3 People (Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos & Warren Buffett) are richer than the poorest 50% of Americans

Gates, Bezos and Buffet have more money than 150 million Americans combined

Now why do I want to cut their taxes?
Because it is their money not yours.

No...they belong to a society from which they benefit tremendously

They are expected to contribute
No body belongs to society.

People are not property of others.

They do contribute. You are no judge or authority on how much they should contribute and neither is anyone else
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do
No I do not and neither does any other human.

Slavery is immoral and illegal. It does not matter if one is owned by one person or a group it is the same evil and society is nothing more than a group of people.

People become part of any society by choice and are as little or as much a part of it as they choose.

Society has no rights over anyone
 
Idk about bezos but the other 2 probably GIVE BACK more than 50% of what the rest of the entire country does. So what exactly is the point here?
The point is...

Why do we continue to help them accumulate wealth?
WE do not.

Buy their product or do not. If you do not want them to get your money simply do not buy what they sell
We sure do

We expect them to contribute less and less
No we do not.

You do not speak for others.
Yes I do
No you do not you only speak for yourself
 
Gates, Bezos and Buffet have more money than 150 million Americans combined

Now why do I want to cut their taxes?
Because it is their money not yours.

No...they belong to a society from which they benefit tremendously

They are expected to contribute
No body belongs to society.

People are not property of others.

They do contribute. You are no judge or authority on how much they should contribute and neither is anyone else
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do
No I do not and neither does any other human.

Slavery is immoral and illegal. It does not matter if one is owned by one person or a group it is the same evil and society is nothing more than a group of people.

People become part of any society by choice and are as little or as much a part of it as they choose.

Society has no rights over anyone

Looks like we got ourselves another anarchist
 
Because it is their money not yours.

No...they belong to a society from which they benefit tremendously

They are expected to contribute
No body belongs to society.

People are not property of others.

They do contribute. You are no judge or authority on how much they should contribute and neither is anyone else
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do
No I do not and neither does any other human.

Slavery is immoral and illegal. It does not matter if one is owned by one person or a group it is the same evil and society is nothing more than a group of people.

People become part of any society by choice and are as little or as much a part of it as they choose.

Society has no rights over anyone

Looks like we got ourselves another anarchist

Get a rope!
 
Gates, Bezos and Buffet have more money than 150 million Americans combined

Now why do I want to cut their taxes?
Because it is their money not yours.

No...they belong to a society from which they benefit tremendously

They are expected to contribute
No body belongs to society.

People are not property of others.

They do contribute. You are no judge or authority on how much they should contribute and neither is anyone else
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do

Yep. But government ≠ society.
 
Gates, Bezos and Buffet have more money than 150 million Americans combined

Now why do I want to cut their taxes?
Because it is their money not yours.

No...they belong to a society from which they benefit tremendously

They are expected to contribute
No body belongs to society.

People are not property of others.

They do contribute. You are no judge or authority on how much they should contribute and neither is anyone else
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do

Yep. But government ≠ society.



We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.......
 
Because it is their money not yours.

No...they belong to a society from which they benefit tremendously

They are expected to contribute
No body belongs to society.

People are not property of others.

They do contribute. You are no judge or authority on how much they should contribute and neither is anyone else
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do

Yep. But government ≠ society.



We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.......

created a Constitution which, specifically and deliberately, limits the power of government over We the People.
 
No...they belong to a society from which they benefit tremendously

They are expected to contribute
No body belongs to society.

People are not property of others.

They do contribute. You are no judge or authority on how much they should contribute and neither is anyone else
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do

Yep. But government ≠ society.



We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.......

created a Constitution which, specifically and deliberately, limits the power of government over We the People.

Nice dodge

We the People created a government in a document we like to call "The Constitution"
A government of the people, by the people and for the people (thanks Abe)
 
No body belongs to society.

People are not property of others.

They do contribute. You are no judge or authority on how much they should contribute and neither is anyone else
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do

Yep. But government ≠ society.



We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.......

created a Constitution which, specifically and deliberately, limits the power of government over We the People.

Nice dodge

We the People created a government in a document we like to call "The Constitution"
A government of the people, by the people and for the people (thanks Abe)

It's not a dodge. I'm pointing out an error in your conception of the kind of government the Constitution authorizes. The founders never wanted totalitarian government. They never saw people as the property of the state. They insisted it should be the other way around. That's the irony of you going around chanting "We the People". You seem to think it's a rallying cry for socialists, when it fact it's the opposite. The slogan emphasizes the primacy of people over government. We the People create government, and government serves at our discretion - not, as you would have it - the other way around.
 
Oh I get it, so you think their wealth is accumulated simply because they get tax cuts. It's not because of the billions of dollars people spend with their businesses. Do you know how much of buffet's wealth has gone to charity? How much of yours has?

Buffet is a good example of someone who makes billions off of the economy but contributes nothing to it

Our wealthiest citizens benefit from much more than a favorable tax rate. They benefit from corporate subsidies, government protection of their investments and a tax code that allows them to hide their earnings

buffet contributes nothing?
He doesn't produce anything
He is involved in speculative investments
He owns many major companies that employ hundreds of thousands of people. God damn you are such a typical liberal. I thought you were a little different but clearly not
What do they produce?

why is that your focus when we don't live in a manufacturing economy... we live in a service economy.

I'm confused about why this is your issue.
 
No...they belong to a society from which they benefit tremendously

They are expected to contribute
No body belongs to society.

People are not property of others.

They do contribute. You are no judge or authority on how much they should contribute and neither is anyone else
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do

Yep. But government ≠ society.



We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.......

created a Constitution which, specifically and deliberately, limits the power of government over We the People.

that is false.... if it were true, we'd be living under the articles of confederation. we are not.... and that issue was put to bed during the civil war...
 
why should government act only to redistribute wealth to the top 1%?

They shouldn't. But if the government has the power to redistribute wealth, the people who want wealth the most will try the hardest to control the process.

That's the cruel irony of socialism. It doesn't do away with greed and economic power. It just changes the game so that the key to success is manipulating government policy rather than satisfying customers.

The pharmacy lobbyists, who convinced congress to make it illegal for the government to negotiate the price of prescription Medicare drugs, are socialists?
dblack is a Libertarian...a neo-Con who doesn't want to pay for anything.

Wow... you're even more deluded than I thought. Libertarians are neo-cons in your world? Tell me more.
With everything but war.
You're a bunch of cheap, opportunistic fucks.

real libertarians would be pro choice and pro marriage equality .... like goldwater was.
 
Idk about bezos but the other 2 probably GIVE BACK more than 50% of what the rest of the entire country does. So what exactly is the point here?
The point is...

Why do we continue to help them accumulate wealth?
WE do not.

Buy their product or do not. If you do not want them to get your money simply do not buy what they sell
We sure do

We expect them to contribute less and less
No we do not.

You do not speak for others.

says you while using the word "we" in stating your "opinion":.
 
Yes you "belong" to a society

All humans do

Yep. But government ≠ society.



We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.......

created a Constitution which, specifically and deliberately, limits the power of government over We the People.

Nice dodge

We the People created a government in a document we like to call "The Constitution"
A government of the people, by the people and for the people (thanks Abe)

It's not a dodge. I'm pointing out an error in your conception of the kind of government the Constitution authorizes. The founders never wanted totalitarian government. They never saw people as the property of the state. They insisted it should be the other way around. That's the irony of you going around chanting "We the People". You seem to think it's a rallying cry for socialists, when it fact it's the opposite. The slogan emphasizes the primacy of people over government. We the People create government, and government serves at our discretion - not, as you would have it - the other way around.

Section 8
1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
 
why should government act only to redistribute wealth to the top 1%?

They shouldn't. But if the government has the power to redistribute wealth, the people who want wealth the most will try the hardest to control the process.

That's the cruel irony of socialism. It doesn't do away with greed and economic power. It just changes the game so that the key to success is manipulating government policy rather than satisfying customers.

The pharmacy lobbyists, who convinced congress to make it illegal for the government to negotiate the price of prescription Medicare drugs, are socialists?
dblack is a Libertarian...a neo-Con who doesn't want to pay for anything.

today's version of "libertarians" are whiny foot-stamping angry randians.
 
Yep. But government ≠ society.



We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.......

created a Constitution which, specifically and deliberately, limits the power of government over We the People.

Nice dodge

We the People created a government in a document we like to call "The Constitution"
A government of the people, by the people and for the people (thanks Abe)

It's not a dodge. I'm pointing out an error in your conception of the kind of government the Constitution authorizes. The founders never wanted totalitarian government. They never saw people as the property of the state. They insisted it should be the other way around. That's the irony of you going around chanting "We the People". You seem to think it's a rallying cry for socialists, when it fact it's the opposite. The slogan emphasizes the primacy of people over government. We the People create government, and government serves at our discretion - not, as you would have it - the other way around.

Section 8
1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

you left out the part about general welfare.

thanks.
 
why should government act only to redistribute wealth to the top 1%?

They shouldn't. But if the government has the power to redistribute wealth, the people who want wealth the most will try the hardest to control the process.

That's the cruel irony of socialism. It doesn't do away with greed and economic power. It just changes the game so that the key to success is manipulating government policy rather than satisfying customers.

The pharmacy lobbyists, who convinced congress to make it illegal for the government to negotiate the price of prescription Medicare drugs, are socialists?
dblack is a Libertarian...a neo-Con who doesn't want to pay for anything.

today's version of "libertarians" are whiny foot-stamping angry randians.

I tend to agree. I think of libertarians as hippies who finally grew up, and discovered that they like having material things after all, but belatedly discovered the concept of "tax" on their property to pay the fire department salaries..
 
why should government act only to redistribute wealth to the top 1%?

They shouldn't. But if the government has the power to redistribute wealth, the people who want wealth the most will try the hardest to control the process.

That's the cruel irony of socialism. It doesn't do away with greed and economic power. It just changes the game so that the key to success is manipulating government policy rather than satisfying customers.

The pharmacy lobbyists, who convinced congress to make it illegal for the government to negotiate the price of prescription Medicare drugs, are socialists?
dblack is a Libertarian...a neo-Con who doesn't want to pay for anything.

today's version of "libertarians" are whiny foot-stamping angry randians.

I tend to agree. I think of libertarians as hippies who finally grew up, and discovered that they like having material things after all, but belatedly discovered the concept of "tax" on their property to pay the fire department salaries..

to a degree... still doesn't address why so called libertarians are anti-choice and anti marriage equality.
 

Forum List

Back
Top