Liberals: If "steal more from the wealthy" wasn't an option. How would you resolve mass dependency?

[Leweman]

So many of the wealthy are so self loathing they'd love for the gov't to take their money, even if it is a blip on the budget. Guys like Gates, Buffet, Bezos, Zuckerburg. Yet, they don't just give away all their money to government and live in "poverty". It's quite the dichotomy.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

While I have no qualms about taking from the wealthy, it is not the best answer to the huge and grossly unfair wealth distribution.

First, the wealthy have a whole lot more money than they deserve. They are de facto thieves - so I have no qualms about taxing the daylights out of them.

However, the real problem is that the vast majority of non-wealthy people are dumb asses. That's why the wealthy are able to take so much.

The American people allow themselves to be ripped off each and every minute of each and every day of their lives. They just accept that that's the way things are. Most are fanatic consumers that live at or beyond their means. They don't know or care about the difference between an appreciable and a non-appreciable asset. They allow mortgage and car loan terms that are blatant thievery At least some have the brains to be fighting against a health care industry that routinely extorts people for all they can.

The American people have stopped demanding wage and salary increases. They are better educated, more skilled and more productive than ever, but they earn less and less every year. They are collectively a bunch of dumb asses for accepting this.

As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%.

On one hand I don't blame the uber-wealthy for being smart - they owe their wealth to the stupidity of working Americans. On the other hand I am 100% O.K. with super high taxes on the wealthy since they do not earn their wealth.

I just wish the American people would wake the **** up!

It must be sooooo simple to be a Liberal, you never have to know anything.....as you demonstrate daily.


For starters, you imbecile...."As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%."

Do you even know who the '1%' are?

Who are the ‘Top 1%,” so reviled by the class warriors?

1. If the Occupy Wall Street protests are aiming to take down the "1 percent" of Americans who control the increasingly largest chunk of our nation's wealth, perhaps they need to redirect their efforts to somewhere other than Wall Street.
2. According to Nicole Lapin of CNN, financial services professionals make up just 14 percent of that top 1 percent of wage earners. Their average salary of $311,000 per year, while quite gaudy, falls just below the threshold needed to break into the highest-earning subset.
3. The biggest single group of professionals in the top one percent is actually doctors, who make up 16 percent of that subset.
4. Executives and managers outside of finance make up 31% of the total, but Lapin didn't break them down by industry.
5. David Carr of The New York Times would also like to offer up his bosses as targets for the mass uprising, pointing out in his column today that media executives are some of the worst offenders when it comes to CEOs who reap multi-million dollar bonuses and golden parachutes by slashing budgets and laying off rank-and-file workers. Go ahead and add them to the list.
6. So those who want to direct their anger at the winners in the income inequality sweepstakes might want to look beyond the lower of half of Manhattan. There's plenty of other folks closer to home that you might want to have a word with. Where Does the Top 1% Really Work?
7. Lawyers make up 9 percent. The 1 Percent Are Not All Wall Streeters—They're the Bosses
8. To get into the “top 1%” of Americans you don’t need to be a billionaire or millionaire or half-millionaire. The minimum wage earners in that group make about $343k/year….The “top 1%” of wage earners earn 17% of the nation’s income. Who the Heck Are the "Top 1%"?!!

I am just so sick of these envious losers.....Liberals.




Oh.....and BTW.....almost all millionaires earned their money.

New figures from Smart Money show that only 3% of millionaires inherited their wealth. That means 97% earned their vast fortune themselves. Smart Money also reports that 80% of millionaires are extra thrifty shoppers. Many of them even clip coupons! "
Millionaires clip coupons and other secrets of the rich! on clarkhoward.com
http://www.clarkhoward.com/news/cla...s-clip-coupons-and-other-secrets-of-the/nDT4/


How on earth do you find your way back, each day, to that double-decker porta-potty you call home????

 

[LeftofLeft]

The rich have stoled from the poor and middle class these past 50 years at rates that are mindblowing.

Using some of that money rebuild our roads, educational system and other improvements would be only fair...

The goddamn rich are only rich because we're free and that freedom and stability cost money...

Correction. The Established wealthy elite liberals steal from the Middle Class by taxing high income earners. What are Liberals going to do to increase take home pay for The Middle Class?

 

[BrokeLoser]

Haha...You koooks are so predictable.
Per capita factoring is only used by smart people seeking TRUE data. You definitely wouldn't want to use this method as WHOLE TRUTH hurts your little feelings...come to think of it you hate the truth and facts...haha

Actually it was me who offered you a full run down of the program. You just choose not to believe those facts so you can freely talk shit about whoever is on it. Deep down you're an insecure little girl who is trying to feel manly.

Yeah, yeah...let's go with that.
So Billy, you're a super bright guy; you can't play Robin Hood and rob others...how would you take ShaQuita from pet human to self funded?

An earned income tax credit for working would help. You can also raise the minimum wage. You could also allow her to take free job training courses at her local community college. Of course, this woman likely has a job since many adults on food stamps are working. They just make peanuts and can't support their kids on their income alone.

Then why did they have kids in the first place?

It really does not matter. Kids receiving food stamps isn't about the mother whatsoever. That money doesn't at all benefit the mom. She isn't profiting off of having kids on food stamps. I know you cons like to pretend she is, but that's just stupid. You know nothing about how the program works. Stop pretending you do.

Someone needs to tell your poster child starring in this video that "he Moma don't be benfintin from FOOD STAMPS"

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It really does not matter. Kids receiving food stamps isn't about the mother whatsoever. That money doesn't at all benefit the mom. She isn't profiting off of having kids on food stamps. I know you cons like to pretend she is, but that's just stupid. You know nothing about how the program works. Stop pretending you do.

It really does not matter? Boy, doesn't that say it all about liberalism.

Of course it matters. Why? Because we pay poor people to create more poor kids, that's why it matters. Do you think that 300 pound mother would be popping out kids if she didn't get food stamps for them? Actually......food stamps are not just for them, they are for the mother as well. Without those kids, maybe she wouldn't be able to get food stamps.

You liberals come out with all kinds of creative ways to end poverty; none that have ever worked mind you. But the one solution you won't consider is to quit paying people to have poor children.

 

[Billy000]

It really does not matter. Kids receiving food stamps isn't about the mother whatsoever. That money doesn't at all benefit the mom. She isn't profiting off of having kids on food stamps. I know you cons like to pretend she is, but that's just stupid. You know nothing about how the program works. Stop pretending you do.

It really does not matter? Boy, doesn't that say it all about liberalism.

Of course it matters. Why? Because we pay poor people to create more poor kids, that's why it matters. Do you think that 300 pound mother would be popping out kids if she didn't get food stamps for them? Actually......food stamps are not just for them, they are for the mother as well. Without those kids, maybe she wouldn't be able to get food stamps.

You liberals come out with all kinds of creative ways to end poverty; none that have ever worked mind you. But the one solution you won't consider is to quit paying people to have poor children.

Ok no shit she shouldn't of had the kid. I'm not defending her. But it happened. Do we just let the kid starve? Why is this simple logic escaping you? And no dumbass, she isn't profiting off of the kid. Her kid would get a little over $100 per month. The overall cost of raising the kid per month far exceeds that.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It really does not matter. Kids receiving food stamps isn't about the mother whatsoever. That money doesn't at all benefit the mom. She isn't profiting off of having kids on food stamps. I know you cons like to pretend she is, but that's just stupid. You know nothing about how the program works. Stop pretending you do.

It really does not matter? Boy, doesn't that say it all about liberalism.

Of course it matters. Why? Because we pay poor people to create more poor kids, that's why it matters. Do you think that 300 pound mother would be popping out kids if she didn't get food stamps for them? Actually......food stamps are not just for them, they are for the mother as well. Without those kids, maybe she wouldn't be able to get food stamps.

You liberals come out with all kinds of creative ways to end poverty; none that have ever worked mind you. But the one solution you won't consider is to quit paying people to have poor children.

Ok no shit she shouldn't of had the kid. I'm not defending her. But it happened. Do we just let the kid starve? Why is this simple logic escaping you? And no dumbass, she isn't profiting off of the kid. Her kid would get a little over $100 per month. The overall cost of raising the kid per month far exceeds that.

Don't give me that bull. I evicted a family because of food stamps. She was getting $250.00 a month in food stamps for her teen and three year old. How much can a three year old eat for crying out loud?

Yes, these people have more children to get more government handouts. The more children they have, the bigger the welfare check, the larger the SNAP's card, the bigger the HUD house in the suburbs.

There are two ways to really make a difference: one is to have mandatory sterilization for applicants of government assistance, or two, take children out of homes where the parent cannot support them. That takes away the incentive to have more kids we have to support.

Other than that, the problem will continue and likely grow as it has in the past.

 

[Hum Dinger]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

While I have no qualms about taking from the wealthy, it is not the best answer to the huge and grossly unfair wealth distribution.

First, the wealthy have a whole lot more money than they deserve. They are de facto thieves - so I have no qualms about taxing the daylights out of them.

However, the real problem is that the vast majority of non-wealthy people are dumb asses. That's why the wealthy are able to take so much.

The American people allow themselves to be ripped off each and every minute of each and every day of their lives. They just accept that that's the way things are. Most are fanatic consumers that live at or beyond their means. They don't know or care about the difference between an appreciable and a non-appreciable asset. They allow mortgage and car loan terms that are blatant thievery At least some have the brains to be fighting against a health care industry that routinely extorts people for all they can.

The American people have stopped demanding wage and salary increases. They are better educated, more skilled and more productive than ever, but they earn less and less every year. They are collectively a bunch of dumb asses for accepting this.

As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%.

On one hand I don't blame the uber-wealthy for being smart - they owe their wealth to the stupidity of working Americans. On the other hand I am 100% O.K. with super high taxes on the wealthy since they do not earn their wealth.

I just wish the American people would wake the **** up!

By "not earn their wealth" you mean they are not carrying 2X4s to the job site; they are not running a lathe; they are not climbing up a ladder with heavy roof shingles over their shoulders?

Anybody who works earns their money. You don't have to be hands-on to say somebody is worth paying. The wealthy have more money than they deserve? By who's standards--yours? And if they have more money than you judge they deserve, government deserves it more???

If anybody is not working for their money, it's government. Second in line are government dependents that take that money from them.

If taking money away from people because they have too much is a good idea, then why not extrapolate that to other things?

Maybe you have a dozen beautiful bushes in front of your home. Would it not be right for government to come along and talk half of your bushes to give to your neighbor down the street that doesn't have any? Or maybe you have three cars in your family. That's not fair, the lady on the next street only has one. Wouldn't it be fair for government to take one of your cars so that you each have two of them? You have three big screens in your home. That's not right. Not everybody has a big screen. So maybe government should take one of your big screens and give it to somebody hat has a 19 inch screen.

If taking other people's money makes a good society, wouldn't taking people's other property away make it a great one? After all, that's what money is. It's property.

"How much is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

It's amazing that you believe the fantasy that there is some correlation between how hard people work and how wealthy they are.

"Nobody ever got wealthy working for a living".

The only thing wealthy people work at is sucking up all the money they can without making any real contribution to society.

Do you believe that financial industry executives, corporate executives and bankers contribute to society in terms of real productivity on par with their pay?

That banking executives EARN $70 million bonuses?

We live in a society that everyone grabs all they can and have no regard for whether they've earned it or not.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

While I have no qualms about taking from the wealthy, it is not the best answer to the huge and grossly unfair wealth distribution.

First, the wealthy have a whole lot more money than they deserve. They are de facto thieves - so I have no qualms about taxing the daylights out of them.

However, the real problem is that the vast majority of non-wealthy people are dumb asses. That's why the wealthy are able to take so much.

The American people allow themselves to be ripped off each and every minute of each and every day of their lives. They just accept that that's the way things are. Most are fanatic consumers that live at or beyond their means. They don't know or care about the difference between an appreciable and a non-appreciable asset. They allow mortgage and car loan terms that are blatant thievery At least some have the brains to be fighting against a health care industry that routinely extorts people for all they can.

The American people have stopped demanding wage and salary increases. They are better educated, more skilled and more productive than ever, but they earn less and less every year. They are collectively a bunch of dumb asses for accepting this.

As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%.

On one hand I don't blame the uber-wealthy for being smart - they owe their wealth to the stupidity of working Americans. On the other hand I am 100% O.K. with super high taxes on the wealthy since they do not earn their wealth.

I just wish the American people would wake the **** up!

By "not earn their wealth" you mean they are not carrying 2X4s to the job site; they are not running a lathe; they are not climbing up a ladder with heavy roof shingles over their shoulders?

Anybody who works earns their money. You don't have to be hands-on to say somebody is worth paying. The wealthy have more money than they deserve? By who's standards--yours? And if they have more money than you judge they deserve, government deserves it more???

If anybody is not working for their money, it's government. Second in line are government dependents that take that money from them.

If taking money away from people because they have too much is a good idea, then why not extrapolate that to other things?

Maybe you have a dozen beautiful bushes in front of your home. Would it not be right for government to come along and talk half of your bushes to give to your neighbor down the street that doesn't have any? Or maybe you have three cars in your family. That's not fair, the lady on the next street only has one. Wouldn't it be fair for government to take one of your cars so that you each have two of them? You have three big screens in your home. That's not right. Not everybody has a big screen. So maybe government should take one of your big screens and give it to somebody hat has a 19 inch screen.

If taking other people's money makes a good society, wouldn't taking people's other property away make it a great one? After all, that's what money is. It's property.

"How much is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

It's amazing that you believe the fantasy that there is some correlation between how hard people work and how wealthy they are.

"Nobody ever got wealthy working for a living".

The only thing wealthy people work at is sucking up all the money they can without making any real contribution to society.

Do you believe that financial industry executives, corporate executives and bankers contribute to society in terms of real productivity on par with their pay?

That banking executives EARN $70 million bonuses?

We live in a society that everyone grabs all they can and have no regard for whether they've earned it or not.

That's your problem right there: you think that pay should equal how physically hard one works. If that were the case, the french fry maker should be making more than the franchise owner.

Let me ask you: how do you feel when some leftist Hollywood actress makes 10 million dollars for one movie? How about sitcom actors that make one million dollars per half-hour episode each? How about a famous band that makes 70k to play one concert? And if you do object to that, why do leftists never bring them up?

Your worth is valued by how much your employer can get another to do the same job, not by how hard you work. If you have a monkey job anybody can do, you make minimum wage. If you have a job that most people could do but not all, you make better than minimum wage. If you have a job that only half the people can do, you make middle class wages. If you have a job most people can't do, you become wealthy.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[deanrd]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

It's OK if the rich steal from you, right nitwit?

 

[Hum Dinger]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

While I have no qualms about taking from the wealthy, it is not the best answer to the huge and grossly unfair wealth distribution.

First, the wealthy have a whole lot more money than they deserve. They are de facto thieves - so I have no qualms about taxing the daylights out of them.

However, the real problem is that the vast majority of non-wealthy people are dumb asses. That's why the wealthy are able to take so much.

The American people allow themselves to be ripped off each and every minute of each and every day of their lives. They just accept that that's the way things are. Most are fanatic consumers that live at or beyond their means. They don't know or care about the difference between an appreciable and a non-appreciable asset. They allow mortgage and car loan terms that are blatant thievery At least some have the brains to be fighting against a health care industry that routinely extorts people for all they can.

The American people have stopped demanding wage and salary increases. They are better educated, more skilled and more productive than ever, but they earn less and less every year. They are collectively a bunch of dumb asses for accepting this.

As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%.

On one hand I don't blame the uber-wealthy for being smart - they owe their wealth to the stupidity of working Americans. On the other hand I am 100% O.K. with super high taxes on the wealthy since they do not earn their wealth.

I just wish the American people would wake the **** up!

It must be sooooo simple to be a Liberal, you never have to know anything.....as you demonstrate daily.


For starters, you imbecile...."As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%."

Do you even know who the '1%' are?

Who are the ‘Top 1%,” so reviled by the class warriors?

1. If the Occupy Wall Street protests are aiming to take down the "1 percent" of Americans who control the increasingly largest chunk of our nation's wealth, perhaps they need to redirect their efforts to somewhere other than Wall Street.
2. According to Nicole Lapin of CNN, financial services professionals make up just 14 percent of that top 1 percent of wage earners. Their average salary of $311,000 per year, while quite gaudy, falls just below the threshold needed to break into the highest-earning subset.
3. The biggest single group of professionals in the top one percent is actually doctors, who make up 16 percent of that subset.
4. Executives and managers outside of finance make up 31% of the total, but Lapin didn't break them down by industry.
5. David Carr of The New York Times would also like to offer up his bosses as targets for the mass uprising, pointing out in his column today that media executives are some of the worst offenders when it comes to CEOs who reap multi-million dollar bonuses and golden parachutes by slashing budgets and laying off rank-and-file workers. Go ahead and add them to the list.
6. So those who want to direct their anger at the winners in the income inequality sweepstakes might want to look beyond the lower of half of Manhattan. There's plenty of other folks closer to home that you might want to have a word with. Where Does the Top 1% Really Work?
7. Lawyers make up 9 percent. The 1 Percent Are Not All Wall Streeters—They're the Bosses
8. To get into the “top 1%” of Americans you don’t need to be a billionaire or millionaire or half-millionaire. The minimum wage earners in that group make about $343k/year….The “top 1%” of wage earners earn 17% of the nation’s income. Who the Heck Are the "Top 1%"?!!

I am just so sick of these envious losers.....Liberals.




Oh.....and BTW.....almost all millionaires earned their money.

New figures from Smart Money show that only 3% of millionaires inherited their wealth. That means 97% earned their vast fortune themselves. Smart Money also reports that 80% of millionaires are extra thrifty shoppers. Many of them even clip coupons! "
Millionaires clip coupons and other secrets of the rich! on clarkhoward.com
http://www.clarkhoward.com/news/cla...s-clip-coupons-and-other-secrets-of-the/nDT4/


How on earth do you find your way back, each day, to that double-decker porta-potty you call home????

Your lack of reading comprehension shows thru as always!

Did you even read what I posted? Or did you just scan it, see '1%' and decide to go off on one of your mindless tirades?

Try actually reading what I posted for a change.

Then I'll consider accepting your apology.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

The Left Is an Aristocratic Fraud, So They Have a Mental Block Against This

Confiscate inheritance, which is unearned and goes to mostly mediocre recipient. Use it to pay the most intelligent of the next generation for their grades. A society won't grow unless its most valuable human resources are paid up front instead of depressing and discouraging them by mandating that they have to sacrifice their personal lives and personalities to develop themselves unaided before getting rewarded. A seed doesn't grow in sand.

An analogy would be that Larry Bird brought millions of dollars into the NBA by being the first White superstar in decades. That money didn't go to Larry Bird's heirs, it didn't even go to the next White superstar. It went to the whole next generation of stars and even to the other players.

What gives you the right to seize assets that someone DID earn and would like to have their children inherit? That isn't YOUR money! It belongs to the person who worked to make it in the first place.

"Paid up front"? What does that mean exactly? You get paid before you accomplish something of value to society just because you're potentially a valuable human resource? I don't think it's possible to come up with something that would encourage people NOT to contribute to society than what your proposing here!

As for people being forced to "sacrifice their personal lives and personalities"?

Blowhards Are Your Tailwind

The heirs didn't earn a dime, so you've started out with a well-financed lie and you know it. If the rich are so foaming-at-the-mouth insistent on their right to pick winners and losers in the next generation, they must have grabbed their own wealth through luck or cheating. If you want to be a loyal serf groveling before his lord, go back to the crumbling castles of Europe where you belong. This country was built by pioneers escaping from hereditary totalitarianism.

As for it being the decedent's money and he can do anything he wants with it, that's another fair-sounding statement that is not what that is all about in reality. It's the same as bribing the referees at his kid's team's game "with his own money." No one has the right to tilt the playing field; the next generation owns that and certainly does have the right to outlaw anti-competitive birth privileges. If we have to do it on our own, so must the spoiled brats. Only then will the best win and produce the best society. Your days are numbered because only now at unearned privileges' terminal stage, not even brownnoses can get ahead. All the good jobs are pre-assigned to HeirHeads. After all your unrealistic statements, you still feel smart and important because of the loudmouths who are paid millions to bombard you with unAmerican aristocratic propaganda.

You won't pay college students for their grades, yet you're all in favor of giving the fatcats' fatkittens allowances there. That is living-inheritance freeloading, and it's invested in birth, not worth.. All investment in resources is paid up front before production, but you won't apply that rule to the most naturally talented human resources because you jealously need to humiliate them. You not only show ingratitude to the creative; you show a slavish preference for the Nobility With No Ability. This will lead to a stagnant economy, just like hereditary political power has led to a government incapable of doing its job.

College is work without pay; that's all it means. It is an obsolete aristocratic institution, designed predominately for rich kids of no special talent living off an allowance. As long as you're preaching that it's not a sacrifice for the rest of us and intended to humiliate the talented so they'll meekly make the rich richer, you're ranting from a pulpit for bullies. This dysfunctional "education" is not about brains, it's about birth and brownnosing. So until it is replaced by highly paid professional training, it will continue to put inferior people in superior positions.

It's not that the heirs have earned their inheritance...it's that their parents have earned the right to give that inheritance to ANYONE they deem worthy! It's not society's money! It belongs to the people who have worked hard to earn it...

As for what built this country? America prospered because this was the land of opportunity where through the sweat of your brow and your own ingenuity...you could become well off!

All the good jobs are "pre-assigned" to "HeirHeads"? Really? So the Dot Com billionaires only succeeded because they inherited great wealth? .

Birth Privileges Are the Road Back to Serfdom

You refuse to try to refute that it is the same as bribing the referees with "their own money." Second, if I have the money to have a loud band play all night long in my back yard, does that give me the right to disturb the neighbors just because "It's My Own Money"? In other words, that phrase doesn't mean anything, so it's dishonest to make it sound like they're just buying luxury items for their adult children and not setting them up with unearned rank in society, blocking our way or making it self-destructive to try to finish where our talent gives us the right to finish, in front of them. This won't be a proud country until the son of a millionaire has just as much chance of winding up a blue-collar worker as the son of a blue-collar worker does. If Daddy places his brats up half-way to the finish line, we definitely do have the right to break their legs first and make them crawl from wherever he pre-positions them. Only sheep with no self-respect would enter a race like that; real men would say, "If we have to do it on our own, so must they!"

Did we vote on the HeirHeads' entitlements? Why are you such a bootlicker of the Plutes Who Wear the Boots? Economic masochists don't belong in America any more than their spoiled idols do. Only someone with no self-respect would enter a race the way it is set up now.

And society does have the right to abolish aristocratic rule. Besides, where do you think the money originally comes from? Did Daddy earn it on an uninhabited island?

 

[Hum Dinger]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

While I have no qualms about taking from the wealthy, it is not the best answer to the huge and grossly unfair wealth distribution.

First, the wealthy have a whole lot more money than they deserve. They are de facto thieves - so I have no qualms about taxing the daylights out of them.

However, the real problem is that the vast majority of non-wealthy people are dumb asses. That's why the wealthy are able to take so much.

The American people allow themselves to be ripped off each and every minute of each and every day of their lives. They just accept that that's the way things are. Most are fanatic consumers that live at or beyond their means. They don't know or care about the difference between an appreciable and a non-appreciable asset. They allow mortgage and car loan terms that are blatant thievery At least some have the brains to be fighting against a health care industry that routinely extorts people for all they can.

The American people have stopped demanding wage and salary increases. They are better educated, more skilled and more productive than ever, but they earn less and less every year. They are collectively a bunch of dumb asses for accepting this.

As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%.

On one hand I don't blame the uber-wealthy for being smart - they owe their wealth to the stupidity of working Americans. On the other hand I am 100% O.K. with super high taxes on the wealthy since they do not earn their wealth.

I just wish the American people would wake the **** up!

By "not earn their wealth" you mean they are not carrying 2X4s to the job site; they are not running a lathe; they are not climbing up a ladder with heavy roof shingles over their shoulders?

Anybody who works earns their money. You don't have to be hands-on to say somebody is worth paying. The wealthy have more money than they deserve? By who's standards--yours? And if they have more money than you judge they deserve, government deserves it more???

If anybody is not working for their money, it's government. Second in line are government dependents that take that money from them.

If taking money away from people because they have too much is a good idea, then why not extrapolate that to other things?

Maybe you have a dozen beautiful bushes in front of your home. Would it not be right for government to come along and talk half of your bushes to give to your neighbor down the street that doesn't have any? Or maybe you have three cars in your family. That's not fair, the lady on the next street only has one. Wouldn't it be fair for government to take one of your cars so that you each have two of them? You have three big screens in your home. That's not right. Not everybody has a big screen. So maybe government should take one of your big screens and give it to somebody hat has a 19 inch screen.

If taking other people's money makes a good society, wouldn't taking people's other property away make it a great one? After all, that's what money is. It's property.

"How much is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

It's amazing that you believe the fantasy that there is some correlation between how hard people work and how wealthy they are.

"Nobody ever got wealthy working for a living".

The only thing wealthy people work at is sucking up all the money they can without making any real contribution to society.

Do you believe that financial industry executives, corporate executives and bankers contribute to society in terms of real productivity on par with their pay?

That banking executives EARN $70 million bonuses?

We live in a society that everyone grabs all they can and have no regard for whether they've earned it or not.

That's your problem right there: you think that pay should equal how physically hard one works. If that were the case, the french fry maker should be making more than the franchise owner.

Let me ask you: how do you feel when some leftist Hollywood actress makes 10 million dollars for one movie? How about sitcom actors that make one million dollars per half-hour episode each? How about a famous band that makes 70k to play one concert? And if you do object to that, why do leftists never bring them up?

Your worth is valued by how much your employer can get another to do the same job, not by how hard you work. If you have a monkey job anybody can do, you make minimum wage. If you have a job that most people could do but not all, you make better than minimum wage. If you have a job that only half the people can do, you make middle class wages. If you have a job most people can't do, you become wealthy.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

You making a whooping and totally false assumption that I've said that only manual labor has productive value. Don't put words in my mouth.

The current system of an employee being paid according to the 'market value' of their skills is absolutely immoral and nothing short of thievery.

Saying that if an employer can find someone desperate enough to work for less money and disregarding the productive value of employee's work is thievery.

It's the economically advantaged taking advantage of the economically disadvantaged. There's nothing justifiable about it.

If an unskilled employee does productive work worth $1 million in a year, it's O.K. to pay them nothing more than a sandwich a day - as long as they or someone else is desperate enough? Do you have any morals at all?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

So many of the wealthy are so self loathing they'd love for the gov't to take their money, even if it is a blip on the budget. Guys like Gates, Buffett, Bezos, Zuckerburg.

Terminal America Is Based on Birth, Not Worth

Gates was born in the 1%. Therefore, in a true land of opportunity, there should be 99 more Bill Gateses. But there aren't. Gates suspects that he wouldn't have been so uniquely successful without his head start, or he would use his charity to finance equal geniuses the same way his Daddy had financed him from childhood on. In order to continue lying to himself that he did it all on his own, he wastes his money on Third World Low IQs.

Warren Buffett, his partner in insulting the unprivileged but talented, claims that if some of the Bell Curve savages had been born in America, they would have become rich, implying that anyone who doesn't get rich in America has no talent.

It is rarely mentioned that Warren Buffett's father was a US Congressman. That's the only reason he got as far as he did. Not only do those people have a Born to Rule attitude, but their unprivileged contemporaries have an equally unjustifiable Born to Serve inferiority complex drummed into them. So Young Lord Warren being the only one to start his own businesses in high school doesn't make him so special when others could have done that, too, but were told that they were nobodies by the ruling class and even by their own parents and equally humiliated classmates.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Actually it was me who offered you a full run down of the program. You just choose not to believe those facts so you can freely talk shit about whoever is on it. Deep down you're an insecure little girl who is trying to feel manly.

Yeah, yeah...let's go with that.
So Billy, you're a super bright guy; you can't play Robin Hood and rob others...how would you take ShaQuita from pet human to self funded?

An earned income tax credit for working would help. You can also raise the minimum wage. You could also allow her to take free job training courses at her local community college. Of course, this woman likely has a job since many adults on food stamps are working. They just make peanuts and can't support their kids on their income alone.

Then why did they have kids in the first place?

It really does not matter. Kids receiving food stamps isn't about the mother whatsoever. That money doesn't at all benefit the mom. She isn't profiting off of having kids on food stamps. I know you cons like to pretend she is, but that's just stupid. You know nothing about how the program works. Stop pretending you do.

Someone needs to tell your poster child starring in this video that "he Moma don't be benfintin from FOOD STAMPS"

Bang, Bang, Gangbanger!

BATTLE OF BLOOD RIVER (South Africa, 1838)

Blacks: 15,000 Zulu spearchuckers
Whites: 464 Boer farmers, locked and loaded

Black dead: 3,000
White dead: Zero

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

It's OK if the rich steal from you, right, nitwit?

Profit Is a Tax So the Plutocrats Can Waste It Just Like the Government Does

Economic sissies are willing to take a pay cut so the Boss can buy Junior a brand new car to drive to school when he's 16.

 

[Markle]

On one hand I don't blame the uber-wealthy for being smart - they owe their wealth to the stupidity of working Americans. On the other hand I am 100% O.K. with super high taxes on the wealthy since they do not earn their wealth.

Instead of that benign word salad, why say anything or just say, "I got nothin"! Would save everyone a lot of time.

So foolish of you to say the wealthy do not EARN their wealth. Just ignorant!

 

[Markle]

It really does not matter. Kids receiving food stamps isn't about the mother whatsoever. That money doesn't at all benefit the mom. She isn't profiting off of having kids on food stamps.

To whom are the benefits given?

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is not intended to be rhetorical. I have a genuine interest in hearing creative potential solutions not linked to the default; "Take more from the wealthy" and "redistribute wealth"
I'm pessimistic that Libs will even touch this thread with a ten foot pole.
Ready...GO!

While I have no qualms about taking from the wealthy, it is not the best answer to the huge and grossly unfair wealth distribution.

First, the wealthy have a whole lot more money than they deserve. They are de facto thieves - so I have no qualms about taxing the daylights out of them.

However, the real problem is that the vast majority of non-wealthy people are dumb asses. That's why the wealthy are able to take so much.

The American people allow themselves to be ripped off each and every minute of each and every day of their lives. They just accept that that's the way things are. Most are fanatic consumers that live at or beyond their means. They don't know or care about the difference between an appreciable and a non-appreciable asset. They allow mortgage and car loan terms that are blatant thievery At least some have the brains to be fighting against a health care industry that routinely extorts people for all they can.

The American people have stopped demanding wage and salary increases. They are better educated, more skilled and more productive than ever, but they earn less and less every year. They are collectively a bunch of dumb asses for accepting this.

As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%.

On one hand I don't blame the uber-wealthy for being smart - they owe their wealth to the stupidity of working Americans. On the other hand I am 100% O.K. with super high taxes on the wealthy since they do not earn their wealth.

I just wish the American people would wake the **** up!

It must be sooooo simple to be a Liberal, you never have to know anything.....as you demonstrate daily.


For starters, you imbecile...."As things are, the only way money can flow is up the economic ladder - until the vast majority of wealth is owned by a tiny percentage of the people - the infamous 1%."

Do you even know who the '1%' are?

Who are the ‘Top 1%,” so reviled by the class warriors?

1. If the Occupy Wall Street protests are aiming to take down the "1 percent" of Americans who control the increasingly largest chunk of our nation's wealth, perhaps they need to redirect their efforts to somewhere other than Wall Street.
2. According to Nicole Lapin of CNN, financial services professionals make up just 14 percent of that top 1 percent of wage earners. Their average salary of $311,000 per year, while quite gaudy, falls just below the threshold needed to break into the highest-earning subset.
3. The biggest single group of professionals in the top one percent is actually doctors, who make up 16 percent of that subset.
4. Executives and managers outside of finance make up 31% of the total, but Lapin didn't break them down by industry.
5. David Carr of The New York Times would also like to offer up his bosses as targets for the mass uprising, pointing out in his column today that media executives are some of the worst offenders when it comes to CEOs who reap multi-million dollar bonuses and golden parachutes by slashing budgets and laying off rank-and-file workers. Go ahead and add them to the list.
6. So those who want to direct their anger at the winners in the income inequality sweepstakes might want to look beyond the lower of half of Manhattan. There's plenty of other folks closer to home that you might want to have a word with. Where Does the Top 1% Really Work?
7. Lawyers make up 9 percent. The 1 Percent Are Not All Wall Streeters—They're the Bosses
8. To get into the “top 1%” of Americans you don’t need to be a billionaire or millionaire or half-millionaire. The minimum wage earners in that group make about $343k/year….The “top 1%” of wage earners earn 17% of the nation’s income. Who the Heck Are the "Top 1%"?!!

I am just so sick of these envious losers.....Liberals.




Oh.....and BTW.....almost all millionaires earned their money.

New figures from Smart Money show that only 3% of millionaires inherited their wealth. That means 97% earned their vast fortune themselves. Smart Money also reports that 80% of millionaires are extra thrifty shoppers. Many of them even clip coupons! "
Millionaires clip coupons and other secrets of the rich! on clarkhoward.com
http://www.clarkhoward.com/news/cla...s-clip-coupons-and-other-secrets-of-the/nDT4/


How on earth do you find your way back, each day, to that double-decker porta-potty you call home????

Your lack of reading comprehension shows thru as always!

Did you even read what I posted? Or did you just scan it, see '1%' and decide to go off on one of your mindless tirades?

Try actually reading what I posted for a change.

Then I'll consider accepting your apology.

You're embarrassed because I had to school you again?

Excellent.

Try not to post such stupidity again, 'else another trip to the woodshed will be in store.

 

[Markle]

We live in a society that everyone grabs all they can and have no regard for whether they've earned it or not.

Does Bill Gates, and all those who worked with him, earn their money? Did they contribute anything to society?

You, like almost everyone else, earn exactly what they are worth, no more, no less.