Republicans: why do you ignore the wealth inequality issue?

[thereisnospoon]

because everything the government gets involved in they just make worse.

true enough. The government just got out the way in China and instantly ended 1000's of years of en masse starvation.

A liberal will be in near perfect denial! Chinese capitalism conflicts with the near perfect brainwashing they receive.

Sorry, guy, I wouldn't want to live in China and neither would you.

It's still a communist dictatorship. It's just one that now encourages investment and manufacturing. They used to call that "fascism". China's going to have some huge problems down the road. They are already ramping back on press and media freedoms, as they don't like the hedonism commercialism encourages.

http://www.wavsource.com/snds_2012-01-15_2007806885813689/tv/all_in_family/shut_up.wav

 

[P@triot]

The MISSION OF CORPORATISM is to get people off the dependence of the state and place their dependence onto the corporations.

So what is the net effect of that?

Governments will have no power and control over the people but corporations will.

Pretty simple, really.

Yes, let's all become dependent on government. Government is benevolent and most definitely has our best interests in mind.

Isn't is simply astounding how IGNORANT and LAZY liberals are? They are willing to trade freedom for government dependency, and in the process, actually believe that government will come through for them on their needs. Never mind governments history of monumental failure after monumental failure. But I guess when you are lazy, you're willing to take that risk rather than actually provide for yourself.

 

[P@triot]

The rich don't work hard.

The poor do.

You sound so ignorant, there aren't even adjectives to properly communicate it. The average wealthy person puts in 16 hours per day. Your average poor person barely does 16 per week.

Bill Gates worked around the clock building Microsoft, doing more than 16 hour days. And Steve Jobs was legendary for working around the clock and driving his employees to do the same when he first founded Apple.

Chris, you're just a lazy and jealous little spiteful creature. You're too lazy to better yourself, and you hate anyone who has done better than you. It really is an unbecoming quality. Why don't you turn to God and turn your life around instead of hating others success and crying about it over your keyboard in your mom's basement?

 

[Rozman]

Republicans ignore it as we feel that you need to earn it. Most of the poor are lazy and don't wish to pound the floor to advance them selfs.

Poor-think it should be handed to you=no wealth. You think life is a joke.
Rich-work hard and plan=more wealth!

Why should the people that work hard and are smart enough to save up give you their money?

I already told you I personally did not want their money. Again, it's arguably not their money if they didn't technically earn it.

Again, it's arguably not their money if they didn't technically earn it.

If they didn't earn it as you claim then who does that money belong to ....You?
President Obama,Michelle Obama.

You guys don't like the rules of the game then change the rules.
Instead you imply that people got their wealth by criminal means...
People with half a brain see right through this class warfare tactic.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Republicans ignore it as we feel that you need to earn it. Most of the poor are lazy and don't wish to pound the floor to advance them selfs.

Poor-think it should be handed to you=no wealth. You think life is a joke.
Rich-work hard and plan=more wealth!

Why should the people that work hard and are smart enough to save up give you their money?

I already told you I personally did not want their money. Again, it's arguably not their money if they didn't technically earn it.

Again, it's arguably not their money if they didn't technically earn it.

If they didn't earn it as you claim then who does that money belong to ....You?
President Obama,Michelle Obama.

You guys don't like the rules of the game then change the rules.
Instead you imply that people got their wealth by criminal means...
People with half a brain see right through this class warfare tactic.

Isn't it funny how he believes he can simply claim the money held by those he finds objectionable is not really "theirs". But when asked for the reasons he believes this we get a bunch of hogwash.

 

[Foxfyre]

I already told you I personally did not want their money. Again, it's arguably not their money if they didn't technically earn it.

Again, it's arguably not their money if they didn't technically earn it.

If they didn't earn it as you claim then who does that money belong to ....You?
President Obama,Michelle Obama.

You guys don't like the rules of the game then change the rules.
Instead you imply that people got their wealth by criminal means...
People with half a brain see right through this class warfare tactic.

Isn't it funny how he believes he can simply claim the money held by those he finds objectionable is not really "theirs". But when asked for the reasons he believes this we get a bunch of hogwash.

But that is what about half of America is becoming and the underlying basis for the leftist ideology is all about isn't it? The idea that if Citizen A has more than Citizen B, then Citizen B is entitled to some of what Citizen A has. And it is just when the government takes Citizen A's property for the benefit of Citizen B and, when that happens, the Left feels righteous.

The problem is that a little is seen as nothing at all, and the more that is taken, the more the Left feels justified in taking still more. It becomes a viscious circle from which there is less and less capability to escape. The Founders saw ones lawfully acquired property as inviolate and intended for the Constitution to protect that as an unalienable right.

The concept has been at least touched on in this thread:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/208522-two-cultures-hunters-and-gatherers-vs-free-stuff.html

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

the more that is taken, the more the Left feels justified in taking still more. It becomes a viscious circle ]

yes liberalism has become mostly about using government to steal from the minority.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-Benjamin Franklin

 

[Foxfyre]

the more that is taken, the more the Left feels justified in taking still more. It becomes a viscious circle ]

yes liberalism has become mostly about using government to steal from the minority.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-Benjamin Franklin

I have long argued that the only solution to the dilemma is a constitutional amendment forbididng anyone in the White House, Congress, or the federal bureaucracy from dispensing any charity, benevolence, or relief from the federal treasury. That was once an iron clad policy of the Federal government until Teddy Roosevelt began tweaking the rules. Ever since the snowball of federal largess, small and slow at first, has been gaining momentum until it now mows down anything unlucky enough to be in its path. It is responsible for massive fraud, self-serving policy, cheating, and graft both in government and in the private sector who receives the money.

I think Conservatives, including those who are Republicans, are becoming increasingly conscious of the problem and know the ONLY solution to wealth inequality is to encourage those who make less to make more, but it is going to take a massive amount of guts and courage to fix it. As we are seeing in socialist country after socialist country where the public coffers inevitably ran dry, those who are trying to rachet back the freebies are finding their very lives, not to mention their careers, in danger as angry mobs take to the street. THAT is the legacy of redistribution of wealth by the government.

 

[alan1]

the more that is taken, the more the Left feels justified in taking still more. It becomes a viscious circle ]

yes liberalism has become mostly about using government to steal from the minority.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-Benjamin Franklin

I have long argued that the only solution to the dilemma is a constitutional amendment forbididng anyone in the White House, Congress, or the federal bureaucracy from dispensing any charity, benevolence, or relief from the federal treasury. That was once an iron clad policy of the Federal government until Teddy Roosevelt began tweaking the rules. Ever since the snowball of federal largess, small and slow at first, has been gaining momentum until it now mows down anything unlucky enough to be in its path. It is responsible for massive fraud, self-serving policy, cheating, and graft both in government and in the private sector who receives the money.

I think Conservatives, including those who are Republicans, are becoming increasingly conscious of the problem and know the ONLY solution to wealth inequality is to encourage those who make less to make more, but it is going to take a massive amount of guts and courage to fix it. As we are seeing in socialist country after socialist country where the public coffers inevitably ran dry, those who are trying to rachet back the freebies are finding their very lives, not to mention their careers, in danger as angry mobs take to the street. THAT is the legacy of redistribution of wealth by the government.

I know this has been posted here before, but perhaps some folks that haven't seen it will read it.
David Crockett Speech

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I have long argued that the only solution to the dilemma is a constitutional amendment forbididng anyone in the White House, Congress, or the federal bureaucracy from dispensing any charity, benevolence, or relief from the federal treasury. That was once an iron clad policy of the Federal government

"The government of the United States [federal government] is a definite government confined to specified objects [powers]. It is not like state governments, whose powers are more general. CHARITY IS NO PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE DUTY OF THE GOVERNMENT."
-James madison

encourage those who make less to make more, but it is going to take a massive amount of guts and courage to fix it.

yes guts and courage in the face of liberal policy that manufactures the desire to earn less by constantly enlarging welfare programs.
How do 74% of black women and a rising number of hispanic and white women support themselves as single mothers without college and often with out HS? They do it with liberalism of course.

 

[Foxfyre]

I have long argued that the only solution to the dilemma is a constitutional amendment forbididng anyone in the White House, Congress, or the federal bureaucracy from dispensing any charity, benevolence, or relief from the federal treasury. That was once an iron clad policy of the Federal government

"The government of the United States [federal government] is a definite government confined to specified objects [powers]. It is not like state governments, whose powers are more general. CHARITY IS NO PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE DUTY OF THE GOVERNMENT."
-James madison

encourage those who make less to make more, but it is going to take a massive amount of guts and courage to fix it.

yes guts and courage in the face of liberal policy that manufactures the desire to earn less by constantly enlarging welfare programs.
How do 74% of black women and a rising number of hispanic and white women support themselves as single mothers without college and often with out HS? They do it with liberalism of course.

Yes, I was just watching a segment of The Factor citing a recent New York Times piece that, to the Times' credit, published the sad statistics that around half of American babies, and a huge percentage babies born in minority groups, are born to single mothers, many who have no interest in marrying the father if she even knows who he is. Such babies are born with an extremely high likelihood that they will grow up poor, that they will drop out of school, that they will get into trouble the with law, run with gangs, and/or abuse controlled substances.

It is HERE that the largest income inquity exists, and no amount of government money thrown at it will correct it, but an increasing amount of government money is being budgeted for it just the same.

I wonder if our leftist (Democrat) friends will even admit, much less consider, that in the wealth inequality issue?

 

[thereisnospoon]

I have long argued that the only solution to the dilemma is a constitutional amendment forbididng anyone in the White House, Congress, or the federal bureaucracy from dispensing any charity, benevolence, or relief from the federal treasury. That was once an iron clad policy of the Federal government

"The government of the United States [federal government] is a definite government confined to specified objects [powers]. It is not like state governments, whose powers are more general. CHARITY IS NO PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE DUTY OF THE GOVERNMENT."
-James madison

encourage those who make less to make more, but it is going to take a massive amount of guts and courage to fix it.

yes guts and courage in the face of liberal policy that manufactures the desire to earn less by constantly enlarging welfare programs.
How do 74% of black women and a rising number of hispanic and white women support themselves as single mothers without college and often with out HS? They do it with liberalism of course.

Yes, I was just watching a segment of The Factor citing a recent New York Times piece that, to the Times' credit, published the sad statistics that around half of American babies, and a huge percentage babies born in minority groups, are born to single mothers, many who have no interest in marrying the father if she even knows who he is. Such babies are born with an extremely high likelihood that they will grow up poor, that they will drop out of school, that they will get into trouble the with law, run with gangs, and/or abuse controlled substances.

It is HERE that the largest income inquity exists, and no amount of government money thrown at it will correct it, but an increasing amount of government money is being budgeted for it just the same.

I wonder if our leftist (Democrat) friends will even admit, much less consider, that in the wealth inequality issue?

Never.
Both whites and non whites together who benefit from the welfare state are not only encouraged to vote for their apparent benefactors but are expected to vote for them.
This sets up a never ending cycle of entitlement and poverty.

 

[Foxfyre]

"The government of the United States [federal government] is a definite government confined to specified objects [powers]. It is not like state governments, whose powers are more general. CHARITY IS NO PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE DUTY OF THE GOVERNMENT."
-James madison




yes guts and courage in the face of liberal policy that manufactures the desire to earn less by constantly enlarging welfare programs.
How do 74% of black women and a rising number of hispanic and white women support themselves as single mothers without college and often with out HS? They do it with liberalism of course.

Yes, I was just watching a segment of The Factor citing a recent New York Times piece that, to the Times' credit, published the sad statistics that around half of American babies, and a huge percentage babies born in minority groups, are born to single mothers, many who have no interest in marrying the father if she even knows who he is. Such babies are born with an extremely high likelihood that they will grow up poor, that they will drop out of school, that they will get into trouble the with law, run with gangs, and/or abuse controlled substances.

It is HERE that the largest income inquity exists, and no amount of government money thrown at it will correct it, but an increasing amount of government money is being budgeted for it just the same.

I wonder if our leftist (Democrat) friends will even admit, much less consider, that in the wealth inequality issue?

Never.
Both whites and non whites together who benefit from the welfare state are not only encouraged to vote for their apparent benefactors but are expected to vote for them.
This sets up a never ending cycle of entitlement and poverty.

It is more than that. It is a 180 cultural change from the world of their current generation's grandparents.

In the 1950's we were still under the influence of America's 'greatest generation' that put God, family, country, and profession as the top priorities and usually in that order. An education was valued, whether equipping somebody for a professional career or equpping him/her to earn his/her bread. Young people were expected to respect their elders and live their lives in accordance with basic communities conduct, dress, speech, and values, at least in public. Of course there were exceptions, but the norm was that a young man acquired skills to earn a living and was gainfully employed and prepared to support a family when he proposed. A wedding was a prerequisit before the first baby came along. Living together before marriage was not a common thing. The traditional nuclear family was the backbone of the American culture and reason that there was a strong, robust, prosperous middle class.

Now that the leftists anti-culture rebels of the 1960's and their mentors are in control of education, the media, and a large chunk of the government, single motherhood is now considered the norm, recreational drugs, tattoos, piercings, and glorification of alternate lifestyles, obscenity, soft porn (visual or in language) and a general coarseness and crudeness is emulated, glorified, and even promoted in sports, the media, in the entertainment world. The entitlement mentality has replaced much of a culture of work and earning what one has.

The new normal is a certain prescription for increased poverty and a greater divide between those who prosper and those who who not prosper so much.

Is that the only cause of the disparity? Of course not. But I believe it is a huge part of it and if we were still holding most of the better 1950's values. the divide would not be so noticable and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The entitlement mentality has replaced much of a culture of work and earning what one has.

yes A great book titled " Never Enough" puts per capita social welfare spending at 15 times what is was in 1970, adjusted for inflation.

 

[P@triot]

Yes, I was just watching a segment of The Factor citing a recent New York Times piece that, to the Times' credit, published the sad statistics that around half of American babies, and a huge percentage babies born in minority groups, are born to single mothers, many who have no interest in marrying the father if she even knows who he is. Such babies are born with an extremely high likelihood that they will grow up poor, that they will drop out of school, that they will get into trouble the with law, run with gangs, and/or abuse controlled substances.

It is HERE that the largest income inquity exists, and no amount of government money thrown at it will correct it, but an increasing amount of government money is being budgeted for it just the same.

I wonder if our leftist (Democrat) friends will even admit, much less consider, that in the wealth inequality issue?

Never.
Both whites and non whites together who benefit from the welfare state are not only encouraged to vote for their apparent benefactors but are expected to vote for them.
This sets up a never ending cycle of entitlement and poverty.

It is more than that. It is a 180 cultural change from the world of their current generation's grandparents.

In the 1950's we were still under the influence of America's 'greatest generation' that put God, family, country, and profession as the top priorities and usually in that order. An education was valued, whether equipping somebody for a professional career or equpping him/her to earn his/her bread. Young people were expected to respect their elders and live their lives in accordance with basic communities conduct, dress, speech, and values, at least in public. Of course there were exceptions, but the norm was that a young man acquired skills to earn a living and was gainfully employed and prepared to support a family when he proposed. A wedding was a prerequisit before the first baby came along. Living together before marriage was not a common thing. The traditional nuclear family was the backbone of the American culture and reason that there was a strong, robust, prosperous middle class.

Now that the leftists anti-culture rebels of the 1960's and their mentors are in control of education, the media, and a large chunk of the government, single motherhood is now considered the norm, recreational drugs, tattoos, piercings, and glorification of alternate lifestyles, obscenity, soft porn (visual or in language) and a general coarseness and crudeness is emulated, glorified, and even promoted in sports, the media, in the entertainment world. The entitlement mentality has replaced much of a culture of work and earning what one has.

The new normal is a certain prescription for increased poverty and a greater divide between those who prosper and those who who not prosper so much.

Is that the only cause of the disparity? Of course not. But I believe it is a huge part of it and if we were still holding most of the better 1950's values. the divide would not be so noticable and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Well said Foxfyre - outstanding! It's tragic for those of us who have a true understanding of where we started, how great we were, the opportunities we had, and the decay that we have ultimately become. I find few things as sickening as listening to Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagen's distain and contempt for the US Constitution. It's simply mind boggling that people who were intrusted - and who swore an oath - to uphold and defend the Constitution could completely reject it and replace it with their own fascist, Nazi-style "laws from the bench". They don't make decisions based on the Constitution, they make decisions with the express purpose of usurping the Constitution. Like little fascist dictators, they abuse their position and impose their will on the entire nation. What makes it worse is that our founders were brilliant enough to acknowledge that they didn't know everything, and left legal channels available (ie amendments) for changing the Constitution. However, since the left-wing nut jobs can't get the votes to legally create the European-style welfare nanny-state they want, and instead of respecting our laws and just accepting that fact, they move ahead nefariously and in violation of our Constitutional laws.

When you add that to the fact that we have a comprehensive decay of society stemming from moral collapse (drugs, promiscuity, loss of integrity, crime), godlessness (atheists, removal of God from our schools and communities, etc.), and unethical "standards" (everyone owes me because I was born, if I don't have what I want I will just take it from someone else, etc.) you get a nation that is $16 trillion in debt, on the verge of collapse, and operating with an unconstitutional, corrupt government. This is exactly what the liberals wanted - an atheist nation, hooked on drugs, creating welfare babies at alarming rates, and completely, totally, and utterly beholden to the government. It's total power for the liberal politician, which is - of course - exactly what the liberals wanted. Power and control through a nation that is relying on government, and thus, beholden to them.

 

[P@triot]

I already told you I personally did not want their money. Again, it's arguably not their money if they didn't technically earn it.

so if someones grandparents worked hard for the money and passed it onto their grandchildren..what do you suggest these people should do with their inheritence? give it to the Guberment for the greater good of the country?

my gawd man.

If someone dies there is no estate tax until it exceeds $5,000,000 for an individual and $10,000,000 for a couple. And fewer than three people out of 1,000 even have to pay anything.

http://www.cbpp.org/files/estatetaxmyths.pdf

So what else you got?

And your point would be? I'm sorry, but someone with $5 milion or more doesn't have a right to leave everything to their children and granchildren, just because you're a dirty, filthy, lazy, piece-of-shit biker who thinks he can TAKE from others what doesn't belong to him? With each post you show the world why you are poor biker - phenomenal ignorance coupled with extreme laziness...

I don't care if it's $500 TRILLION dollars - it belongs to that family and NOT to YOU or the US government. People like you make me sick. Get the **** out of our country and go live in Cuba if you like Socialism so much.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I don't care if it's $500 TRILLION dollars - it belongs to that family and NOT to YOU or the US government. People like you make me sick. Get the **** out of our country and go live in Cuba if you like Socialism so much.

also,

1) if people know the liberals will steal their estate at the point of a gun why earn it in the first place like Gates or Jobs did by making revolutionary products.

2) if people know the liberals will steal their money why not waste it before they die to thwart the violent liberal theft? Do we want to encourage that?

3) if people cant use their money to help their families and causes at death why let them do it in life. The violent liberal must then tax them 20 years before they die.

4) the liberals have spent us $16 trillion into debt and our problems are worse than ever. Does anyone think a new tax, on our most productive citizens no less, to give liberals more to waste will solve any problems?

5) if Bill Gates cant give his kids his money should he be allowed to give them his brains? Why not hold them back in school in public schools so they don't get an advantage?

 

[GoneBezerk]

You mean like when dumbass Biden is at a black tie event where people paid $10,000 for their dinner last night and he talked about Republicans not understanding the middle class.

You people are fucked in the head. Democrats have $10,000-$50,000 dinner plates and you act like they are for the common man. Biden doesn't know shit about the common man, he even makes racist comments about Pakistani "lingo" at 7-11....

The facts should anger you.

You say any person deserves to keep every cent they make. That would be fine, except that most of the people in the top 5% are not EARNING all of the money that they are MAKING.

Why ignore the evidence?

Wealth And Inequality In America

Productivity and profits are up, yet wages for the middle class haven't changed over the last few decades unlike the 1%

I don't think that I should make more money simply because of the top 5%. I just the think the wealthy should pay a fair tax that would go to benefit programs for lower level workers. In doing so, their hardwork can be fulfilled.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I just the think the wealthy should pay a fair tax

The top 1% pay 38% of all federal income taxes. The bottom 50% pay nothing!! PLease don't forget. Having been brain washed is no excuse

 

[oreo]

The facts should anger you.

You say any person deserves to keep every cent they make. That would be fine, except that most of the people in the top 5% are not EARNING all of the money that they are MAKING.

Why ignore the evidence?

Wealth And Inequality In America

Productivity and profits are up, yet wages for the middle class haven't changed over the last few decades unlike the 1%

I don't think that I should make more money simply because of the top 5%. I just the think the wealthy should pay a fair tax that would go to benefit programs for lower level workers. In doing so, their hardwork can be fulfilled.

When you are talking about the 1%--which equates to people who are making over 300K per year. The top 5% bracket are 250K & over. Meaning that the other 95% are in income brackets--from 250K and below--(which is the MIDDLE CLASS.)

Now if you really believe that 160 MILLION working Americans are going to "split" up the income on 1% of the population and come up with an extra dime in their pockets--you're sadly mistaken. The MATH is just not there for that.