The "TRUTH" about "Wealth Distribution".

[edthecynic]

And currently the tax structure has the top 5% of wage earners paying over half the tax collected, while the bottom 60% of wage earners receive money back or come out even.

So... what are you saying?

That's right, WAGE EARNERS pay the bulk of the taxes, not the truly wealthy, who do not work for wages!!!!!
We need a wealth tax instead of an income tax. The wealthiest families, like the Rockefellers, Mellons, DuPontes, etc., pay no income taxes at all. When Nelson Rockefeller was appointed Veep he made his tax return public. On a 7 figure income he paid not one penny in income taxes.

And that "60%", actually 47%, that pay no income tax is due to the GOP trying to buy votes with tax cuts.

It's fucking hilarious that some of you actually argue in such righteous tones for giving more of other people's money to a body that spends it so inefficiently.

It's fucking hilarious that some of you actually argue in such righteous tones that the wealthy are ENTITLED to a free ride because the government is "inefficient."

They are entitled to keep whatever money the tax code allows them to keep. Blame that if you want to blame anything. It's what everyone, regardless of income should be doing, giving government as little money as legally allowed. Explain to me how a group that is getting a free ride still generates the bulk of the tax revenue.

Why should I have to explain something YOU made up??????????????????

 

[Oddball]

Its right there in my post,out of the budget. Who's being naive? We do waste vast amounts of dollars there, and all politics has to do with what money, of what we have, is to be spent funding which goverment programs. You want it spent on the programs you approve of, but you still want it spent.

First of all, the point is that the money to hire more bureaucrats has to come from somewhere. Moreover, bureaucrats and gubmint make-work projects produce absolutely nothing of added value, or of debatable value, for the general economy.

We waste lots of money on all sorts of stupid programs. Yet, when it comes to cutting back on anything, the first words out of the mouths of the left is "cut the military"....
Y'all are really becoming cartoons of yourselves.

1st of all, I indicated one place extra money could be found. Moreover, we don't have to "make" work, as there is plenty that needs doing. The military is a sacred cow that goes on chewing and chewing without much scrutiny. I'm not saying other waste couldn't be found, or that it all has to come from one place. A lot of the waste I see in government spending is on administration. The bureaus are top heavy, just like in private industry, and when cuts come, the people who are cut are the ones who do the actual work, leaving paper pushers behind to collect full time salaries.

And dude, stop trying to insult me. I don't do that to you, and it just looks silly.

You're ignoring the point...That doesn't make it go away...Like the bureaucrats who get hired in your thoroughly failed and discredited Keynesian scenario.

Now, when you can come up with a time that actual cuts --as opposed to lessened increases in the baseline-- have been made to the bureaucracy to pay for all this Keynesian central planning, you might have a point...But you can't, so you don't.

 

[edthecynic]

Oh horseshit, Edthecretin

And why do you hate the working man who makes good? Hm? You hate the wealthy, I would love to see you try and tax the Kennedys, the Heinz-Kerrys, the McCains, the Soros of the world. You just go right ahead. That's where the real money is. Steal from them. I bet you never make an inch of headway because they are the ones who buy and sell politicians.

Once again, sanctimonious and evil envy raises it's hoary head.

Thank you for admitting that the wealthy tax dodgers have the real money and own both Parties and not the wage earner.

Once again, your sanctimonious and evil stupidity raises it's hoary head.

It's so Ironic you think the indigent and shiftless should be given that instead.

And when you have doled out the wealth of those who have earned it in the past and present that drives the world's industry, and you've given a sheer pittance to the hoards of poor who cannot employ anyone or invest it, what then?

So now you have millions of people with only a few thousand dollars a piece. Who owns the facilities? Who decides who gets more? Who will make the loans? Something tells me you plan to be the one with that power making all the decisions.

The key failure of socialism is that the socialists always seem to think they're going to be in charge and the ones making the decisions for everyone else, not subject to them.

CON$ervative mind-readers always project what they think into others.

All I said was the truly wealthy, who pay no taxes, should pay some taxes equal to the level that the wage earners pay. The wealthy, who benefit most from the right of private ownership protected by our government, should contribute to the support of said government that benefits them most. They are not ENTITLED to a free ride, as you "THINK."

 

[Big Fitz]

Thank you for admitting that the wealthy tax dodgers have the real money and own both Parties and not the wage earner.

Once again, your sanctimonious and evil stupidity raises it's hoary head.

It's so Ironic you think the indigent and shiftless should be given that instead.

And when you have doled out the wealth of those who have earned it in the past and present that drives the world's industry, and you've given a sheer pittance to the hoards of poor who cannot employ anyone or invest it, what then?

So now you have millions of people with only a few thousand dollars a piece. Who owns the facilities? Who decides who gets more? Who will make the loans? Something tells me you plan to be the one with that power making all the decisions.

The key failure of socialism is that the socialists always seem to think they're going to be in charge and the ones making the decisions for everyone else, not subject to them.

CON$ervative mind-readers always project what they think into others.

All I said was the truly wealthy, who pay no taxes, should pay some taxes equal to the level that the wage earners pay. The wealthy, who benefit most from the right of private ownership protected by our government, should contribute to the support of said government that benefits them most. They are not ENTITLED to a free ride, as you "THINK."

Edthecretin, you've exposed your true goal long ago to destroy the wealthy and make yourself one instead.

... but isn't it true this is all Rush's fault?

 

[edthecynic]

It's so Ironic you think the indigent and shiftless should be given that instead.

And when you have doled out the wealth of those who have earned it in the past and present that drives the world's industry, and you've given a sheer pittance to the hoards of poor who cannot employ anyone or invest it, what then?

So now you have millions of people with only a few thousand dollars a piece. Who owns the facilities? Who decides who gets more? Who will make the loans? Something tells me you plan to be the one with that power making all the decisions.

The key failure of socialism is that the socialists always seem to think they're going to be in charge and the ones making the decisions for everyone else, not subject to them.

CON$ervative mind-readers always project what they think into others.

All I said was the truly wealthy, who pay no taxes, should pay some taxes equal to the level that the wage earners pay. The wealthy, who benefit most from the right of private ownership protected by our government, should contribute to the support of said government that benefits them most. They are not ENTITLED to a free ride, as you "THINK."

Edthecretin, you've exposed your true goal long ago to destroy the wealthy and make yourself one instead.

... but isn't it true this is all Rush's fault?

Linkiepoo!!!!!

 

[Big Fitz]

CON$ervative mind-readers always project what they think into others.

All I said was the truly wealthy, who pay no taxes, should pay some taxes equal to the level that the wage earners pay. The wealthy, who benefit most from the right of private ownership protected by our government, should contribute to the support of said government that benefits them most. They are not ENTITLED to a free ride, as you "THINK."

Edthecretin, you've exposed your true goal long ago to destroy the wealthy and make yourself one instead.

... but isn't it true this is all Rush's fault?

Linkiepoo!!!!!

Be your own research monkey. I don't have time or the interest to cull all your rants to prove your insanity.

 

[Bern80]

And currently the tax structure has the top 5% of wage earners paying over half the tax collected, while the bottom 60% of wage earners receive money back or come out even.

So... what are you saying?

That's right, WAGE EARNERS pay the bulk of the taxes, not the truly wealthy, who do not work for wages!!!!!
We need a wealth tax instead of an income tax. The wealthiest families, like the Rockefellers, Mellons, DuPontes, etc., pay no income taxes at all. When Nelson Rockefeller was appointed Veep he made his tax return public. On a 7 figure income he paid not one penny in income taxes.

And that "60%", actually 47%, that pay no income tax is due to the GOP trying to buy votes with tax cuts.

It's fucking hilarious that some of you actually argue in such righteous tones that the wealthy are ENTITLED to a free ride because the government is "inefficient."

They are entitled to keep whatever money the tax code allows them to keep. Blame that if you want to blame anything. It's what everyone, regardless of income should be doing, giving government as little money as legally allowed. Explain to me how a group that is getting a free ride still generates the bulk of the tax revenue.

Why should I have to explain something YOU made up??????????????????

Because it's not made up. It's math. Just because you wanted to bold and put in big letters in your claim doesn't it make it so.

 

[Barb]

First of all, the point is that the money to hire more bureaucrats has to come from somewhere. Moreover, bureaucrats and gubmint make-work projects produce absolutely nothing of added value, or of debatable value, for the general economy.

We waste lots of money on all sorts of stupid programs. Yet, when it comes to cutting back on anything, the first words out of the mouths of the left is "cut the military"....
Y'all are really becoming cartoons of yourselves.

1st of all, I indicated one place extra money could be found. Moreover, we don't have to "make" work, as there is plenty that needs doing. The military is a sacred cow that goes on chewing and chewing without much scrutiny. I'm not saying other waste couldn't be found, or that it all has to come from one place. A lot of the waste I see in government spending is on administration. The bureaus are top heavy, just like in private industry, and when cuts come, the people who are cut are the ones who do the actual work, leaving paper pushers behind to collect full time salaries.

And dude, stop trying to insult me. I don't do that to you, and it just looks silly.

You're ignoring the point...That doesn't make it go away...Like the bureaucrats who get hired in your thoroughly failed and discredited Keynesian scenario.

Now, when you can come up with a time that actual cuts --as opposed to lessened increases in the baseline-- have been made to the bureaucracy to pay for all this Keynesian central planning, you might have a point...But you can't, so you don't.

Did the point move? I addressed your point.
And there already IS central planning, has been in place for quite some time. What the right won't admit is that they have their own pet projects (Run by bureaucrats), and that it isn't government programs they dislike, but those government programs that don't do what they want done.
You want cuts in spending? Cut military expenses, cut out corporate welfare for companies that expatriated production. Want more revenue? Let the tax cuts for the wealthy expire, raise import taxes on companies that epatriated production.

 

[Oddball]

Secondary point being that economic central planning doesn't work, no matter how many programs you cut or bureaucrats you put on the dole.

What you're proposing is doing more of the same and expecting a better result.

 

[editec]

Taxation has nothing to do with CENTRAL PLANNING.

Per usual you folks are confusing yourselves because you don't really know what you're talking about.

Read a book!

 

[Oddball]

Using taxation to take from the productive, in order to feather the nests of the unproductive (i.e. distribute wealth), has everything to do with central planning.

While we're on the topic of reading books, try a few on basic economics some time.

 

[Bern80]

Taxation has nothing to do with CENTRAL PLANNING.

Per usual you folks are confusing yourselves because you don't really know what you're talking about.

Read a book!

How would one fund central planning without taxation?

 

[Barb]

Taxation has nothing to do with CENTRAL PLANNING.

Per usual you folks are confusing yourselves because you don't really know what you're talking about.

Read a book!

Okay, I know its wiki, but I'm lazy today:

Economic planning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States

The United States utilized economic planning during the First World War. The Federal Government supplemented the price system with centralized resource allocation and created a number of new agencies to direct important economic sectors; notably the Food Administration, Fuel Administration, Railroad Administration and War Industries Board.[10] During the Second World War, the economy experienced staggering growth under a similar system of planning.

From the start of the Cold War to the present, the United States Federal Government directs a significant amount of investment and funding into research and development, often initially through the Department of Defense. The government performs 50% of all R&D in the United States,[11] with a dynamic state-directed public-sector developing most of the technology that later becomes the basis of the private sector economy.[12] Examples include laser technology, the internet, telecommunications and computers.

 

[Oddball]

Taxation has nothing to do with CENTRAL PLANNING.

Per usual you folks are confusing yourselves because you don't really know what you're talking about.

Read a book!

Okay, I know its wiki, but I'm lazy today:

Economic planning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States

The United States utilized economic planning during the First World War. The Federal Government supplemented the price system with centralized resource allocation and created a number of new agencies to direct important economic sectors; notably the Food Administration, Fuel Administration, Railroad Administration and War Industries Board.[10] During the Second World War, the economy experienced staggering growth under a similar system of planning.

From the start of the Cold War to the present, the United States Federal Government directs a significant amount of investment and funding into research and development, often initially through the Department of Defense. The government performs 50% of all R&D in the United States,[11] with a dynamic state-directed public-sector developing most of the technology that later becomes the basis of the private sector economy.[12] Examples include laser technology, the internet, telecommunications and computers.

Right...And prior to WWI, there was also no income tax.

I assure you, the relationship between a graduated income tax and central economic planning is direct.

 

[Barb]

Taxation has nothing to do with CENTRAL PLANNING.

Per usual you folks are confusing yourselves because you don't really know what you're talking about.

Read a book!

Okay, I know its wiki, but I'm lazy today:

Economic planning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States

The United States utilized economic planning during the First World War. The Federal Government supplemented the price system with centralized resource allocation and created a number of new agencies to direct important economic sectors; notably the Food Administration, Fuel Administration, Railroad Administration and War Industries Board.[10] During the Second World War, the economy experienced staggering growth under a similar system of planning.

From the start of the Cold War to the present, the United States Federal Government directs a significant amount of investment and funding into research and development, often initially through the Department of Defense. The government performs 50% of all R&D in the United States,[11] with a dynamic state-directed public-sector developing most of the technology that later becomes the basis of the private sector economy.[12] Examples include laser technology, the internet, telecommunications and computers.

Right...And prior to WWI, there was also no income tax.

I assure you, the relationship between a graduated income tax and central economic planning is direct.

Dude, economic structures put in place in response to the Great Depression (including the new markets created by discoveries made during R&D by wartime scientists and researchers) brought many out of poverty and created the middle class.

Much of that same middle class became quite conservative once their economic and social security became old hat, when they decided their "place" was becoming too crowded / close for comfort, and when poverty became racialized by government and the mass media.

 

[edthecynic]

Originally Posted by Big Fitz And currently the tax structure has the top 5% of wage earners paying over half the tax collected, while the bottom 60% of wage earners receive money back or come out even.

That's right, WAGE EARNERS pay the bulk of the taxes, not the truly wealthy, who do not work for wages!!!!!
We need a wealth tax instead of an income tax. The wealthiest families, like the Rockefellers, Mellons, DuPontes, etc., pay no income taxes at all. When Nelson Rockefeller was appointed Veep he made his tax return public. On a 7 figure income he paid not one penny in income taxes.

And that "60%", actually 47%, that pay no income tax is due to the GOP trying to buy votes with tax cuts.

They are entitled to keep whatever money the tax code allows them to keep. Blame that if you want to blame anything. It's what everyone, regardless of income should be doing, giving government as little money as legally allowed. Explain to me how a group that is getting a free ride still generates the bulk of the tax revenue.

Why should I have to explain something YOU made up??????????????????

Because it's not made up. It's math. Just because you wanted to bold and put in big letters in your claim doesn't it make it so.

Only by CON$ervative "Fuzzy Math."

Again you expose the lack of reading comprehension by CON$! I didn't make the claim, it was one of your fellow CON$ parroting the CON$ervative hate radio mantra.

I merely pointed out that WAGE EARNERS are not the truly wealthy.

 

[Oddball]

Okay, I know its wiki, but I'm lazy today:

Economic planning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right...And prior to WWI, there was also no income tax.

I assure you, the relationship between a graduated income tax and central economic planning is direct.

Dude, economic structures put in place in response to the Great Depression (including the new markets created by discoveries made during R&D by wartime scientists and researchers) brought many out of poverty and created the middle class.

Much of that same middle class became quite conservative once their economic and social security became old hat, when they decided their "place" was becoming too crowded / close for comfort, and when poverty became racialized by government and the mass media.

Total lie.

Not only did Hoover's and FDR's foolish and economically ignorant programs not get us out of the depression, they in fact created a double-dip depression.

Go peddle your Keynesian central planner propaganda to the willing and blissfully ignorant.

 

[Bern80]

Originally Posted by Big Fitz And currently the tax structure has the top 5% of wage earners paying over half the tax collected, while the bottom 60% of wage earners receive money back or come out even.

Why should I have to explain something YOU made up??????????????????

Because it's not made up. It's math. Just because you wanted to bold and put in big letters in your claim doesn't it make it so.

Only by CON$ervative "Fuzzy Math."

Again you expose the lack of reading comprehension by CON$! I didn't make the claim, it was one of your fellow CON$ parroting the CON$ervative hate radio mantra.

I merely pointed out that WAGE EARNERS are not the truly wealthy.

Your big bold letters suggest you were trying to point out that the wage earners are paying the bulk of the tax bill. Which is simply not so.

 

[edthecynic]

Originally Posted by Big Fitz And currently the tax structure has the top 5% of wage earners paying over half the tax collected, while the bottom 60% of wage earners receive money back or come out even.

Because it's not made up. It's math. Just because you wanted to bold and put in big letters in your claim doesn't it make it so.

Only by CON$ervative "Fuzzy Math."

Again you expose the lack of reading comprehension by CON$! I didn't make the claim, it was one of your fellow CON$ parroting the CON$ervative hate radio mantra.

I merely pointed out that WAGE EARNERS are not the truly wealthy.

Your big bold letters suggest you were trying to point out that the wage earners are paying the bulk of the tax bill. Which is simply not so.

So you are admitting the GOP hate radio mantra has been a lie all these years!
Thank You.

December 18, 2007
RUSH: Before the Bush tax cuts, the top 1% of wage earners paid 37% of all income tax revenue. Now, after the Bush tax cuts, the top 1% are paying 39% of a total income tax bite. That's a 2% increase in the share of total taxes paid by the rich, the top 1%, since the Bush tax cuts went into effect. By the same token, before the Bush tax cuts, the top 5% paid 56% of all income tax revenue. Now the top 5% are paying 60%, after the Bush tax cuts.

 

[Big Fitz]

Taxation has nothing to do with CENTRAL PLANNING.

Per usual you folks are confusing yourselves because you don't really know what you're talking about.

Read a book!

Horsecrap on a stick.

Taxation is the means of funding central planning. What else are they going to use? The free market? Fuck no! They plan and plot and devise and tax. It is their ONLY way to generate revenue and one of the primary reasons that the USSR failed because of their addictions to 5 year plans instead of relying on a constantly reacting market evolving to economic conditions.