learned several times that liberal unions taxes deficits and attack on the family and schools destroyed the middle class.

More bloviating?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

1) notice the way the idiot liberal had to change the subject rather than respond directly to my post about the actual nature of supply side economics which I reduced to a kindergarten liberal level for him. .

2) you're like a Nazi in your passion for ignorance and disregard for the truth. You've learned several times that liberal unions taxes deficits and attack on the family and schools destroyed the middle class.

More bloviating?

1) notice the way the idiot liberal had to change the subject rather than respond directly to my post about the actual nature of supply side economics which I reduced to a kindergarten liberal level for him. .

2) you're like a Nazi in your passion for ignorance and disregard for the truth. You've learned several times that liberal unions taxes deficits and attack on the family and schools destroyed the middle class.

 

[Dad2three]

Wealthy Americans have been cheating on their taxes for ages even as they lie about what they pay.

Funny, the average American is stuck with payroll taxes that they cannot really cheat on.

Fair?

Fair?

Yeah, all we ever hear about is how unfair it is to tax the wealthy who cheat.

Have you ever been wealthy? Then shut the fuck up! You have no clue what you are talking about.

Instead of being envious of the wealthy, why don't you thank them for paying huge taxes, buying lots of stuff, and creating jobs.

Yeah, we see how the 'job creators' work, lol

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.”

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

 

[Dad2three]

Have you ever been wealthy? Then shut the fuck up! You have no clue what you are talking about.

Instead of being envious of the wealthy, why don't you thank them for paying huge taxes, buying lots of stuff, and creating jobs.

I am wealthy. I've got news for you. We pay less effective tax than you, we don't buy lot's of stuff, and we don't create jobs, the middle class creates jobs.

A. You're full of shit.

B. The top ten percent of income earners pay over 70% of U.S. income taxes.

The rich pay majority of U.S. income taxes - Mar. 12 2013

AND? Income tax revenues are about 42% of federal revenues???

 

[Dad2three]

Who has the right to determine how mush is enough? O'bama? "Maybe you have earned enough" Government? The only legitimate concern of the government is how much you earned to determine how much you owe in taxes. Do you remember when the liberals (democrats) decided to gouge (tax) yachts at a exorbitant rate? What was the result? Less tax revenue, yacht builders closing, many Joe six-packs losing their jobs. Maybe it time to put a glass ceiling on taxation, 50% total of all taxes sounds good. Beyond that level the payee may just decide it not worth the effort. We should also put a floor on taxation. There is no free lunch, everybody should pay a share. While I certainly have little sympathy for someone being wealthy, I see no rationale for progressive taxation. That is simply greed, avarice, and envy. Our current system seems to punish success and reward failure. Great wealth is worthless if it is not used, if it is used it creates jobs, businesses, economic activity. That benefits all of us. If it is confiscated (taxed at high rates) it is removed from the market that feeds us all. Peace, Love, and Faith, Pappadave

Poor Americans Pay Double The State, Local Tax Rates Of Top One Percent

Nearly every U.S. state taxes the poor more than the rich, according to a 2009 report by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. Overall, the poorest 20 percent of households paid an average 10.9 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes in 2007, while the top 1 percent on average paid just 5.2 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes, according to the study.

Poor Americans Pay Double The State Local Tax Rates Of Top One Percent


It's the Inequality, Stupid


Winners Take All
The superrich have grabbed the bulk of the past three decades' gains.

It s the Inequality Stupid Mother Jones

80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Who Rules America Wealth Income and Power

The middle class has been eviscerated


"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." - Louis D. Brandeis



Why Thomas Jefferson Favored Profit Sharing
By David Cay Johnston

The founders, despite decades of rancorous disagreements about almost every other aspect of their grand experiment, agreed that America would survive and thrive only if there was widespread ownership of land and businesses.

George Washington, nine months before his inauguration as the first president, predicted that America "will be the most favorable country of any kind in the world for persons of industry and frugality, possessed of moderate capital, to inhabit." And, he continued, "it will not be less advantageous to the happiness of the lowest class of people, because of the equal distribution of property."

The second president, John Adams, feared "monopolies of land" would destroy the nation and that a business aristocracy born of inequality would manipulate voters, creating "a system of subordination to all... The capricious will of one or a very few" dominating the rest. Unless constrained, Adams wrote, "the rich and the proud" would wield economic and political power that "will destroy all the equality and liberty, with the consent and acclamations of the people themselves."

James Madison, the Constitution's main author, described inequality as an evil, saying government should prevent "an immoderate, and especially unmerited, accumulation of riches." He favored "the silent operation of laws which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigents towards a state of comfort."


Alexander Hamilton, who championed manufacturing and banking as the first Treasury secretary, also argued for widespread ownership of assets, warning in 1782 that, "whenever a discretionary power is lodged in any set of men over the property of their neighbors, they will abuse it."

Late in life, Adams, pessimistic about whether the republic would endure, wrote that the goal of the democratic government was not to help the wealthy and powerful but to achieve "the greatest happiness for the greatest number."



http://www.newsweek.com/2014/02/07/why-thomas-jefferson-favored-profit-sharing-245454.html

 

[Dad2three]

Who has the right to determine how mush is enough? O'bama? "Maybe you have earned enough" Government? The only legitimate concern of the government is how much you earned to determine how much you owe in taxes. Do you remember when the liberals (democrats) decided to gouge (tax) yachts at a exorbitant rate? What was the result? Less tax revenue, yacht builders closing, many Joe six-packs losing their jobs. Maybe it time to put a glass ceiling on taxation, 50% total of all taxes sounds good. Beyond that level the payee may just decide it not worth the effort. We should also put a floor on taxation. There is no free lunch, everybody should pay a share. While I certainly have little sympathy for someone being wealthy, I see no rationale for progressive taxation. That is simply greed, avarice, and envy. Our current system seems to punish success and reward failure. Great wealth is worthless if it is not used, if it is used it creates jobs, businesses, economic activity. That benefits all of us. If it is confiscated (taxed at high rates) it is removed from the market that feeds us all. Peace, Love, and Faith, Pappadave

Because under current tax rates, there's no reason for the 1% to not continue to pay themselves hundreds of times what the average family earns, even if some of the loopholes go away.

The reason we had more equality of income back in the 1950's through the 1970's is that the 1% couldn't keep the money they gave themselves. When high earner's income went into the 70% margin rate (or the 91% rate under Ike), they were simply paying more taxes. No board of directors would okay increases in CEO wages because most of it would go to the IRS. Cap gains rates were also higher. Paying yourself a big salary or bonus was worthless if you couldn't keep it.

The problem with the conservative movement in America is that it is based on bigotry, hatred, and, greed. Above all, greed. Money is their god. They worship money and the holders of it and despise those who don't have it.



"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it."

Thomas Jefferson

 

[Judicial review]

Who has the right to determine how mush is enough? O'bama? "Maybe you have earned enough" Government? The only legitimate concern of the government is how much you earned to determine how much you owe in taxes. Do you remember when the liberals (democrats) decided to gouge (tax) yachts at a exorbitant rate? What was the result? Less tax revenue, yacht builders closing, many Joe six-packs losing their jobs. Maybe it time to put a glass ceiling on taxation, 50% total of all taxes sounds good. Beyond that level the payee may just decide it not worth the effort. We should also put a floor on taxation. There is no free lunch, everybody should pay a share. While I certainly have little sympathy for someone being wealthy, I see no rationale for progressive taxation. That is simply greed, avarice, and envy. Our current system seems to punish success and reward failure. Great wealth is worthless if it is not used, if it is used it creates jobs, businesses, economic activity. That benefits all of us. If it is confiscated (taxed at high rates) it is removed from the market that feeds us all. Peace, Love, and Faith, Pappadave

Because under current tax rates, there's no reason for the 1% to not continue to pay themselves hundreds of times what the average family earns, even if some of the loopholes go away.

The reason we had more equality of income back in the 1950's through the 1970's is that the 1% couldn't keep the money they gave themselves. When high earner's income went into the 70% margin rate (or the 91% rate under Ike), they were simply paying more taxes. No board of directors would okay increases in CEO wages because most of it would go to the IRS. Cap gains rates were also higher. Paying yourself a big salary or bonus was worthless if you couldn't keep it.

The problem with the conservative movement in America is that it is based on bigotry, hatred, and, greed. Above all, greed. Money is their god. They worship money and the holders of it and despise those who don't have it.



"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it."

Thomas Jefferson

Conservative? LOL better double check that if I were you.

 

[Dad2three]

Who has the right to determine how mush is enough? O'bama? "Maybe you have earned enough" Government? The only legitimate concern of the government is how much you earned to determine how much you owe in taxes. Do you remember when the liberals (democrats) decided to gouge (tax) yachts at a exorbitant rate? What was the result? Less tax revenue, yacht builders closing, many Joe six-packs losing their jobs. Maybe it time to put a glass ceiling on taxation, 50% total of all taxes sounds good. Beyond that level the payee may just decide it not worth the effort. We should also put a floor on taxation. There is no free lunch, everybody should pay a share. While I certainly have little sympathy for someone being wealthy, I see no rationale for progressive taxation. That is simply greed, avarice, and envy. Our current system seems to punish success and reward failure. Great wealth is worthless if it is not used, if it is used it creates jobs, businesses, economic activity. That benefits all of us. If it is confiscated (taxed at high rates) it is removed from the market that feeds us all. Peace, Love, and Faith, Pappadave

Because under current tax rates, there's no reason for the 1% to not continue to pay themselves hundreds of times what the average family earns, even if some of the loopholes go away.

The reason we had more equality of income back in the 1950's through the 1970's is that the 1% couldn't keep the money they gave themselves. When high earner's income went into the 70% margin rate (or the 91% rate under Ike), they were simply paying more taxes. No board of directors would okay increases in CEO wages because most of it would go to the IRS. Cap gains rates were also higher. Paying yourself a big salary or bonus was worthless if you couldn't keep it.

The problem with the conservative movement in America is that it is based on bigotry, hatred, and, greed. Above all, greed. Money is their god. They worship money and the holders of it and despise those who don't have it.



"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it."

Thomas Jefferson

Conservative? LOL better double check that if I were you.

Yeah, it's always the libs fighting equal equal rights and justice right?

 

[Judicial review]

Who has the right to determine how mush is enough? O'bama? "Maybe you have earned enough" Government? The only legitimate concern of the government is how much you earned to determine how much you owe in taxes. Do you remember when the liberals (democrats) decided to gouge (tax) yachts at a exorbitant rate? What was the result? Less tax revenue, yacht builders closing, many Joe six-packs losing their jobs. Maybe it time to put a glass ceiling on taxation, 50% total of all taxes sounds good. Beyond that level the payee may just decide it not worth the effort. We should also put a floor on taxation. There is no free lunch, everybody should pay a share. While I certainly have little sympathy for someone being wealthy, I see no rationale for progressive taxation. That is simply greed, avarice, and envy. Our current system seems to punish success and reward failure. Great wealth is worthless if it is not used, if it is used it creates jobs, businesses, economic activity. That benefits all of us. If it is confiscated (taxed at high rates) it is removed from the market that feeds us all. Peace, Love, and Faith, Pappadave

Because under current tax rates, there's no reason for the 1% to not continue to pay themselves hundreds of times what the average family earns, even if some of the loopholes go away.

The reason we had more equality of income back in the 1950's through the 1970's is that the 1% couldn't keep the money they gave themselves. When high earner's income went into the 70% margin rate (or the 91% rate under Ike), they were simply paying more taxes. No board of directors would okay increases in CEO wages because most of it would go to the IRS. Cap gains rates were also higher. Paying yourself a big salary or bonus was worthless if you couldn't keep it.

The problem with the conservative movement in America is that it is based on bigotry, hatred, and, greed. Above all, greed. Money is their god. They worship money and the holders of it and despise those who don't have it.



"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it."

Thomas Jefferson

Conservative? LOL better double check that if I were you.

Yeah, it's always the libs fighting equal equal rights and justice right?

You can only be fighting for equal rights if it's the constitution you are fighting for. There bad business owners and there's good business owners and the amount of their wealth that they put into hiering and payroll has nothing to do with it. It's how they treat there employees and if they pay salary according to market rate and living costs determination in their states.

I'm a top 1% business owner. I ran my company from age 18 when i took it over till just a few months ago and I only go to board meetings. I'm basically retired. I averaged about 1-3 million a year in the last 5 years from this year. My company if I sold it would net me over 50 million. that would be my asking prince based on yearly profit. I hired for 3 weeks of every month, and I gave out bonuses that were unexpected sometimes in excess of $50,000 to employees only making 100,000 a year. Lots of money to be made in my franchise. There's a reason why Warren Buffet the liberal Billionaire owns the parent company and has for over 50 years. At Christmas I gave away free expensive gifts like free laptops, big HD new TV's, gift cards in the thousands, and had a company free dinner at a resturant all rented out with free drinks at open bar. I made many people millionaires not with my money, but by leading by example if they were willing to work hard i rewarded them. This is all ontop of the free trips from the parent company.

I consider myself a very good business owner because i took care of my employees. Now, let me give you the other example of a bad business owner and my right leaning buddies will not like this....

Mitt Romney with Bain capital. That company invests in other companies and takes a percentage of the profits. However, even when a company was profitable even though it was only a little profitable, Bain would take it over and suck it dry and fire everybody in it. See I couldn't do that,. My thinking is if they are making a profit they are doing what businesses are supposed to do and they deserve more time to increase it. Bain just like other investment companies are greedy. They care only about the profit instead of the companies employees. It should be the other way around. This is why Romney will never get my vote and hasn't. He will NEVER be able to level with the average American. therefore he wont ever win.

 

[Dad2three]

Who has the right to determine how mush is enough? O'bama? "Maybe you have earned enough" Government? The only legitimate concern of the government is how much you earned to determine how much you owe in taxes. Do you remember when the liberals (democrats) decided to gouge (tax) yachts at a exorbitant rate? What was the result? Less tax revenue, yacht builders closing, many Joe six-packs losing their jobs. Maybe it time to put a glass ceiling on taxation, 50% total of all taxes sounds good. Beyond that level the payee may just decide it not worth the effort. We should also put a floor on taxation. There is no free lunch, everybody should pay a share. While I certainly have little sympathy for someone being wealthy, I see no rationale for progressive taxation. That is simply greed, avarice, and envy. Our current system seems to punish success and reward failure. Great wealth is worthless if it is not used, if it is used it creates jobs, businesses, economic activity. That benefits all of us. If it is confiscated (taxed at high rates) it is removed from the market that feeds us all. Peace, Love, and Faith, Pappadave

Because under current tax rates, there's no reason for the 1% to not continue to pay themselves hundreds of times what the average family earns, even if some of the loopholes go away.

The reason we had more equality of income back in the 1950's through the 1970's is that the 1% couldn't keep the money they gave themselves. When high earner's income went into the 70% margin rate (or the 91% rate under Ike), they were simply paying more taxes. No board of directors would okay increases in CEO wages because most of it would go to the IRS. Cap gains rates were also higher. Paying yourself a big salary or bonus was worthless if you couldn't keep it.

The problem with the conservative movement in America is that it is based on bigotry, hatred, and, greed. Above all, greed. Money is their god. They worship money and the holders of it and despise those who don't have it.



"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it."

Thomas Jefferson

Conservative? LOL better double check that if I were you.

Yeah, it's always the libs fighting equal equal rights and justice right?

You can only be fighting for equal rights if it's the constitution you are fighting for. There bad business owners and there's good business owners and the amount of their wealth that they put into hiering and payroll has nothing to do with it. It's how they treat there employees and if they pay salary according to market rate and living costs determination in their states.

I'm a top 1% business owner. I ran my company from age 18 when i took it over till just a few months ago and I only go to board meetings. I'm basically retired. I averaged about 1-3 million a year in the last 5 years from this year. My company if I sold it would net me over 50 million. that would be my asking prince based on yearly profit. I hired for 3 weeks of every month, and I gave out bonuses that were unexpected sometimes in excess of $50,000 to employees only making 100,000 a year. Lots of money to be made in my franchise. There's a reason why Warren Buffet the liberal Billionaire owns the parent company and has for over 50 years. At Christmas I gave away free expensive gifts like free laptops, big HD new TV's, gift cards in the thousands, and had a company free dinner at a resturant all rented out with free drinks at open bar. I made many people millionaires not with my money, but by leading by example if they were willing to work hard i rewarded them. This is all ontop of the free trips from the parent company.

I consider myself a very good business owner because i took care of my employees. Now, let me give you the other example of a bad business owner and my right leaning buddies will not like this....

Mitt Romney with Bain capital. That company invests in other companies and takes a percentage of the profits. However, even when a company was profitable even though it was only a little profitable, Bain would take it over and suck it dry and fire everybody in it. See I couldn't do that,. My thinking is if they are making a profit they are doing what businesses are supposed to do and they deserve more time to increase it. Bain just like other investment companies are greedy. They care only about the profit instead of the companies employees. It should be the other way around. This is why Romney will never get my vote and hasn't. He will NEVER be able to level with the average American. therefore he wont ever win.

The past 30+ years of changes has rewarded the Bain's/Walmart/Koch's race to the bottom to benefit the top 1/10th of 1%ers


The Top 0.1% Of The Nation Earn Half Of All Capital Gains

Income and wealth disparities become even more absurd if we look at the top 0.1% of the nation’s earners– rather than the more common 1%. The top 0.1%– about 315,000 individuals out of 315 million– are making about half of all capital gains on the sale of shares or property after 1 year; and these capital gains make up 60% of the income made by the Forbes 400.

It’s crystal clear that the Bush tax reduction on capital gains and dividend income in 2003 was the cutting edge policy that has created the immense increase in net worth of corporate executives, Wall St. professionals and other entrepreneurs.

The reduction in the tax from 20% to 15% continued the step-by-step tradition of cutting this tax to create more wealth.


The Top 0.1 Of The Nation Earn Half Of All Capital Gains - Forbes



80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Who Rules America Wealth Income and Power

The middle class has been eviscerated.


Neo-Liberalism/Conservatives is/has destroyed the American Economy in favor of the so called "Job Creator"... In reality are "Job Exporters"...

"Dynastic wealth, the enemy of a meritocracy, is on the rise. Equality of opportunity has been on the decline. A progressive and meaningful estate tax is needed to curb the movement of a democracy toward plutocracy." Warren Buffett

 

[Dad2three]

Who has the right to determine how mush is enough? O'bama? "Maybe you have earned enough" Government? The only legitimate concern of the government is how much you earned to determine how much you owe in taxes. Do you remember when the liberals (democrats) decided to gouge (tax) yachts at a exorbitant rate? What was the result? Less tax revenue, yacht builders closing, many Joe six-packs losing their jobs. Maybe it time to put a glass ceiling on taxation, 50% total of all taxes sounds good. Beyond that level the payee may just decide it not worth the effort. We should also put a floor on taxation. There is no free lunch, everybody should pay a share. While I certainly have little sympathy for someone being wealthy, I see no rationale for progressive taxation. That is simply greed, avarice, and envy. Our current system seems to punish success and reward failure. Great wealth is worthless if it is not used, if it is used it creates jobs, businesses, economic activity. That benefits all of us. If it is confiscated (taxed at high rates) it is removed from the market that feeds us all. Peace, Love, and Faith, Pappadave

Because under current tax rates, there's no reason for the 1% to not continue to pay themselves hundreds of times what the average family earns, even if some of the loopholes go away.

The reason we had more equality of income back in the 1950's through the 1970's is that the 1% couldn't keep the money they gave themselves. When high earner's income went into the 70% margin rate (or the 91% rate under Ike), they were simply paying more taxes. No board of directors would okay increases in CEO wages because most of it would go to the IRS. Cap gains rates were also higher. Paying yourself a big salary or bonus was worthless if you couldn't keep it.

The problem with the conservative movement in America is that it is based on bigotry, hatred, and, greed. Above all, greed. Money is their god. They worship money and the holders of it and despise those who don't have it.



"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it."

Thomas Jefferson

Conservative? LOL better double check that if I were you.

Yeah, it's always the libs fighting equal equal rights and justice right?

You can only be fighting for equal rights if it's the constitution you are fighting for. There bad business owners and there's good business owners and the amount of their wealth that they put into hiering and payroll has nothing to do with it. It's how they treat there employees and if they pay salary according to market rate and living costs determination in their states.

I'm a top 1% business owner. I ran my company from age 18 when i took it over till just a few months ago and I only go to board meetings. I'm basically retired. I averaged about 1-3 million a year in the last 5 years from this year. My company if I sold it would net me over 50 million. that would be my asking prince based on yearly profit. I hired for 3 weeks of every month, and I gave out bonuses that were unexpected sometimes in excess of $50,000 to employees only making 100,000 a year. Lots of money to be made in my franchise. There's a reason why Warren Buffet the liberal Billionaire owns the parent company and has for over 50 years. At Christmas I gave away free expensive gifts like free laptops, big HD new TV's, gift cards in the thousands, and had a company free dinner at a resturant all rented out with free drinks at open bar. I made many people millionaires not with my money, but by leading by example if they were willing to work hard i rewarded them. This is all ontop of the free trips from the parent company.

I consider myself a very good business owner because i took care of my employees. Now, let me give you the other example of a bad business owner and my right leaning buddies will not like this....

Mitt Romney with Bain capital. That company invests in other companies and takes a percentage of the profits. However, even when a company was profitable even though it was only a little profitable, Bain would take it over and suck it dry and fire everybody in it. See I couldn't do that,. My thinking is if they are making a profit they are doing what businesses are supposed to do and they deserve more time to increase it. Bain just like other investment companies are greedy. They care only about the profit instead of the companies employees. It should be the other way around. This is why Romney will never get my vote and hasn't. He will NEVER be able to level with the average American. therefore he wont ever win.

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.”

So, to the extent a corporation can keep from sharing the wealth with workers—the ones who created the wealth to begin with—investors and executives get a bigger slice of the income pie and become richer.

To understand this aspect of the zero-sum nature of wealth, and the way many people get rich—that is, besides selling-out our workers to Third World countries—consider how Gates, Eisner, and Welch Jr. did it. It’s no mystery, and it isn’t all that hard to do.

Although the following specific details are fictional, the scenario is accurate. Through their emissaries, Mr. Bill Gates (CEO of Micro- soft), met with Michael Eisner (CEO of Walt Disney Corp.), and John Welch Jr. (CEO of General Electric). Their discussion went like this:

The Zero-sum Nature of economics

 

[Judicial review]

I've seen all of these articals already. Obama has controlled your minds. Guess why there really is no middle class to bridge the gap between poor and rich? Obama and his liberal economics. He wants you all on welfare.

 

[Dad2three]

I've seen all of these articals already. Obama has controlled your minds. Guess why there really is no middle class to bridge the gap between poor and rich? Obama and his liberal economics. He wants you all on welfare.

Obama the second best conservative Prez since Ike? Only BJ Bill was better? lol

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 modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

John Kenneth Galbraith




1%er Warns Fellow Plutocrats Neoliberalism Will Lead to Violent Class Revolution

Though Charles and David Koch may be grabbing the headlines promoting a 1% neo-feudal agenda, not everyone in the upper echelons of the American plutocracy is on board. Nick Hanauer, a super rich venture capitalist, recently wrote a piece condemning neoliberalism – often called “trickle-down economics” – saying the current economic system is not only unfair and causing resentment but counter-productive to a thriving middle class saying “These idiotic trickle-down policies are destroying my customer base.”


1 er Warns Fellow Plutocrats Neoliberalism Will Lead To Violent Class Revolution FDL News Desk

 

[Dad2three]

I've seen all of these articals already. Obama has controlled your minds. Guess why there really is no middle class to bridge the gap between poor and rich? Obama and his liberal economics. He wants you all on welfare.

"The most intelligent, educated, and informed people are almost never Republicans




Think that headline is a little too strong? Well consider this: Only 6% of scientists are registered republicans. Or this: Only 7% of journalists are registered republicans. We can agree, can’t we, that becoming a scientist requires a remarkable dedication to scholarship, education, and to the truth? We can agree, can’t we, that nobody knows more about the working of our “democracy” than journalists? So, why have well over 90% of those who have followed a scientific or journalistic path rejected the Republican party? Could the answer be more obvious? The Republican war on science fought on behalf of the wealthiest and most powerful and the utter contempt which Congressional Republicans hold for the democratic process have completely alienated our brightest, most informed, and most curious."


Hal Ginsberg