Republicans: why do you ignore the wealth inequality issue?

[Mr.Nick]

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.

The poor are only poor because they don't possess a skill anyone wants or needs...

I'd expect a 20-year-old to be poor... You have to start somewhere, however there is no excuse for someone to do nothing with their lives....

I have NO sympathy for an individuasl that has wasted their lives away...

Why should one work hard and build a resume and profit off of it while another does nothing???

Of course its the person that worked hard for their money that gets attacked ruthlessly by the lazy fucks in society...

You fucks bitch about "fairness" well how "fair" is that???

Why the fuck should the lazy fuck get the same as the individual who spent time to learn a skill???

Ignorant fuck....

 

[Cecilie1200]

Um, no, that is not what I am saying.

then what the hell are you saying with this..??

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

oh that's right..you would tax that money from them for the greater good of the country...you are so generous with other peoples money..

An inheritance is not income. What I am suggesting is a general policy on high income individuals.

An inheritance IS income. It's just one-time income, similar to winning the lottery, as opposed to steady, repetitive income.

 

[thereisnospoon]

No one is "moving jobs"....Global competition dictates the marketplace. .

yes, a liberal simply cant understand this point or capitalism in general. He imagines that if corporations just stayed here and made over priced union junk the American people would mysteriously stop going to WalMart to buy lower priced higher quality stuff from China.

In fact the people would continue to shop at WalMart to improve their standard of living and the home bound American corporations would go bankrupt with 100% of the jobs.

I get a big kick out of communities in the forced unionization states that try to block Wal Mart stores from their towns because they accuse the retailer of "destroying downtown" and "paying scab wages"...Yet their spouses and kids are seen shopping in the Wal Mart or other discount retailer in a neighboring town. Such hypocrisy.
To my knowledge, Lowes, Home Depot, Target, Costco, Sam's Mart, Dicks Sporting Goods, K-Mart, Sears, and a whole host of other national chains are for the most part non-union. The issue is , those retailers are all able to offer quality products at competitive prices. If they were unionized and had to pay union scale wages and establish union work rule, not only would customer service suffer, prices would have to reflect the much higher labor costs.

 

[Sunshine]

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

lots of reason for that:

1) liberals have destroyed familes creating lots of poor single mothers who would have been in 2 parent middle class families. 50% are now born out of wedlock

2) many new recent immigrants are just arriving into the bottom of the middle class

3) many women are now in college and marrying college grad men to form families that are above the middle class shortly after leaving school.

you have been brainwashed by the liberals. Sorry

In addition, the baby boomers are beginning to retire. That will take a bite out of the work force over the next couple of decades, but think how much opportunity there will be.

Want to invest? Invest in products for the elderly, canes, walkers, adult diapers, oxygen suppliers, adult day care. There's lots of money to be made. Get crackin!

 

[Sunshine]

then what the hell are you saying with this..??


oh that's right..you would tax that money from them for the greater good of the country...you are so generous with other peoples money..

An inheritance is not income. What I am suggesting is a general policy on high income individuals.

An inheritance IS income. It's just one-time income, similar to winning the lottery, as opposed to steady, repetitive income.

I believe you all are trying to distinguish between different kinds of income like capital gains, inheritances, etc. and earnings. Both = income. Both =/= earnings. And each is taxed differently.

 

[Sunshine]

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.

So the daughter of Joe kennedy who had to be 'put away' for life should just have to draw disability because she has no right to ole Joe's capital gains keeping her in a 'home?" Groovy.

You have no idea the number of disabled adults out there who are maintained from the proceeds of their parents' investments. I have had several of them as patients. I guess they have no right to be maintained this way. According to your logic they don't. Because it isn't their money. Because they didn't earn it.

\

 

[Mr.Nick]

then what the hell are you saying with this..??


oh that's right..you would tax that money from them for the greater good of the country...you are so generous with other peoples money..

An inheritance is not income. What I am suggesting is a general policy on high income individuals.

An inheritance IS income. It's just one-time income, similar to winning the lottery, as opposed to steady, repetitive income.

"Similar to winning the lottery"

Only a snob leftist prick would use such an analogy....

 

[Cecilie1200]

Like I said, we, unlike you, are not a bunch of whinny crybabies.

You don't have a right nor do they have an obligation to give you, a job.

Like I said, we, unlike you, are not a bunch of whinny crybabies.

And you whine about paying necessary taxes.

Very little of the taxes we pay are "necessary"..
That is the point. Government continues to consume a larger share of the private sector, spends more than it takes in, then demands we surrender more of what we earn.
Trickle down is not a myth. It is the most logical and prosperous form of economy there is.

Well, it sure as hell can't trickle UP, because the people at the bottom have nothing to trickle.

 

[Sunshine]

Like I said, we, unlike you, are not a bunch of whinny crybabies.

You don't have a right nor do they have an obligation to give you, a job.

Like I said, we, unlike you, are not a bunch of whinny crybabies.

And you whine about paying necessary taxes.

Very little of the taxes we pay are "necessary"..
That is the point. Government continues to consume a larger share of the private sector, spends more than it takes in, then demands we surrender more of what we earn.
Trickle down is not a myth. It is the most logical and prosperous form of economy there is.

People at the bottom want it to gush down.

 

[Liability]

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.

BillyZero:

Why do you imagine that the liberal formulation of "wealth inequality" is worthy of consideration?

Conservatives favor equality of opportunity. Nobody WITH a brain favors mandating equality of outcome.

Thus, rationally, nobody should expect anything BUT income INequality. I don't desire income equality.

That notion is just plain stupid.

 

[Sunshine]

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.

BillyZero:

Why do you imagine that the liberal formulation of "wealth inequality" is worthy of consideration?

Conservatives favor equality of opportunity. nobody WITH a brain favors mandating equality of outcome.

Thus, rationally, nobody should expect anything BUT income INequality. I don't desire income equality.

That notion is just plain stupid.

As a young wife, planning that 'someday' and working toward it was one of the great joys of living. Now, young people want to start with the mansion, and life is oh so unfair if they can't buy designer clothes.

 

[Sunshine]

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.

So the daughter of Joe kennedy who had to be 'put away' for life should just have to draw disability because she has no right to ole Joe's capital gains keeping her in a 'home?" Groovy.

You have no idea the number of disabled adults out there who are maintained from the proceeds of their parents' investments. I have had several of them as patients. I guess they have no right to be maintained this way. According to your logic they don't. Because it isn't their money. Because they didn't earn it.

No takers on this one? Of course not! Why would there be. Life is SO unfair!

 

[Mr.Nick]

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.

BillyZero:

Why do you imagine that the liberal formulation of "wealth inequality" is worthy of consideration?

Conservatives favor equality of opportunity. nobody WITH a brain favors mandating equality of outcome.

Thus, rationally, nobody should expect anything BUT income INequality. I don't desire income equality.

That notion is just plain stupid.

As a young wife, planning that 'someday' and working toward it was one of the great joys of living. Now, young people want to start with the mansion, and life is oh so unfair if they can't buy designer clothes.

I never had a feeling of entitlement....

I'm not that old (31) and have never craved what the wealthy possess...

Of course I'm not a leftist either.

Anyone who dedicates their lives to envy will ever be successful....

The time they spend crying is wasted time - time that could be used progressing ones self...

 

[Cecilie1200]

I am very wary of people who talk about legislation to make things "fair".

I'm all for fair play and equal opportunity, but I don't trust the government to tell me what is "fair".

No sireee bob.

I'm very wary of people using the word "fair". Also the word "should". It makes my hair stand on end.

 

[Liability]

I am very wary of people who talk about legislation to make things "fair".

I'm all for fair play and equal opportunity, but I don't trust the government to tell me what is "fair".

No sireee bob.

I'm very wary of people using the word "fair". Also the word "should". It makes my hair stand on end.

Which hair?

 

[thereisnospoon]

And you whine about paying necessary taxes.

Very little of the taxes we pay are "necessary"..
That is the point. Government continues to consume a larger share of the private sector, spends more than it takes in, then demands we surrender more of what we earn.
Trickle down is not a myth. It is the most logical and prosperous form of economy there is.

Well, it sure as hell can't trickle UP, because the people at the bottom have nothing to trickle.

Obama actually said he believe the econo9my could grow from the "bottom up"....
HUH?....Yes because he has suggested that government could spend it's way into this.
During his campaign Obama proposed among other things, the most massive public works spending program since the Interstate System. He has also suggested spending uncountable amounts of money on "high speed rail" ...Now, while I think fast tracking infrastructure repair and efficient rail travel are good things, the expense would be astronomical.
Obama has stated all that is needed to fund these things is to raise taxes on the rich.
That is where he gets his notion of "bottom up" economics.
What Obama does not say ( I think he is an economic illiterate) is how any of this will take place. Simply put, it is Obama in constant campaign mode. As long as he can say he wants to do something, he can score political points without actually having to do anything.
Of course all his political base has to do is hear these words and they will continue to support him.
It's all nonsense. That is seen in the pro Obama posts in this forum.
Your Christmas Present From The Democrats: Another Load of Trickle-Up Economics - HUMAN EVENTS

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

This seems to be a recurring theme, but is almost always short on specifics. How much tax is "fair"? And how will those additional funds be used to provide "benefit programs for lower level workers"? Despite your assertion that the rich aren't paying enough, the federal government spends every bit as much or more on "benefit programs", and yet according to you, the middle class still can't make it. What specific additional benefit programs would provide the needed push to get these poor and lower level workers to where you would like them to be? And how would those additional dollars do more good in government's hands than being invested in private sector capital?

I'm also curious to know the difference between "earning" and "making". If a doctor spends the entire decade of his 20's working hard in college, medical school and interning, then works 60-70 hour weeks throughout his 30's and 40's, should he then feel guilty that he has some money invested in financial assets and is doing well? Isn't that part of the reason he applied himself in the first place? Should his kids feel badly that he was able to pass some of it to them as well?

It is difficult to consider your post to be a serious call for action when it is long on blame and short on solutions.

I am not an economist, so I do not know what a fair tax would be. However, I do believe the question can answered mathematically given the disparity of wealth. A rate can be determined based upon the gap between the top 1% and everybody else. Also, these "additional funds" would not likely go to benefit the poor if they were invested in private capital.

You seem to think I am against success altogether. That's where this black and white thinkinging comes in. I am not wanting to punish success. I think doctors should be well-paid for what they do. Anyone at the top 1%, however, need to at least pay their fair share if they are going to have this monopoly.

Anyone who actually thinks you can discuss the most subjective word in the English language - "fair" - in mathematical terms has just disqualified himself from being taken seriously as a rational adult.

 

[Liability]

This seems to be a recurring theme, but is almost always short on specifics. How much tax is "fair"? And how will those additional funds be used to provide "benefit programs for lower level workers"? Despite your assertion that the rich aren't paying enough, the federal government spends every bit as much or more on "benefit programs", and yet according to you, the middle class still can't make it. What specific additional benefit programs would provide the needed push to get these poor and lower level workers to where you would like them to be? And how would those additional dollars do more good in government's hands than being invested in private sector capital?

I'm also curious to know the difference between "earning" and "making". If a doctor spends the entire decade of his 20's working hard in college, medical school and interning, then works 60-70 hour weeks throughout his 30's and 40's, should he then feel guilty that he has some money invested in financial assets and is doing well? Isn't that part of the reason he applied himself in the first place? Should his kids feel badly that he was able to pass some of it to them as well?

It is difficult to consider your post to be a serious call for action when it is long on blame and short on solutions.

I am not an economist, so I do not know what a fair tax would be. However, I do believe the question can answered mathematically given the disparity of wealth. A rate can be determined based upon the gap between the top 1% and everybody else. Also, these "additional funds" would not likely go to benefit the poor if they were invested in private capital.

You seem to think I am against success altogether. That's where this black and white thinkinging comes in. I am not wanting to punish success. I think doctors should be well-paid for what they do. Anyone at the top 1%, however, need to at least pay their fair share if they are going to have this monopoly.

Anyone who actually thinks you can discuss the most subjective word in the English language - "fair" - in mathematical terms has just disqualified himself from being taken seriously as a rational adult.

^ what she just said!

 

[Cecilie1200]

The trickle down is a myth. Corporations are making record profits and taxes are at record lows. Where are the jobs exactly?

Record profits sounds pretty impressive, until you realize that those record profits amount to less than 5% of the gross of some of the larger corporations. A small business would collapse under that margin, but large companies can make it because of the sheer volume.

By the way, corporate taxes are actually among the highest in the world, individual taxes are the ones you are actually talking about when you throw out that low tax line. The fact that you do not understand that indicates why you should not be discussing this.

Our corporate tax is the lowest in the world, but it has also been at its lowest point in years. Obviously, it wasn't a problem before. And yes, individual taxes are different from corporate taxes. I was making a separate point about the trickle down theory.

U.S. Corporate Tax Rate the Highest | Cato @ Liberty

 

[The T]

I am not an economist, so I do not know what a fair tax would be. However, I do believe the question can answered mathematically given the disparity of wealth. A rate can be determined based upon the gap between the top 1% and everybody else. Also, these "additional funds" would not likely go to benefit the poor if they were invested in private capital.

You seem to think I am against success altogether. That's where this black and white thinkinging comes in. I am not wanting to punish success. I think doctors should be well-paid for what they do. Anyone at the top 1%, however, need to at least pay their fair share if they are going to have this monopoly.

Anyone who actually thinks you can discuss the most subjective word in the English language - "fair" - in mathematical terms has just disqualified himself from being taken seriously as a rational adult.

^ what she just said!

Agreed. Math deals with known finite quantities. I have never known any mathematical symbol, standard for fair.