Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich

Last edited:
not that i don't think their taxes are outrageous and not just for businesses but for all citizens!

but they are still very successful no matter how that think tank labels them!

maybe they could do even more if they were taxed less....that i can only presume!
 
HUGGY said:
It never ceases to amaze me how those that only have the desire for wealth fall all over themselves to defend the rich..like they need defending.

And ....why do you say that Huggy?

Because they are rich you fuckin dolt!

Taxes are not retroactive. No one that is rich is going to be LESS rich paying future taxes..

You don't get taxed on what you have accumulated..you get taxed on future PROFIT.

My Safe Shingle tear off system tests were successful. I can remove to bare plywood a strip 20 feet by 2 feet in less than a minute. I will be out in the market soon subcontracting with roofing companies.. I will make around ten million plus on this invention in the next couple of years. Then I will sell or liscence the idea and make maybe ten times that. I worked real hard to get to this point. I also realize that my little bit of success could not have happened anywhere else. In short I owe my community partially for being able doing what I do.

I don't need or want any special tax breaks. Its only the weasles that use money and others gulibility to make a fortune that cry when the money they leach out of the system is taxed. Piss on those thieves.
Click to expand...

There is a place on the income tax form that allows you to give the gov more than you owe. I hope your passion of taking others money matches giving freely of your own. TIA for the support of the "poor".
 
where will all the rich go? ....this is sad.

stole-from-rich.jpg
 
All over this and other boards I read the Democrat supporters vilifying the evil "rich", they want more and more of what the "rich" have because they are all that is wrong with America.

What's the definition of "rich"? I've asked this a few times, but haven't received an answer, and I would sincerely like to know. It seems to me that in their zeal to get the "rich" guy, they also get people who may be comfortable, but far from "rich".
 
ba1614 said:
All over this and other boards I read the Democrat supporters vilifying the evil "rich", they want more and more of what the "rich" have because they are all that is wrong with America.

What's the definition of "rich"? I've asked this a few times, but haven't received an answer, and I would sincerely like to know. It seems to me that in their zeal to get the "rich" guy, they also get people who may be comfortable, but far from "rich".
Click to expand...
According to the CON$, the "evil rich" are the "Limousine Liberals." So to fall for CON$ervative "logic" you have to gullible enough believe Libs want more of what Libs already have. :cuckoo:

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives More Liberal Givers
March 27, 2008
Conservatives More Liberal Givers
By George Will

Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
November 6, 2007
Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
by Michael Franc

More and more Democrats represent areas with a high concentration of wealthy households. Using Internal Revenue Service data, the Heritage Foundation identified two categories of taxpayers - single filers with incomes of more than $100,000 and married filers with incomes of more than $200,000 - and combined them to discern where the wealthiest Americans live and who represents them.
Democrats now control the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. More than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats.
 
I think deaf ears are present.

There is nothing wrong with being rich, and there is nothing wrong with a progressive tax structure like we have had for decades.

What is being argued, at least by me, is whether our progressive tax structure that was initially instituted decades ago, which understood that you can not get blood out of a turnip, and understood the IMPORTANCE of having a strong middle class for America's continual success, has been manipulated SO MUCH by those elite with those we have elected in to power to represent us, that the system itself is corrupt now, and not serving it's purpose.....I seriously doubt that our IRS CODE when it was created, was 12 feet high if all the paper the code is written on is stacked.... ya know?

My parents are rich, not super wealthy but rich...none the less...they earned their money...mostly by being penny pinchers, they never took vacations, unless camping, never went out to dinner, mom packed dad's and my sister and my lunch every day, cooked our breakfasts and dinners...pinching pennies along the way...she sewed our clothes until my sister and I hit 12...just penny pincher-ing, no other way to describe it....Even as seniors, they now pay out the yin yang in taxes....but they can afford to do such and they don't complain, they are grateful for what this country gave them, the opportunity to become rich....

my parents worked hard and saved their whole life for the million or 2 that they have in wealth, while the Ceo gets this sum in one year, what took my father 50 years of bust ass working and restraining from any of the luxuries in life while he went along. My father does not wish ill on the person who managed to finagle this kind of salary....but please, as this person, don't be sending your lobbyist peons out to bid your cause, of not wanting to pay the taxes due....

Care
 
ozzmdj said:
Americans know how to use the moving van to escape high taxes.Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

So why hasn't Gates moved from Washington to no tax Texas? Why do both California and New York have more millionaires and billionairs than Texas? WSJ ignores quality of life and the fact that when taxation doesn't affect quality of life there is no reason to move...
 
edthecynic said:
ba1614 said:
All over this and other boards I read the Democrat supporters vilifying the evil "rich", they want more and more of what the "rich" have because they are all that is wrong with America.

What's the definition of "rich"? I've asked this a few times, but haven't received an answer, and I would sincerely like to know. It seems to me that in their zeal to get the "rich" guy, they also get people who may be comfortable, but far from "rich".
Click to expand...
According to the CON$, the "evil rich" are the "Limousine Liberals." So to fall for CON$ervative "logic" you have to gullible enough believe Libs want more of what Libs already have. :cuckoo:

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives More Liberal Givers
March 27, 2008
Conservatives More Liberal Givers
By George Will

Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
November 6, 2007
Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
by Michael Franc

More and more Democrats represent areas with a high concentration of wealthy households. Using Internal Revenue Service data, the Heritage Foundation identified two categories of taxpayers - single filers with incomes of more than $100,000 and married filers with incomes of more than $200,000 - and combined them to discern where the wealthiest Americans live and who represents them.
Democrats now control the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. More than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats.
Click to expand...

Look, I don't give a **** about Republican or Democrat bullshit, I'm neither, although I do lean to the right more than to the left. I've only been a member here for a bit, but don't you worry, I'm all over the Republicans ass too when they **** with my livelihood.

It is undeniable that the Democrats support raising/creating taxes more than the Republicans do. Or at least they did. Reading the article you posted it looks as though some of the left, Reid for example, are realizing they are lowering the "rich" threshold to the point where it's starting to get some of their supporters. Hopefully that does slow them down a bit, that would be a good thing.

An income of $100,000 is what's being considered "wealthy" is it?

Care, I would put myself in the same boat as your parents. I've never made real big money, but I'm frugal, and have taken a couple chances that turned out well. I don't mind paying my fair share of taxes, I really don't. But when is enough enough? For me, it wouldn't be such a bitter pill to swallow if there was at least some attempt, somewhere, to get spending under control, but that seems like a snowball out of control regardless of who is in control. Yet we are are paying more and more little taxes here and there, and it is really starting to add up and have an impact on lives

It frustrates me to no end when you hear people rippin' on the super rich, or the greedy CEOs', or whatever, then use a numbers like.."incomes of more than $100,000 and married filers with incomes of more than $200,000...", that ain't fuckin' rich!!
I'm not even going to get into the repeal on inheritance tax that's about to expire. That's the final straw for me, and one that I refuse to let my family fall victim to.
 
ba1614 said:
edthecynic said:
ba1614 said:
All over this and other boards I read the Democrat supporters vilifying the evil "rich", they want more and more of what the "rich" have because they are all that is wrong with America.

What's the definition of "rich"? I've asked this a few times, but haven't received an answer, and I would sincerely like to know. It seems to me that in their zeal to get the "rich" guy, they also get people who may be comfortable, but far from "rich".
Click to expand...
According to the CON$, the "evil rich" are the "Limousine Liberals." So to fall for CON$ervative "logic" you have to gullible enough believe Libs want more of what Libs already have. :cuckoo:

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives More Liberal Givers
March 27, 2008
Conservatives More Liberal Givers
By George Will

Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
November 6, 2007
Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
by Michael Franc

More and more Democrats represent areas with a high concentration of wealthy households. Using Internal Revenue Service data, the Heritage Foundation identified two categories of taxpayers - single filers with incomes of more than $100,000 and married filers with incomes of more than $200,000 - and combined them to discern where the wealthiest Americans live and who represents them.
Democrats now control the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. More than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats.
Click to expand...

Look, I don't give a **** about Republican or Democrat bullshit, I'm neither, although I do lean to the right more than to the left. I've only been a member here for a bit, but don't you worry, I'm all over the Republicans ass too when they **** with my livelihood.

It is undeniable that the Democrats support raising/creating taxes more than the Republicans do. Or at least they did. Reading the article you posted it looks as though some of the left, Reid for example, are realizing they are lowering the "rich" threshold to the point where it's starting to get some of their supporters. Hopefully that does slow them down a bit, that would be a good thing.

An income of $100,000 is what's being considered "wealthy" is it?

Care, I would put myself in the same boat as your parents. I've never made real big money, but I'm frugal, and have taken a couple chances that turned out well. I don't mind paying my fair share of taxes, I really don't. But when is enough enough? For me, it wouldn't be such a bitter pill to swallow if there was at least some attempt, somewhere, to get spending under control, but that seems like a snowball out of control regardless of who is in control. Yet we are are paying more and more little taxes here and there, and it is really starting to add up and have an impact on lives

It frustrates me to no end when you hear people rippin' on the super rich, or the greedy CEOs', or whatever, then use a numbers like.."incomes of more than $100,000 and married filers with incomes of more than $200,000...", that ain't fuckin' rich!!
I'm not even going to get into the repeal on inheritance tax that's about to expire. That's the final straw for me, and one that I refuse to let my family fall victim to.
Click to expand...
It was the extreme Right Wing CON$ervative HERITAGE FOUNDATION who set the threshold at $100K and $200K!!! I even highlighted it in my original post, how could you have possibly missed it???? :cuckoo:
 
Last edited:
ba1614 said:
edthecynic said:
ba1614 said:
All over this and other boards I read the Democrat supporters vilifying the evil "rich", they want more and more of what the "rich" have because they are all that is wrong with America.

What's the definition of "rich"? I've asked this a few times, but haven't received an answer, and I would sincerely like to know. It seems to me that in their zeal to get the "rich" guy, they also get people who may be comfortable, but far from "rich".
Click to expand...
According to the CON$, the "evil rich" are the "Limousine Liberals." So to fall for CON$ervative "logic" you have to gullible enough believe Libs want more of what Libs already have. :cuckoo:

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives More Liberal Givers
March 27, 2008
Conservatives More Liberal Givers
By George Will

Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
November 6, 2007
Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
by Michael Franc

More and more Democrats represent areas with a high concentration of wealthy households. Using Internal Revenue Service data, the Heritage Foundation identified two categories of taxpayers - single filers with incomes of more than $100,000 and married filers with incomes of more than $200,000 - and combined them to discern where the wealthiest Americans live and who represents them.
Democrats now control the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. More than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats.
Click to expand...

Look, I don't give a **** about Republican or Democrat bullshit, I'm neither, although I do lean to the right more than to the left. I've only been a member here for a bit, but don't you worry, I'm all over the Republicans ass too when they **** with my livelihood.

It is undeniable that the Democrats support raising/creating taxes more than the Republicans do. Or at least they did. Reading the article you posted it looks as though some of the left, Reid for example, are realizing they are lowering the "rich" threshold to the point where it's starting to get some of their supporters. Hopefully that does slow them down a bit, that would be a good thing.

An income of $100,000 is what's being considered "wealthy" is it?

Care, I would put myself in the same boat as your parents. I've never made real big money, but I'm frugal, and have taken a couple chances that turned out well. I don't mind paying my fair share of taxes, I really don't. But when is enough enough? For me, it wouldn't be such a bitter pill to swallow if there was at least some attempt, somewhere, to get spending under control, but that seems like a snowball out of control regardless of who is in control. Yet we are are paying more and more little taxes here and there, and it is really starting to add up and have an impact on lives

It frustrates me to no end when you hear people rippin' on the super rich, or the greedy CEOs', or whatever, then use a numbers like.."incomes of more than $100,000 and married filers with incomes of more than $200,000...", that ain't fuckin' rich!!
I'm not even going to get into the repeal on inheritance tax that's about to expire. That's the final straw for me, and one that I refuse to let my family fall victim to.
Click to expand...

And that is where my beef with GW was, and my beef has escalated with Obama, though at least he didn't pretend to be 'conservative.' I KNEW he was the most liberal member of US Congress, though he'd voted like 8 times before running. In any case, I'm voting for those that want to roll back government, not 'contain' it, containing implies it's ok now, which it's not.
 
15th post
95% tax on the highest wage earners is the way to go.Tax cut are always the right wing answer and has never worked, ever.Give the rich more is nonsense.
 
ozzmdj said:
Americans know how to use the moving van to escape high taxes.Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich - WSJ.com
Click to expand...
In the seventies CEOs made 40 times what average workers made. Now they make over 450 times what average workers make. Did CEOs magically start working ten times harder in the seventies?

**** no. They learned how to lobby Congress and game the rules. Look at income figures for the past 30 years. How can anyone with any sense ***** about "poor rich people"?

The rich have been stealing working peoples' money (by percentage) at an astounding rate for decades. And yet the right continues to kiss their asses as if the rich will allow crumbs to fall out of the windows of their limousines... it makes me sick.

Doug
 
Last edited:
ddye said:
ozzmdj said:
Americans know how to use the moving van to escape high taxes.Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich - WSJ.com
Click to expand...
In the seventies CEOs made 40 times what average workers made. Now they make over 450 times what average workers make. Did CEOs magically start working ten times harder in the seventies?

**** no. They learned how to lobby Congress and game the rules. Look at income figures for the past 30 years. How can anyone with any sense ***** about "poor rich people"?

The rich have been stealing working peoples' money (by percentage) at an astounding rate for decades. And yet the right continues to kiss their asses as if the rich will allow crumbs to fall out of the windows of their limousines... it makes me sick.

Doug
Click to expand...

I don't agree with the premise of the OP, but I wouldn't agree with the kind of legislation Barney Frank tried to push through earlier this year, either, when he tried to get a bill going that would limit ALL CEO pay, not just those of companies that recieved federal bailout money.


I have a big problem seeing all these CEOs getting golden parachutes when the companies they run go under and the little guys working under them find themselves losing their houses, but I have no good answer for what, if anything, should be done about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

More Hope and Change

< Previous Thread

According to "The (liberal) Girl Next Door, back in 2007

Next Thread >

Similar threads

Nostra
A challenge for the "Tax the rich more" crowd.
11 12 13
Replies
245
Views
2K
Nostra
Nostra
frigidweirdo
Trump said the Epstein files should be closed.... but Khanna and Massie just released the names of 6 rich men who Trump was protecting.
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
639
EvilCat Breath
EvilCat Breath
ThisIsMe
About that wealth tax….
Replies
11
Views
202
sartre play
S
Dont Taz Me Bro
Sanders, Khanna to propose federal billionaires' wealth tax
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
645
ThisIsMe
ThisIsMe
G
  • Locked
The next Democratic president is gonna TAX the s*** out of America in 2030
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
789
White 6
White 6

New Topics

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom