Do The Rich Pay Their Fair Share?

[HappyJoy]

This is kind of ridiculous. You see, government collects taxes, employs people to manage the roads and decide where they need to go and if they have enough money which ones need to be fixed and then seeks out those hopefully qualified to do the work. It's called management, I know, I know, libertarians don't get it.

How those who never had a real job could manage anything? Let me remind you, the same guys are managing AmTrak, Post Office, Education, Fannie & Freddie... successfully? Yeah, libertarians don't get it.

But you do.

How have they never had a real job? By the way, I went to my mailbox today and I was totally surprised, just like I have been every other fucking weekday of my life in that there was mail in it.

 

[Spare_change]

If the bottom 47% pay 0% or less on income, why are you looking at 1% of anything?

Because they don't make enough money. Hello? Any intelligent life out there?

Because they don't make enough money.

Exactly. Poor people pay less than rich people.

Any intelligent life out there?

No, you are still dumber than a stump.

Sure. When you have taxes based on income, those that make less, pay less. But thanks to Republicans, the wealthy pay less percentage of total income than workers.

Twisted and perverted logic .... it's amazing the machinations you will go thru in an attempt to avoid your personal responsibilities.

 

[Ame®icano]

This is kind of ridiculous. You see, government collects taxes, employs people to manage the roads and decide where they need to go and if they have enough money which ones need to be fixed and then seeks out those hopefully qualified to do the work. It's called management, I know, I know, libertarians don't get it.

How those who never had a real job could manage anything? Let me remind you, the same guys are managing AmTrak, Post Office, Education, Fannie & Freddie... successfully? Yeah, libertarians don't get it.

But you do.

How have they never had a real job? By the way, I went to my mailbox today and I was totally surprised, just like I have been every other fucking weekday of my life in that there was mail in it.

I thought you were talking about management. Oh wait, you did.

 

[HappyJoy]

This is kind of ridiculous. You see, government collects taxes, employs people to manage the roads and decide where they need to go and if they have enough money which ones need to be fixed and then seeks out those hopefully qualified to do the work. It's called management, I know, I know, libertarians don't get it.

How those who never had a real job could manage anything? Let me remind you, the same guys are managing AmTrak, Post Office, Education, Fannie & Freddie... successfully? Yeah, libertarians don't get it.

But you do.

How have they never had a real job? By the way, I went to my mailbox today and I was totally surprised, just like I have been every other fucking weekday of my life in that there was mail in it.

I thought you were talking about management. Oh wait, you did.

Right and I....still got my mail? I'm not sure of your point.

 

[Ame®icano]

This is kind of ridiculous. You see, government collects taxes, employs people to manage the roads and decide where they need to go and if they have enough money which ones need to be fixed and then seeks out those hopefully qualified to do the work. It's called management, I know, I know, libertarians don't get it.

How those who never had a real job could manage anything? Let me remind you, the same guys are managing AmTrak, Post Office, Education, Fannie & Freddie... successfully? Yeah, libertarians don't get it.

But you do.

How have they never had a real job? By the way, I went to my mailbox today and I was totally surprised, just like I have been every other fucking weekday of my life in that there was mail in it.

I thought you were talking about management. Oh wait, you did.

Right and I....still got my mail? I'm not sure of your point.

You said earlier... "It's called management".

Is your mailman managing Post Office?

Here is the hint: US Postal Service: Over $47 Billion In Losses In The Past Decade And Counting

That's called management, right?

 

[danielpalos]

So your proof of his claim is..........?

here is your clue and your Cause: What is the income level for the wealthy and for workers in your scenario? we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Labor with labor usually on a capital gains versus earned income basis. that should work in any given scenario.

 

[danielpalos]

This is kind of ridiculous. You see, government collects taxes, employs people to manage the roads and decide where they need to go and if they have enough money which ones need to be fixed and then seeks out those hopefully qualified to do the work. It's called management, I know, I know, libertarians don't get it.

How those who never had a real job could manage anything? Let me remind you, the same guys are managing AmTrak, Post Office, Education, Fannie & Freddie... successfully? Yeah, libertarians don't get it.

But you do.

How have they never had a real job? By the way, I went to my mailbox today and I was totally surprised, just like I have been every other fucking weekday of my life in that there was mail in it.

I thought you were talking about management. Oh wait, you did.

Right and I....still got my mail? I'm not sure of your point.

You said earlier... "It's called management".

Is your mailman managing Post Office?

Here is the hint: US Postal Service: Over $47 Billion In Losses In The Past Decade And Counting

That's called management, right?

Only the Right jumps on that red herring convoy and bandwagon: The agency is saddled with a congressional mandate that requires it to prefund more than $5.5 billion annually for health benefits for future retirees.--http://US Postal Service Over 47 Billion In Losses In The Past Decade And Counting Zero Hedge

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So your proof of his claim is..........?

here is your clue and your Cause: What is the income level for the wealthy and for workers in your scenario? we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Labor with labor usually on a capital gains versus earned income basis. that should work in any given scenario.

here is your clue and your Cause: What is the income level for the wealthy and for workers in your scenario?

Did you answer my question somewhere?
I don't see any numbers in your posts.
Try again?

 

[Ernie S.]

Obtuse: someone who says she/he paid taxes to drive on roads (i.e.; paid for or bought a service), then calls taxes theft.
Paying to have shoes repaired is theft? Paying so that necessary services are accomplished is theft?

Or, is living in society and not participating in paying for social advantages anti-social?

No. Paying to support people that should be paying their own way is theft.

So taxation is theft you say?

Great bit from "The West Wing"

"I've paid my fair share. And the fair share of 27 other people. But my water doesn't come out of the faucet 27 times hotter, and the fire department doesn't arrive 27 times faster."

Nonetheless, every rich person gets a disproportionate share of the MAIN ROLE OF GOVERNMENT, which is the protection of property. In fact, the diligence of this protection increases exponentially with the amount of property accumulated.

In fact, the protection of a rich person's property is always more important to any law enforcement agency than an ordinary person's life. Just ask the 11 people killed by Tony Hayward.

Actually, that's wrong. Rich people hire private security to protect their property. Only a fool would rely on the police for protection. So the reality is that the rich get less from the state in terms of protection than poor people do.

As for Tony Harward, industrial accidents have nothing to do with police protection. Liberals are always trying to equate things that are not equal.

Look at our history. The police go to bat for the very wealthy. Most recently, the occupy wall street movement. In the old days, cops always siding with the ownership against the union strikers. It's becoming harder to protest now. Get thrown in jail, a young guy now has an arrest record. The cops will always side with the ownership class.

The purpose of police is to arrest criminals. OWS protesters who raped, shit on police cars, and violated orders to disperse were violating the law.
Union workers blocking entrance to private businesses were violating the law.

Cops will side with the law abiding.

Ever go to an occupy to see for yourself? The OWS people had their act together for the most part. The homeless and other riff raff were a problem of course. This is what we get from the richest country in the world spending trillions on wars but getting stingy with problems like people sleeping under bridges and scrounging in trash cans. Thanks Republicans. Anyway, where are they supposed to protest the takeover of this country by big money, the desert? The cops first and foremost work for the rulers of a society, so don't expect them to always be fair and honest, but it looks like some of you prefer the coming oligarchy in this country.

Legalized theft.... Government has become Robin Hood with the Sheriff of Nottingham his ardent supporter.

 

[danielpalos]

So your proof of his claim is..........?

here is your clue and your Cause: What is the income level for the wealthy and for workers in your scenario? we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Labor with labor usually on a capital gains versus earned income basis. that should work in any given scenario.

here is your clue and your Cause: What is the income level for the wealthy and for workers in your scenario?

Did you answer my question somewhere?
I don't see any numbers in your posts.
Try again?

don't understand anything but your party, propaganda and rhetoric, Person on the Right?

we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Laborists with labor usually on a capital gains versus earned income basis. that should work in any given scenario.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So your proof of his claim is..........?

here is your clue and your Cause: What is the income level for the wealthy and for workers in your scenario? we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Labor with labor usually on a capital gains versus earned income basis. that should work in any given scenario.

here is your clue and your Cause: What is the income level for the wealthy and for workers in your scenario?

Did you answer my question somewhere?
I don't see any numbers in your posts.
Try again?

don't understand anything but your party, propaganda and rhetoric, Person on the Right?

we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Laborists with labor usually on a capital gains versus earned income basis. that should work in any given scenario.

we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Laborists with labor

Distinguish all you want. Let me know when you can prove his claim.
Here it is.

But thanks to Republicans, the wealthy pay less percentage of total income than workers.

You may have noticed, he doesn't define the income level of the workers or the income level of the wealthy. Without that info, his claim is unfalsifiable.

Help him out, he needs it.

 

[danielpalos]

So your proof of his claim is..........?

here is your clue and your Cause: What is the income level for the wealthy and for workers in your scenario? we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Labor with labor usually on a capital gains versus earned income basis. that should work in any given scenario.

here is your clue and your Cause: What is the income level for the wealthy and for workers in your scenario?

Did you answer my question somewhere?
I don't see any numbers in your posts.
Try again?

don't understand anything but your party, propaganda and rhetoric, Person on the Right?

we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Laborists with labor usually on a capital gains versus earned income basis. that should work in any given scenario.

we can distinguish between Capitalists with capital and Laborists with labor

Distinguish all you want. Let me know when you can prove his claim.
Here it is.

But thanks to Republicans, the wealthy pay less percentage of total income than workers.

You may have noticed, he doesn't define the income level of the workers or the income level of the wealthy. Without that info, his claim is unfalsifiable.

Help him out, he needs it.

let's assume capitalists for the wealthiest and laborists for labor; thus, thanks to Republicans, the wealthiest capitalists pay less as a percentage of earned income than less wealthy laborists providing labor, as compared and contrasted to non-earned income such as capital gains.

 

[Ernie S.]

Let's assume you could construct a readable sentence....

 

[danielpalos]

Let's assume you could construct a readable sentence....

nothing but diversion for your Cause; how Right of you.

 

[Ernie S.]

Nothing but barely coherent tripe; how very Left of you.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Nothing but barely coherent tripe; how very Left of you.

Still mad about having to pay taxes eh, even though they are far too low for the rich. So be it.

 

[2aguy]

Nothing but barely coherent tripe; how very Left of you.

Still mad about having to pay taxes eh, even though they are far too low for the rich. So be it.

No...they are far too high for those paying them.........we don't have a tax problem we have a spending problem...fix that and the tax rate is just fine.....

 

[Ernie S.]

Nothing but barely coherent tripe; how very Left of you.

Still mad about having to pay taxes eh, even though they are far too low for the rich. So be it.

Mad? Yeah I suppose How would you like to pay 10 times as much for a gallon of milk because you earn more money?

 

[Ernie S.]

I'd like to stay and play, but I need to head in to my business to take care of a computer issue.

 

[danielpalos]

Nothing but barely coherent tripe; how very Left of you.

all you need is a clue and a Cause to understand it.