Liberals: How Do You define What it Means to be a Liberal?

[LoneLaugher]

I am asking this question very sincerely. Liberals...what does it mean to you personally to be liberal? How do you define your liberal philosophy in personal terms?

I ask this question for several reasons.


1. Many liberals express frustration on this message board that they are misunderstood. When they are criticized, the general response often seems to be "you do not know where I am coming from. You really don't understand liberalism."

2. I have found most Conservatives and Libertarians are very willing to discuss their personal political philosophy. Maybe this is a generalization, but liberals seem very reluctant to get specific about what liberalism is...and what it means to them personally.

3. Maybe if you were more willing to discuss what liberalism means to you personally, there would be greater understanding.

I will speak for myself. I am probably socially left leaning. I support gay rights and gay marriage (neither are any of my business) , I don't like abortion but would not refuse women the right to seek one (again, not directly my business). I am generally very tolerant of different points of view and say live and let live as long as you are not hurting anyone else. So socially I'm probably libertarian/Democrat.

Fiscal issues...Constitutional Rights, Gun Ownership, personal responsibility for your own life, I'm pretty Conservative.

See, that was easy. So you folks who see yourself as liberal...how do you define your beliefs? And please no links to 20 page Das Kapital position papers. This is what you believe.

You see that description of yourself up there?

Imagine for a moment that an honest person described him or herself in that manner. Add some common sense details to the "fiscal issues" tab and a realization that our constitution is a living document.

Then, my nutter friend, you will have discovered a liberal.

Merry Christmas.

My dear nutter friend, did you catch "personal responsibility for your own life?" That precludes many of liberals from the conservative way of life.

I, too feel that Conservatives and liberals are much the same on many subjects, but the true testing grounds are the personal responsibility issue.

Matter of fact, if we would put up that Libertarian test again, we might find the Democrat - Republican and Liberal - Conservative labels are just out of place these days. We have vehement discussions arguing over semantics, when it's actually one issue we disagree most on and agree with most others.

Many liberals? Names, please. You do not have the market on personal responsibility cornered.....not by a long shot. That is a nutter talking point.

 

[mskafka]

Self-reliance is no longer a "right-wing" talking point, Jackson. But where do you stand on the taxes you've paid? I don't know your age, but are you willing to give up all that you've paid into Social Security? Because I would wager that it's already spent, unless a miracle worker comes along with an solution to the mess.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I am asking this question very sincerely. Liberals...what does it mean to you personally to be liberal? How do you define your liberal philosophy in personal terms?

I ask this question for several reasons.


1. Many liberals express frustration on this message board that they are misunderstood. When they are criticized, the general response often seems to be "you do not know where I am coming from. You really don't understand liberalism."

2. I have found most Conservatives and Libertarians are very willing to discuss their personal political philosophy. Maybe this is a generalization, but liberals seem very reluctant to get specific about what liberalism is...and what it means to them personally.

3. Maybe if you were more willing to discuss what liberalism means to you personally, there would be greater understanding.

I will speak for myself. I am probably socially left leaning. I support gay rights and gay marriage (neither are any of my business) , I don't like abortion but would not refuse women the right to seek one (again, not directly my business). I am generally very tolerant of different points of view and say live and let live as long as you are not hurting anyone else. So socially I'm probably libertarian/Democrat.

Fiscal issues...Constitutional Rights, Gun Ownership, personal responsibility for your own life, I'm pretty Conservative.

See, that was easy. So you folks who see yourself as liberal...how do you define your beliefs? And please no links to 20 page Das Kapital position papers. This is what you believe.

Liberals are pragmatist, which confuses and frustrates conservatives.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Billo props to you. Of all the liberals on this board you seem to be the only one who is sort of willing to define your principles.

Someone else posted "common sense about fiscal issues," and the "Constitution is a living document." I have no idea what either of those statements mean. Does common sense about fiscal issues mean you ignore the fact that entitlement programs are going bankrupt? Does it mean you support entitlement reform? What does it mean?

And the Constitution is a living document? Does that mean you can ignore it at will, or the words are important and mean what they say? Which is it?

You invited me to this thread because of a response that I made to you in another thread and this post is about as close to the other point as I could find after reading this entire thread (with the exception of a handful who are on ignore because they contribute nothing of any value.)

I am not a tea partier, a conservative, a lbertarian, a republican, a progressive, a democrat, a liberal, a social democrat or a marxist. What I am is an Independent. As such I cannot speak for "liberals" and have no intention of doing so because I only speak for myself. If I want to use a plural term I go with We the People because that is all inclusive and makes no differentiation.

So I am not going to address your OP questions because I don't see myself as "qualified" to do so however you did request that I read this thread and I am willing to give you my position on what I perceive you are attempting to achieve.

In your other OP, and in your comment above, you are complaining about wealth distribution and entitlements that are going bankrupt and placing the blame for this on "liberals". If you are honest with yourself you will admit that is true. I am not going to defend those programs since that would be a deflection. Instead I am going to contrast them with the other reason this nation is "going bankrupt" and that is the "wealth redistribution" that is happening in the opposite direction. The flow of wealth from the middle class and into the hands of the top 1% is at a record high. You might not see this as a problem but it is what is actually bankrupting this nation. The top 1% are not paying enough in taxes to justify that income and the benefits that they are deriving from it. Those benefits include wars and the ability of corporations to essentially buy elections and politicians for fractions of a cent on the dollars that get back in "corporate welfare".

By draining the middle class and denying opportunities to the poor they are effectively in absolute control of this nation while never holding any elected office. They are accountable to no one but themselves. We the People have no effective recourse.

So when you complained about the "wealth redistribution" and "entitlement" programs that are "going bankrupt" you were just another voice in the chorus for the wealthy elite. You were singing the song that they want you to sing. By placing the blame on the elderly, the sick and the poor they are effectively keeping your attention distracted from what they are doing to you, your children and grandchildren.

The problems in this nation are not to be found in the social safety net programs. They are self funding and require only modest tweaking to remain solvent.

The real problems are in the lack of jobs with benefits. The jobs that the "job creators" were supposed to provide when they were given those tax cuts. But those jobs never materialized. The top 1% never kept their side of the deal. They reneged on their side of the contract with We the People. But are you holding them accountable? Are you pushing for taxes to be raised to pay back what they took without providing the requisite jobs? Or are you blaming the elderly, the sick and the poor instead?

If you are truly a "fiscal conservative" you would be holding the top 1% accountable and if you were truly "socially liberal" you would know that there is nothing inherently wrong with the social programs.

And if you are genuinely interested in learning about where liberals stand you would do your utmost to understand that Billo nailed it as far as the things that are important to liberals.

We the People do have problems but as JFK pointed out they are man-made so they can be fixed by mankind. And the most serious and pressing problem that We the People face is that we are not united against the enemy within because that enemy has the power and the money to deceive enough of us so that we are divided and will remain ineffectual.

Thank you for allowing me to use my soap box. You may now return to your regularly scheduled OP.

Peace
DT

 

[bripat9643]

I am asking this question very sincerely. Liberals...what does it mean to you personally to be liberal? How do you define your liberal philosophy in personal terms?

I ask this question for several reasons.


1. Many liberals express frustration on this message board that they are misunderstood. When they are criticized, the general response often seems to be "you do not know where I am coming from. You really don't understand liberalism."

2. I have found most Conservatives and Libertarians are very willing to discuss their personal political philosophy. Maybe this is a generalization, but liberals seem very reluctant to get specific about what liberalism is...and what it means to them personally.

3. Maybe if you were more willing to discuss what liberalism means to you personally, there would be greater understanding.

I will speak for myself. I am probably socially left leaning. I support gay rights and gay marriage (neither are any of my business) , I don't like abortion but would not refuse women the right to seek one (again, not directly my business). I am generally very tolerant of different points of view and say live and let live as long as you are not hurting anyone else. So socially I'm probably libertarian/Democrat.

Fiscal issues...Constitutional Rights, Gun Ownership, personal responsibility for your own life, I'm pretty Conservative.

See, that was easy. So you folks who see yourself as liberal...how do you define your beliefs? And please no links to 20 page Das Kapital position papers. This is what you believe.

Liberals are pragmatist, which confuses and frustrates conservatives.

"Pragmatist" must be the liberal euphemism meaning "deranged lunatic."

 

[WelfareQueen]

Billo props to you. Of all the liberals on this board you seem to be the only one who is sort of willing to define your principles.

Someone else posted "common sense about fiscal issues," and the "Constitution is a living document." I have no idea what either of those statements mean. Does common sense about fiscal issues mean you ignore the fact that entitlement programs are going bankrupt? Does it mean you support entitlement reform? What does it mean?

And the Constitution is a living document? Does that mean you can ignore it at will, or the words are important and mean what they say? Which is it?

You invited me to this thread because of a response that I made to you in another thread and this post is about as close to the other point as I could find after reading this entire thread (with the exception of a handful who are on ignore because they contribute nothing of any value.)

I am not a tea partier, a conservative, a lbertarian, a republican, a progressive, a democrat, a liberal, a social democrat or a marxist. What I am is an Independent. As such I cannot speak for "liberals" and have no intention of doing so because I only speak for myself. If I want to use a plural term I go with We the People because that is all inclusive and makes no differentiation.

So I am not going to address your OP questions because I don't see myself as "qualified" to do so however you did request that I read this thread and I am willing to give you my position on what I perceive you are attempting to achieve.

In your other OP, and in your comment above, you are complaining about wealth distribution and entitlements that are going bankrupt and placing the blame for this on "liberals". If you are honest with yourself you will admit that is true. I am not going to defend those programs since that would be a deflection. Instead I am going to contrast them with the other reason this nation is "going bankrupt" and that is the "wealth redistribution" that is happening in the opposite direction. The flow of wealth from the middle class and into the hands of the top 1% is at a record high. You might not see this as a problem but it is what is actually bankrupting this nation. The top 1% are not paying enough in taxes to justify that income and the benefits that they are deriving from it. Those benefits include wars and the ability of corporations to essentially buy elections and politicians for fractions of a cent on the dollars that get back in "corporate welfare".

By draining the middle class and denying opportunities to the poor they are effectively in absolute control of this nation while never holding any elected office. They are accountable to no one but themselves. We the People have no effective recourse.

So when you complained about the "wealth redistribution" and "entitlement" programs that are "going bankrupt" you were just another voice in the chorus for the wealthy elite. You were singing the song that they want you to sing. By placing the blame on the elderly, the sick and the poor they are effectively keeping your attention distracted from what they are doing to you, your children and grandchildren.

The problems in this nation are not to be found in the social safety net programs. They are self funding and require only modest tweaking to remain solvent.

The real problems are in the lack of jobs with benefits. The jobs that the "job creators" were supposed to provide when they were given those tax cuts. But those jobs never materialized. The top 1% never kept their side of the deal. They reneged on their side of the contract with We the People. But are you holding them accountable? Are you pushing for taxes to be raised to pay back what they took without providing the requisite jobs? Or are you blaming the elderly, the sick and the poor instead?

If you are truly a "fiscal conservative" you would be holding the top 1% accountable and if you were truly "socially liberal" you would know that there is nothing inherently wrong with the social programs.

And if you are genuinely interested in learning about where liberals stand you would do your utmost to understand that Billo nailed it as far as the things that are important to liberals.

We the People do have problems but as JFK pointed out they are man-made so they can be fixed by mankind. And the most serious and pressing problem that We the People face is that we are not united against the enemy within because that enemy has the power and the money to deceive enough of us so that we are divided and will remain ineffectual.

Thank you for allowing me to use my soap box. You may now return to your regularly scheduled OP.

Peace
DT

Thanks for your response. Several things. You have referenced me being the OP of a similar thread twice. I was not the OP. I did not start the thread. Okay? I did start this thread because I wanted to be clear on what I felt. The other thread I made some comments out of anger I regret after being attacked. Childish, I know, but this was my attempt to solicit something positive. I think it has largely succeeded.

Now to the substance of what you said. You said I placed the blame on entitlement programs going broke on liberals. I made no such statement. You highlighted my comments which were two questions, not an accusation. People can read for themselves and see who is correct. For the record, I think both parties are responsible for the entitlement mess. The Republicans have expressed some interest in reforming those programs to keep them viable long term, the Dems have largely avoided the issue. That is my only comment on the matter.

You also said my I complained in the comment above about wealth redistribution. I made zero reference to wealth redistribution in my comment. Folks can again see for themselves exactly what I said. I do think Obama's policies and liberal policies are largely about wealth redistribution. Obamacare is a perfect example of this, as you have a program that forces the middle-class and the young and healthy to subsidize those that are not. The fact this program was sold on a series of lies is deeply troubling to me. Some wealth redistribution has to happen in any modern society, but too much and society collapses.

Finally, you make the liberal point of wealth redistribution away from the middle class up to the wealthy. I have heard that liberal talking point many times but it defies logic. The top 10% pay 70% of all income tax. Now if you are saying many policies in our Government favor the wealthy, you and I agree. But many policies also favor the poor. The middle class seem to be the group that gets screwed the most...but that is just my opinion.

This thread has taught me a number of things. One, it sounds like both liberals and Conservatives have a deep distrust of Corporate power and feel corporations have far too much influence in our Government and society. Two, both sides seem to feel Government is not nearly responsive enough to we the people, but more so to special interests. Three, neither side seems as wedded to their core principles as the other side probably thinks.

I really do appreciate your thoughtful response back. You are good people. I stand back my comments in this thread...every one of them. If folks disagree, I am okay with that.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Billo props to you. Of all the liberals on this board you seem to be the only one who is sort of willing to define your principles.

Someone else posted "common sense about fiscal issues," and the "Constitution is a living document." I have no idea what either of those statements mean. Does common sense about fiscal issues mean you ignore the fact that entitlement programs are going bankrupt? Does it mean you support entitlement reform? What does it mean?

And the Constitution is a living document? Does that mean you can ignore it at will, or the words are important and mean what they say? Which is it?

You invited me to this thread because of a response that I made to you in another thread and this post is about as close to the other point as I could find after reading this entire thread (with the exception of a handful who are on ignore because they contribute nothing of any value.)

I am not a tea partier, a conservative, a lbertarian, a republican, a progressive, a democrat, a liberal, a social democrat or a marxist. What I am is an Independent. As such I cannot speak for "liberals" and have no intention of doing so because I only speak for myself. If I want to use a plural term I go with We the People because that is all inclusive and makes no differentiation.

So I am not going to address your OP questions because I don't see myself as "qualified" to do so however you did request that I read this thread and I am willing to give you my position on what I perceive you are attempting to achieve.

In your other OP, and in your comment above, you are complaining about wealth distribution and entitlements that are going bankrupt and placing the blame for this on "liberals". If you are honest with yourself you will admit that is true. I am not going to defend those programs since that would be a deflection. Instead I am going to contrast them with the other reason this nation is "going bankrupt" and that is the "wealth redistribution" that is happening in the opposite direction. The flow of wealth from the middle class and into the hands of the top 1% is at a record high. You might not see this as a problem but it is what is actually bankrupting this nation. The top 1% are not paying enough in taxes to justify that income and the benefits that they are deriving from it. Those benefits include wars and the ability of corporations to essentially buy elections and politicians for fractions of a cent on the dollars that get back in "corporate welfare".

By draining the middle class and denying opportunities to the poor they are effectively in absolute control of this nation while never holding any elected office. They are accountable to no one but themselves. We the People have no effective recourse.

So when you complained about the "wealth redistribution" and "entitlement" programs that are "going bankrupt" you were just another voice in the chorus for the wealthy elite. You were singing the song that they want you to sing. By placing the blame on the elderly, the sick and the poor they are effectively keeping your attention distracted from what they are doing to you, your children and grandchildren.

The problems in this nation are not to be found in the social safety net programs. They are self funding and require only modest tweaking to remain solvent.

The real problems are in the lack of jobs with benefits. The jobs that the "job creators" were supposed to provide when they were given those tax cuts. But those jobs never materialized. The top 1% never kept their side of the deal. They reneged on their side of the contract with We the People. But are you holding them accountable? Are you pushing for taxes to be raised to pay back what they took without providing the requisite jobs? Or are you blaming the elderly, the sick and the poor instead?

If you are truly a "fiscal conservative" you would be holding the top 1% accountable and if you were truly "socially liberal" you would know that there is nothing inherently wrong with the social programs.

And if you are genuinely interested in learning about where liberals stand you would do your utmost to understand that Billo nailed it as far as the things that are important to liberals.

We the People do have problems but as JFK pointed out they are man-made so they can be fixed by mankind. And the most serious and pressing problem that We the People face is that we are not united against the enemy within because that enemy has the power and the money to deceive enough of us so that we are divided and will remain ineffectual.

Thank you for allowing me to use my soap box. You may now return to your regularly scheduled OP.

Peace
DT

Thanks for your response. Several things. You have referenced me being the OP of a similar thread twice. I was not the OP. I did not start the thread. Okay? I did start this thread because I wanted to be clear on what I felt. The other thread I made some comments out of anger I regret after being attacked. Childish, I know, but this was my attempt to solicit something positive. I think it has largely succeeded.

Now to the substance of what you said. You said I placed the blame on entitlement programs going broke on liberals. I made no such statement. You highlighted my comments which were two questions, not an accusation. People can read for themselves and see who is correct. For the record, I think both parties are responsible for the entitlement mess. The Republicans have expressed some interest in reforming those programs to keep them viable long term, the Dems have largely avoided the issue. That is my only comment on the matter.

You also said my I complained in the comment above about wealth redistribution. I made zero reference to wealth redistribution in my comment. Folks can again see for themselves exactly what I said. I do think Obama's policies and liberal policies are largely about wealth redistribution. Obamacare is a perfect example of this, as you have a program that forces the middle-class and the young and healthy to subsidize those that are not. The fact this program was sold on a series of lies is deeply troubling to me. Some wealth redistribution has to happen in any modern society, but too much and society collapses.

Finally, you make the liberal point of wealth redistribution away from the middle class up to the wealthy. I have heard that liberal talking point many times but it defies logic. The top 10% pay 70% of all income tax. Now if you are saying many policies in our Government favor the wealthy, you and I agree. But many policies also favor the poor. The middle class seem to be the group that gets screwed the most...but that is just my opinion.

This thread has taught me a number of things. One, it sounds like both liberals and Conservatives have a deep distrust of Corporate power and feel corporations have far too much influence in our Government and society. Two, both sides seem to feel Government is not nearly responsive enough to we the people, but more so to special interests. Three, neither side seems as wedded to their core principles as the other side probably thinks.

I really do appreciate your thoughtful response back. You are good people. I stand back my comments in this thread...every one of them. If folks disagree, I am okay with that.

Nothing wrong with civilized differences, in fact they are healthy, because they keep both sides in check. My apologies for the mistake about the OP.

Your reference to the top 10 paying 70% of the income tax is misleading. The lack of living wage jobs with benefits means that these people are earning so little their impact on taxes as a percentage is obviously far less than it would be if they were earning enough to be paying their fair share of the tax burden. Let me put it this way, that $5 burger actually costs you $10 in real terms because you have to subsidize the housing, food and healthcare for that minimum wage employee. The same applies to those cut rate items from Walmart. The real price is actually much higher because you are subsidizing those employees with your taxes. Or to be more precise with your credit card that is being used to borrow funds from China that you are on the hook for that debt.

Far better to pay all of those people a living wage with benefits in the first place. Yes, you will pay more for that burger and those items from Walmart but all of those employees will be paying for their own housing, food and healthcare. On top of that they will also be paying taxes. The system works if you set the ground rules and don't allow corporations to strip mine the human resources of this nation for the benefit of the wealthy elite. WE the People have a right to a living wage with benefits in my opinion. Slavery was outlawed and if you believe that you are a "tax slave" it is only because you are aiding and abetting corporations to treat hardworking American citizens as one rung above slaves.

At heart you, and every other person, is a good person with a belief in what is best for this nation no matter where on the political spectrum you find yourself. Together We the People must unite to force our representatives to repeal the corruption that the corporations have used to undermine OUR government OF the people and FOR THE PEOPLE.

But we can only do it if we understand that we have a common goal and we must put aside our petty differences until we fix the problem that is the enemy within.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You invited me to this thread because of a response that I made to you in another thread and this post is about as close to the other point as I could find after reading this entire thread (with the exception of a handful who are on ignore because they contribute nothing of any value.)

I am not a tea partier, a conservative, a lbertarian, a republican, a progressive, a democrat, a liberal, a social democrat or a marxist. What I am is an Independent. As such I cannot speak for "liberals" and have no intention of doing so because I only speak for myself. If I want to use a plural term I go with We the People because that is all inclusive and makes no differentiation.

So I am not going to address your OP questions because I don't see myself as "qualified" to do so however you did request that I read this thread and I am willing to give you my position on what I perceive you are attempting to achieve.

In your other OP, and in your comment above, you are complaining about wealth distribution and entitlements that are going bankrupt and placing the blame for this on "liberals". If you are honest with yourself you will admit that is true. I am not going to defend those programs since that would be a deflection. Instead I am going to contrast them with the other reason this nation is "going bankrupt" and that is the "wealth redistribution" that is happening in the opposite direction. The flow of wealth from the middle class and into the hands of the top 1% is at a record high. You might not see this as a problem but it is what is actually bankrupting this nation. The top 1% are not paying enough in taxes to justify that income and the benefits that they are deriving from it. Those benefits include wars and the ability of corporations to essentially buy elections and politicians for fractions of a cent on the dollars that get back in "corporate welfare".

By draining the middle class and denying opportunities to the poor they are effectively in absolute control of this nation while never holding any elected office. They are accountable to no one but themselves. We the People have no effective recourse.

So when you complained about the "wealth redistribution" and "entitlement" programs that are "going bankrupt" you were just another voice in the chorus for the wealthy elite. You were singing the song that they want you to sing. By placing the blame on the elderly, the sick and the poor they are effectively keeping your attention distracted from what they are doing to you, your children and grandchildren.

The problems in this nation are not to be found in the social safety net programs. They are self funding and require only modest tweaking to remain solvent.

The real problems are in the lack of jobs with benefits. The jobs that the "job creators" were supposed to provide when they were given those tax cuts. But those jobs never materialized. The top 1% never kept their side of the deal. They reneged on their side of the contract with We the People. But are you holding them accountable? Are you pushing for taxes to be raised to pay back what they took without providing the requisite jobs? Or are you blaming the elderly, the sick and the poor instead?

If you are truly a "fiscal conservative" you would be holding the top 1% accountable and if you were truly "socially liberal" you would know that there is nothing inherently wrong with the social programs.

And if you are genuinely interested in learning about where liberals stand you would do your utmost to understand that Billo nailed it as far as the things that are important to liberals.

We the People do have problems but as JFK pointed out they are man-made so they can be fixed by mankind. And the most serious and pressing problem that We the People face is that we are not united against the enemy within because that enemy has the power and the money to deceive enough of us so that we are divided and will remain ineffectual.

Thank you for allowing me to use my soap box. You may now return to your regularly scheduled OP.

Peace
DT

Thanks for your response. Several things. You have referenced me being the OP of a similar thread twice. I was not the OP. I did not start the thread. Okay? I did start this thread because I wanted to be clear on what I felt. The other thread I made some comments out of anger I regret after being attacked. Childish, I know, but this was my attempt to solicit something positive. I think it has largely succeeded.

Now to the substance of what you said. You said I placed the blame on entitlement programs going broke on liberals. I made no such statement. You highlighted my comments which were two questions, not an accusation. People can read for themselves and see who is correct. For the record, I think both parties are responsible for the entitlement mess. The Republicans have expressed some interest in reforming those programs to keep them viable long term, the Dems have largely avoided the issue. That is my only comment on the matter.

You also said my I complained in the comment above about wealth redistribution. I made zero reference to wealth redistribution in my comment. Folks can again see for themselves exactly what I said. I do think Obama's policies and liberal policies are largely about wealth redistribution. Obamacare is a perfect example of this, as you have a program that forces the middle-class and the young and healthy to subsidize those that are not. The fact this program was sold on a series of lies is deeply troubling to me. Some wealth redistribution has to happen in any modern society, but too much and society collapses.

Finally, you make the liberal point of wealth redistribution away from the middle class up to the wealthy. I have heard that liberal talking point many times but it defies logic. The top 10% pay 70% of all income tax. Now if you are saying many policies in our Government favor the wealthy, you and I agree. But many policies also favor the poor. The middle class seem to be the group that gets screwed the most...but that is just my opinion.

This thread has taught me a number of things. One, it sounds like both liberals and Conservatives have a deep distrust of Corporate power and feel corporations have far too much influence in our Government and society. Two, both sides seem to feel Government is not nearly responsive enough to we the people, but more so to special interests. Three, neither side seems as wedded to their core principles as the other side probably thinks.

I really do appreciate your thoughtful response back. You are good people. I stand back my comments in this thread...every one of them. If folks disagree, I am okay with that.

Nothing wrong with civilized differences, in fact they are healthy, because they keep both sides in check. My apologies for the mistake about the OP.

Your reference to the top 10 paying 70% of the income tax is misleading. The lack of living wage jobs with benefits means that these people are earning so little their impact on taxes as a percentage is obviously far less than it would be if they were earning enough to be paying their fair share of the tax burden. Let me put it this way, that $5 burger actually costs you $10 in real terms because you have to subsidize the housing, food and healthcare for that minimum wage employee. The same applies to those cut rate items from Walmart. The real price is actually much higher because you are subsidizing those employees with your taxes. Or to be more precise with your credit card that is being used to borrow funds from China that you are on the hook for that debt.

Far better to pay all of those people a living wage with benefits in the first place. Yes, you will pay more for that burger and those items from Walmart but all of those employees will be paying for their own housing, food and healthcare. On top of that they will also be paying taxes. The system works if you set the ground rules and don't allow corporations to strip mine the human resources of this nation for the benefit of the wealthy elite. WE the People have a right to a living wage with benefits in my opinion. Slavery was outlawed and if you believe that you are a "tax slave" it is only because you are aiding and abetting corporations to treat hardworking American citizens as one rung above slaves.

At heart you, and every other person, is a good person with a belief in what is best for this nation no matter where on the political spectrum you find yourself. Together We the People must unite to force our representatives to repeal the corruption that the corporations have used to undermine OUR government OF the people and FOR THE PEOPLE.

But we can only do it if we understand that we have a common goal and we must put aside our petty differences until we fix the problem that is the enemy within.

And if we keep punching down......looking to blame those who have less influence than we do....we are fucked.