Republicans: why do you ignore the wealth inequality issue?

[Luddly Neddite]

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.

Oh Billy, you left wing slut,

Well for starters your god, Islamic Obama Hussein is fouling the whole nation state into a $9 per gallon gas, impoverished 4th world country.

Good example of the rw ignorance.

I would guess there are really very few rw's who believe that gas prices are controlled or even influenced by the president. They weren't when bush was in office and they're not controlled or influenced by President Obama now.

Who here really does not know that is fact?

And yet, the rw's will repeat this same fiction over and over again.

THAT is why they will foolishly vote for Mittens even knowing that a vote for him is actually a vote for Grover Norquist and Karl Rove and lush Limb-a-a-a-a. They know he's a disaster but they'll do anyway because they have been told to and they do as they're told. Just as Norquist has said Mitt will do.

 

[blackhawk]

I have a question or two there are many Democrats who make far more than I do how much or what percent of their wealth am I entitled to and why?

 

[geoff787]

You're not entitled to any of it. You get Social Security because you paid for it. You get Medicare because you paid for it. We get a defense because we all pay for it. We get fire, police, roads, schools, river dikes, bridges etc. etc. etc. because we pay for it. Oh, did I say "we"? Not the richest among us, they are not paying their fair share, not even close. The Republican Party wants to tax you all right, then give their rich buddies tax breaks. Wake up!

 

[snakedoc]

You're not entitled to any of it. You get Social Security because you paid for it. You get Medicare because you paid for it. We get a defense because we all pay for it. We get fire, police, roads, schools, river dikes, bridges etc. etc. etc. because we pay for it. Oh, did I say "we"? Not the richest among us, they are not paying their fair share, not even close. The Republican Party wants to tax you all right, then give their rich buddies tax breaks. Wake up!

Wow do you have to write that talking point down or do you have it memorized? No matter I will ask a question I have asked before on this rich don't pay their fair share stuff what is a fair share?

 

[geoff787]

Also, I'd like to remind everyone that the top marginal tax rate under Dwight David Eisenhower (Republican) was 91% throughout both of his terms - that's eight years straight. The top marginal tax rate now is 35%. What'll those damn socialists do next? Drop the top rate to 20%? No wonder our country is going to hell in a handbasket! Let's get angry! Let's get even! Let's stop those damnable socialists from lowering the taxes on the rich any more! Hell, let's demand they raise taxes on the rich to something above what a garbageman pays!
You may ask again what you're entitled to. You're entitled to live in a country where the tax code is fair to all, even to you!

 

[geoff787]

Oh, and Snakedoc, my snake has been exposed to that Republican BS and has started eating his own tail. What should I do?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Also, I'd like to remind everyone that the top marginal tax rate under Dwight David Eisenhower (Republican) was 91% throughout both of his terms !

what they collected then was tiny as a % of GDP. Get it? No one paid 91% anymore than our corporations pay the 36% , also the highest in the world.

BUt what does happen is that people go to great lengths to avoid and evade taxes rather then focus on conducting and building business so it is a huge net loss to economy. The perfect example is corporations moving off shore to evade or avoid the liberal taxes.


The higher the tax bill the more you are willing to pay for loopholes!! Over a liberals head?

 

[geoff787]

EB, you almost have a point in there somewhere. You're right, either nobody or next to nobody paid 91% then, are you suggesting anyone (who can afford good tax lawyers {they're part of the economy too}) is paying 35%? Au contraire. And what do you mean by [large] corporations moving offshore? To paraphrase a great philosopher (Dan Quayle) you obviously do not live in this century. Corporations worldwide don't give a crap about nations, and haven't for a very long time. They will always do what is in their best interest, not ours. Republicans have held the Presidency a lot more than Dems since Truman, but this phenomenon has only accelerated. When the US again becomes the low cost provider, they'll throw us a few crumbs, that is all. I must admit, your last sentence goes clean over my head. I'll have to find a forum that doesn't allow lightweights in!

 

[snakedoc]

Oh, and Snakedoc, my snake has been exposed to that Republican BS and has started eating his own tail. What should I do?

Well you could start by answering my question what is a fair share? You raise hell about the rich not paying their fair share so you must know what their fair share should be.

 

[geoff787]

I'm not averse to a flat rate for everyone ala Steve Forbes, as long as the exemptions are adequate. I mean by that that it should be high enough (for earner, spouse, kids and other dependants) that they can live a decent life even if they're receiving minimum wage. In most states they're already paying a lot in sales taxes just to eat and meet their other minimal requirements. But the flat rate must be final, no deductions credits etc. blah blah blah. This will never pass because you would be asking Congress to give up much of its power, not to mention they won't be getting all the kickbacks that they are now receiving. I should define the term kickback, it means there's someone who has a lot of money who will give a little of it to someone who has not so much to vote the way the monied individual wants them to. The poor and the middle class don't do kickbacks. As to the percentage that is fair, that would have to be variable based on the country's immediate as well as projected requirements, which are always subject to change (as when a certain party's President takes us into a stupid war for nothing). But nowadays I would guess that that would be somewhere around 20%, again ala Steve Forbes. Good enough?

 

[geoff787]

Oh, my God (see flying spaghetti monster), I just advocated a flat tax and I'm a progressive. Off to the emergency room I go!

 

[inALIENable]

What a bunch of jealous coveting dumb asses in this world, eh?

Wealth inequity is a good thing, fools. Gawd, imagine a world where being stupid, worthless, unmotivated, underachieving, etc., didn't come with a heavy penalty in life. Heck, I wouldn't bother getting out of bed tomorrow it there were equality in life.

Gawd, coveting and jealousy are so unbecoming of a human. Is there no shame or self respect or honor being a human any more? They beg like dogs now.

 

[geoff787]

I didn't see anyone talking about the wealth inequity on this page or the previous. We've been talking about paying your fair share of the tax burden. Perhaps you got lost and landed in the wrong forum?

 

[geoff787]

Oh, and stupidity is also unbecoming but all too common. But of course you've gone to the right forum and aren't reading this, so you will remain invincibly ignorant. That is a loss to us all. In any case, I must be off to my ugly sleep, so don't anyone think I'm running away 'cause I'm scared of you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I didn't see anyone talking about the wealth inequity on this page or the previous. We've been talking about paying your fair share of the tax burden. Perhaps you got lost and landed in the wrong forum?

You didn't see anyone talking about wealth inequality? Really? So you didn't even bother to read the thread title before barging in here, shooting off your mouth and sharing your half-cent worth with all of us (I say "half-cent", because I have yet to see a single emanation from you that I'd value at an entire two cents)?

Nothing like having no ******* clue what you're talking about before holding forth on it, huh? Then again, I expect that's pretty standard for you.

 

[oreo]

I have a question or two there are many Democrats who make far more than I do how much or what percent of their wealth am I entitled to and why?

When you ask one of them--how much of someone else's money do they feel would be fair to "confiscate"--none of them can come up with an answer.

Currently--there are 220,000 people in this country that make 1 million and over per year--out of a working population of 164 million. So if you take every cent of the 220,000 and divide it by 164,000,000 million people--how much would each one of us get out of it?

Someone needs to figure out--how much money we would all get by taking the rich guys money away from them--and dividing it among us?

 

[Foxfyre]

I have a question or two there are many Democrats who make far more than I do how much or what percent of their wealth am I entitled to and why?

When you ask one of them--how much of someone else's money do they feel would be fair to "confiscate"--none of them can come up with an answer.

Currently--there are 220,000 people in this country that make 1 million and over per year--out of a working population of 164 million. So if you take every cent of the 220,000 and divide it by 164,000,000 million people--how much would each one of us get out of it?

Someone needs to figure out--how much money we would all get by taking the rich guys money away from them--and dividing it among us?

I don't know how much each of us would get and have absolutely no interest in gathering the numbers necessary to do the math. I have read from numerous sources though, and have never seen any rebuttal from any source, that if we confiscated ALL the wealth of those 220,000 people, it would run the U.S. government at most a few weeks.

And then of course, having removed those folks from a free market system, we would have a long, deep, depression from which we would likely never recover.

 

[initforme]

Does it really pay to whine about the inequality issue? Whining isnt going to change anything. As a successful business owner who sees the HUGE list of rotten things about this country, I have concluded the following.

1) You arent going to be a one percenter. I dont care how hard or long you work or how creative you are. It isnt going to happen. You have to have alot of money to begin with in order to become rich. Might as well not whine about it.

2) Try to be happy. Find happiness. You dont have to be rich. Deny yourself any new possessions. Drive crappy cars, even if you can easily afford new ones. Live in a shoddy house, even if you can afford a nicer one. Save your money. Dont give it away to some company that doesnt deserve it. Cut your costs. Grow a garden. Eat cheap. Live cheap. Dont do fun things on your time off. Stay home. Save gas, even you if can afford it. Save and stockpile every last cent you have. No cable tv, no cell phone, you know, those things you can live without. But people dont live this way because americans feel like they deserve something for working hard. I paint them with a broad brush, shallow and ignorant.

3) Saving all your money when you are young and not investing in houses and such will lead to more cash for retirement. Then take it easy.

 

[Misty]

The rich don't work hard.

The poor do.

I thought the blue states support the red states? How can that be true if all republicans are rich?

 

[starcraftzzz]

^Income inequality also lowers growth because when the very wealthy increase their consumption it’, on goods that are pure luxury instead of goods that increase wellbeing. For example a poor person who sees an influx in income will more likely spend that income on healthcare, healthier food, or other goods that have investment returns, while a rich person is more likely to get jewelry, or private jets.

^Income inequality also lowers growth because when the very wealthy increase their consumption it’, on goods that have productive constraints.
For example a poor person who sees an influx in income is more likely to purchase basic goods like clothes, food, or appliances whose production can be increased easily via more labor harvesting, while a rich person is more likely to buy collectable items, beach front properties, or wines from a special region all goods whose production cannot be increases purely by increases labor or harvesting.