Question for lib/dems

[OODA_Loop]

i guess once you get used to swiping crumbs from the rich, it's hard to imagine other people not kissing ass to get by.

Me thinks your livelihood involves monied participants schmuck knuckle

you'd be wrong, again.

What do you do ?

Entitlement ? Government ? Private-sector ? Non-profit ?

All requires the monied, turd burglar.

 

[Trajan]

Would you rather have a growing economy where the rich guys get 9 out of every 10 dollars of new wealth that are created, or an economy where nobody gets anything? First scenario, you got a dollar, 2nd one you got nothin'.

A hypothetical situation to be sure, but it sure feels like you guys are so wrapped around the axel that some rich guy gets 9 out of 10 dollars that you forget you'll end up with nothing. Personally, I think we're all better off getting the same slice out of a bigger pie than we are with a bigger slice of a smaller pie.

Personally, I think we're all better off getting the same slice out of a bigger pie than we are with a bigger slice of a smaller pie.

sounds like a GDP fed. revenue % question, you want that slice of fed. revenue of say 18%- of a bigger GDP pie, not 19% of a smaller one etc...

 

[OODA_Loop]

how's that yahoo poll going?

Romney 57% of 700,000+ respondents.

Then Yahoo pulled it for the "Did you Vote ?" Poll.

 

[lefty_rosenthal]

Me thinks your livelihood involves monied participants schmuck knuckle

you'd be wrong, again.

What do you do ?

Entitlement ? Government ? Private-sector ? Non-profit ?

All requires the monied, turd burglar.

Del will just give vague, non answers followed by an occasional insult about licking boots. He's ducked several real questions and has concreted my opinion on any liberal I've ever had contact with.

"Confuse a liberal...Use facts and logic"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzdhEKxgGXg]Romney Clubs Seals - YouTube[/ame]

 

[del]

Me thinks your livelihood involves monied participants schmuck knuckle

you'd be wrong, again.

What do you do ?

Entitlement ? Government ? Private-sector ? Non-profit ?

All requires the monied, turd burglar.

i do business with people. they pay me for my services.

i don't kiss their asses, tug my forelock and say "thank you sir, may i have another?" as i back out of their presence.

but if that's what works for you, more power to you.

personally, i'd rather be dead than be a suck up like you.

 

[Steelplate]

Would you rather have a growing economy where the rich guys get 9 out of every 10 dollars of new wealth that are created, or an economy where nobody gets anything? First scenario, you got a dollar, 2nd one you got nothin'.

A hypothetical situation to be sure..

Yes, it is hypothetical. More inequality does not make the economy growing faster -- and that is why it is a problem.

"Equality" makes an economy grow? How?

Who said anything about equality? All we are saying is.....pay your ******* workers so they can:

A. Keep a roof over their heads, pay their bills and feed their families without government help.

B. Have disposable income to buy and create demand for goods....which is GOOD for business, creates jobs and increases profits

C. have enough taxable income that it helps with the National Debt.

That's going to take a conscious effort from our business community to accept less in profits and personal gain in the short term for even greater ones in the long term.

It seems to me that them paying 4% more in income taxes is irrelevant to the debt....because there's not enough to make a dent.....but....get 100 million people on a paying basis, with real money in their pockets? Then you have something.

 

[emilynghiem]

Would you rather have a growing economy where the rich guys get 9 out of every 10 dollars of new wealth that are created, or an economy where nobody gets anything? First scenario, you got a dollar, 2nd one you got nothin'.

A hypothetical situation to be sure, but it sure feels like you guys are so wrapped around the axel that some rich guy gets 9 out of 10 dollars that you forget you'll end up with nothing. Personally, I think we're all better off getting the same slice out of a bigger pie than we are with a bigger slice of a smaller pie.

I'd like to see more communities organized around a "tiered" business plan, modeled after the campus system, where there is room for students in entry-level internships/work-study jobs, as well as post-graduate positions and training for managers and corporate developers. So no matter what level a person is coming in, or is training for, everyone can receive support and mentorship and move forward up the ladder to the next stage.

Otherwise, this whole scenario of "competing" between either/or choices doesn't accommodate or serve everyone equally. Why frame the question this way?

Why not ask how we can use the current systems of academic and business structures, to reform the prisons, schools and health services to develop a sustainable system of integrating education with jobs, so the schools and communities are financially viable?

Why can't everyone win by setting up the system to work with anyone's social level?

 

[OODA_Loop]

you'd be wrong, again.

What do you do ?

Entitlement ? Government ? Private-sector ? Non-profit ?

All requires the monied, turd burglar.

i do business with people. they pay me for my services.

i don't kiss their asses, tug my forelock and say "thank you sir, may i have another?" as i back out of their presence.

How much extra do they have to pay for the ass and forelock work Steve Gobie ?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Would you rather have a growing economy where the rich guys get 9 out of every 10 dollars of new wealth that are created, or an economy where nobody gets anything? First scenario, you got a dollar, 2nd one you got nothin'.

A hypothetical situation to be sure, but it sure feels like you guys are so wrapped around the axel that some rich guy gets 9 out of 10 dollars that you forget you'll end up with nothing. Personally, I think we're all better off getting the same slice out of a bigger pie than we are with a bigger slice of a smaller pie.

This is America, damn it!

If we can put a man on the Moon, we can come up with a system of fair and simple taxes, public budgets that are balanced by law, and transparency in all things politics.

Doing it the way we're doing it makes us look brutish, greedy and incredibly stupid from space. It's no wonder we don't get any visitors.

 

[del]

What do you do ?

Entitlement ? Government ? Private-sector ? Non-profit ?

All requires the monied, turd burglar.

i do business with people. they pay me for my services.

i don't kiss their asses, tug my forelock and say "thank you sir, may i have another?" as i back out of their presence.

How much extra do they have to pay for the ass and forelock work ?

they know better than to ask.

you'll have to go elsewhere to see if you're leaving money on the table when they bend you over it.

sorry, yahoo

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Yes, it is hypothetical. More inequality does not make the economy growing faster -- and that is why it is a problem.

"Equality" makes an economy grow? How?

Who said anything about equality? All we are saying is.....pay your ******* workers so they can:

A. Keep a roof over their heads, pay their bills and feed their families without government help.

B. Have disposable income to buy and create demand for goods....which is GOOD for business, creates jobs and increases profits

C. have enough taxable income that it helps with the National Debt.

That's going to take a conscious effort from our business community to accept less in profits and personal gain in the short term for even greater ones in the long term.

It seems to me that them paying 4% more in income taxes is irrelevant to the debt....because there's not enough to make a dent.....but....get 100 million people on a paying basis, with real money in their pockets? Then you have something.

How does raising someones taxes accomplish that?

 

[ilia25]

Would you rather have a growing economy where the rich guys get 9 out of every 10 dollars of new wealth that are created, or an economy where nobody gets anything? First scenario, you got a dollar, 2nd one you got nothin'.

A hypothetical situation to be sure..

Yes, it is hypothetical. More inequality does not make the economy growing faster -- and that is why it is a problem.

"Equality" makes an economy grow? How?

Who said anything about equality? Less inequality makes for a better society as long as it does not reduce economic growth. And the US have way to much of inequality.

 

[rightwinger]

you'd be wrong, again.

What do you do ?

Entitlement ? Government ? Private-sector ? Non-profit ?

All requires the monied, turd burglar.

Del will just give vague, non answers followed by an occasional insult about licking boots. He's ducked several real questions and has concreted my opinion on any liberal I've ever had contact with.

"Confuse a liberal...Use facts and logic"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzdhEKxgGXg]Romney Clubs Seals - YouTube[/ame]

How many times have you posted the same lame video today?

Beating a dead horse

 

[bripat9643]

Would you rather have a growing economy where the rich guys get 9 out of every 10 dollars of new wealth that are created, or an economy where nobody gets anything? First scenario, you got a dollar, 2nd one you got nothin'.

A hypothetical situation to be sure..

Yes, it is hypothetical. More inequality does not make the economy growing faster -- and that is why it is a problem.

Confiscatory taxation doesn't make the economy grow. True story.

No nation ever taxed its way to prosperity.

 

[Steelplate]

"Equality" makes an economy grow? How?

Who said anything about equality? All we are saying is.....pay your ******* workers so they can:

A. Keep a roof over their heads, pay their bills and feed their families without government help.

B. Have disposable income to buy and create demand for goods....which is GOOD for business, creates jobs and increases profits

C. have enough taxable income that it helps with the National Debt.

That's going to take a conscious effort from our business community to accept less in profits and personal gain in the short term for even greater ones in the long term.

It seems to me that them paying 4% more in income taxes is irrelevant to the debt....because there's not enough to make a dent.....but....get 100 million people on a paying basis, with real money in their pockets? Then you have something.

How does raising someones taxes accomplish that?

Where did I say anything about taxes?....read my first paragraph after the lettered items....in fact I said that tax increases on the wealthy would be irrelevant to the debt in the very next one.

Look, I'm not going to sit here and feel sorry for our wealthiest while so many hard working people can't make enough to survive without government help and they have seen their wealth and power explode in the same time span.

They have to take at LEAST half of the responsibility for this problem....and that's being nice.

 

[rightwinger]

Would you rather have a growing economy where the rich guys get 9 out of every 10 dollars of new wealth that are created, or an economy where nobody gets anything? First scenario, you got a dollar, 2nd one you got nothin'.

A hypothetical situation to be sure..

Yes, it is hypothetical. More inequality does not make the economy growing faster -- and that is why it is a problem.

Confiscatory taxation doesn't make the economy grow. True story.

No nation ever taxed its way to prosperity.

It is merely applying our tax dollars to where they do the most good. Throwing money at the rich does not help our economy. Investing our tax dollars in education, technology, healthcare, infrastructure does help the economy

 

[LeftofLeft]

Yes, it is hypothetical. More inequality does not make the economy growing faster -- and that is why it is a problem.

"Equality" makes an economy grow? How?

Who said anything about equality? All we are saying is.....pay your ******* workers so they can:

A. Keep a roof over their heads, pay their bills and feed their families without government help.

B. Have disposable income to buy and create demand for goods....which is GOOD for business, creates jobs and increases profits

C. have enough taxable income that it helps with the National Debt.

That's going to take a conscious effort from our business community to accept less in profits and personal gain in the short term for even greater ones in the long term.

It seems to me that them paying 4% more in income taxes is irrelevant to the debt....because there's not enough to make a dent.....but....get 100 million people on a paying basis, with real money in their pockets? Then you have something.

That's going to take a conscious effort from our business community to accept less in profits and personal gain in the short term for even greater ones in the long term.

You had some good points in A and B, but this statement just shows how anti-capitalist you really are. JFK had the best vision for the modern US economy. Look it up.

 

[Wiseacre]

Would you rather have a growing economy where the rich guys get 9 out of every 10 dollars of new wealth that are created, or an economy where nobody gets anything? First scenario, you got a dollar, 2nd one you got nothin'.

A hypothetical situation to be sure..

Yes, it is hypothetical. More inequality does not make the economy growing faster -- and that is why it is a problem.

That may be true, but misses the point. The question I'm proposing is whether or not you can grow the economy and avoid more inequality. I would say it's possible, but there is a point where you raise taxes enough to where economic growth is negatively impacted. There are times and situations where changing the tax rates might or might not be effective; generally I'd say raising them in a bull market is okay, raising them at a time like this is not.

 

[Steelplate]

"Equality" makes an economy grow? How?

Who said anything about equality? All we are saying is.....pay your ******* workers so they can:

A. Keep a roof over their heads, pay their bills and feed their families without government help.

B. Have disposable income to buy and create demand for goods....which is GOOD for business, creates jobs and increases profits

C. have enough taxable income that it helps with the National Debt.

That's going to take a conscious effort from our business community to accept less in profits and personal gain in the short term for even greater ones in the long term.

It seems to me that them paying 4% more in income taxes is irrelevant to the debt....because there's not enough to make a dent.....but....get 100 million people on a paying basis, with real money in their pockets? Then you have something.

That's going to take a conscious effort from our business community to accept less in profits and personal gain in the short term for even greater ones in the long term.

You had some good points in A and B, but this statement just shows how anti-capitalist you really are. JFK had the best vision for the modern US economy. Look it up.

Oh bullshit....I am pro Capitalist.....You are just too ******* stupid to realize that Capitalists need a MARKET for their goods and services....who is that market? the rest of the people.

If you can't figure that out, then you aren't a pro Capitalist....you're pro Aristocracy type.....You'd be a British sympathizer in 1776....or a guy that goes to Vegas and roots for the house.

 

[AVG-JOE]

They don't understand this concept. Facts are facts: Rich people pay our taxes, rich people create jobs. More rich people=better for America. It's not rocket science

Couldn't have said it better.

The problem with Trickle Down Golden Shower Republican Economics is that it doesn't make more rich Americans, it's designed from the top down to make fewer and fewer American Kings.

That ain't right.