What should the wealthy do? Libs How should they be sharing there wealth?

[Vox]

Doesn't the rich guy who owns a trucking company benefit from good roads? Yet he didn't build those roads nor does he maintain them. Certainly the owner of the trucking company uses the roads more than the single individual. So if he is using them more he should pay more. There are lots of such examples.

Yes, HE DID and helps to maintain them

 

[mmmjvpssm]

That would last for maybe a year, then the rich would start getting all sorts of deductions because "They create jobs!"

 

[Vox]

How about if they just pay the same tax rate as me. I would be fine with that.

Actually.. how about everyone pay the same tax rate on every dollar earned (starting with dollar 1) with no exception, exemption, deduction, loophole, or anything else???

That is THE BEST WAY

 

[Brain357]

Doesn't the rich guy who owns a trucking company benefit from good roads? Yet he didn't build those roads nor does he maintain them. Certainly the owner of the trucking company uses the roads more than the single individual. So if he is using them more he should pay more. There are lots of such examples.

Yes, HE DID and helps to maintain them

Now maybe you mean he helped pay for them with taxes and helps maintain them with taxes. That would be correct. But he did not break the shovel out and build them himself, nor does he maintain them. The government does those things. And since he puts way more wear on them than the guy who has a single car, it makes sense he pays more.

 

[Vox]

That would last for maybe a year, then the rich would start getting all sorts of deductions because "They create jobs!"

dumbo, people who pay taxes ( doesn't matter the rate) ALL built those roads and maintain them.

now, this obviously eludes you since you have never payed taxes

 

[mmmjvpssm]

The problem isn't that rich people are rich, I don't care about that. The problem is that the rightwing thinks we should get down on our knees and kiss their feet. They think the rich are doing us a big favor when they "create jobs" They're not. They only hire people to make money for themselves. Nothing wrong with that but don't try to make them out to be some kind of heroes. The right is also constantly trying to skew the playing field, for example limiting the ability of unions to donate to political campaigns, but the Koch brothers can give as much as they want to anti worker right wing candidates

 

[Vox]

Doesn't the rich guy who owns a trucking company benefit from good roads? Yet he didn't build those roads nor does he maintain them. Certainly the owner of the trucking company uses the roads more than the single individual. So if he is using them more he should pay more. There are lots of such examples.

Yes, HE DID and helps to maintain them

Now maybe you mean he helped pay for them with taxes and helps maintain them with taxes. That would be correct. But he did not break the shovel out and build them himself, nor does he maintain them. The government does those things. And since he puts way more wear on them than the guy who has a single car, it makes sense he pays more.

it doesn't matter. He payed for the job being done, so he doesn't need to take the shovel.
It is not his job.

his job was to create this job for the man with a shovel - and it is good he did, the man can make a living and support his family.

 

[The Rabbi]

Even the most obvious points elude you. Impressive.

No actually they seem to elude you. Like the amount the wealthy pay in taxes far exceeds the military budget.

Well it's just one example of how the very rich get more benefit and hence should pay more. I think the security company example is great. Certainly you can't disagree that the person with 5 houses, several warehouses, and a few office buildings should pay more for security than the guy with one house? If you do please explain.

Doesn't the rich guy who owns a trucking company benefit from good roads? Yet he didn't build those roads nor does he maintain them. Certainly the owner of the trucking company uses the roads more than the single individual. So if he is using them more he should pay more. There are lots of such examples.

The owner of the trucking company pays for the roads through:
Income taxes
Wage taxes for his employees.
Tag, title and other taxes for his trucks
Fuel taxes for his trucks.

Seen that way the freeloaders are the workers.

You seem to be missing 1.000 here.

 

[Brain357]

No actually they seem to elude you. Like the amount the wealthy pay in taxes far exceeds the military budget.

Well it's just one example of how the very rich get more benefit and hence should pay more. I think the security company example is great. Certainly you can't disagree that the person with 5 houses, several warehouses, and a few office buildings should pay more for security than the guy with one house? If you do please explain.

Doesn't the rich guy who owns a trucking company benefit from good roads? Yet he didn't build those roads nor does he maintain them. Certainly the owner of the trucking company uses the roads more than the single individual. So if he is using them more he should pay more. There are lots of such examples.

The owner of the trucking company pays for the roads through:
Income taxes
Wage taxes for his employees.
Tag, title and other taxes for his trucks
Fuel taxes for his trucks.

Seen that way the freeloaders are the workers.

You seem to be missing 1.000 here.

I'll assume you agree with the first point.

Yes he does pay for them. And benefits greatly from them. Just like he benefits from all his workers making him money. They are not freeloaders at all.

 

[mmmjvpssm]

No actually they seem to elude you. Like the amount the wealthy pay in taxes far exceeds the military budget.

Well it's just one example of how the very rich get more benefit and hence should pay more. I think the security company example is great. Certainly you can't disagree that the person with 5 houses, several warehouses, and a few office buildings should pay more for security than the guy with one house? If you do please explain.

Doesn't the rich guy who owns a trucking company benefit from good roads? Yet he didn't build those roads nor does he maintain them. Certainly the owner of the trucking company uses the roads more than the single individual. So if he is using them more he should pay more. There are lots of such examples.

The owner of the trucking company pays for the roads through:
Income taxes
Wage taxes for his employees.
Tag, title and other taxes for his trucks
Fuel taxes for his trucks.

Seen that way the freeloaders are the workers.

You seem to be missing 1.000 here.

The rich guy doesn't pay wage taxes, that comes straight out of the paychecks of the workers. Those other ones are also paid by other people. The old retired guy down the street who has a truck also pays income taxes and stuff for his truck, but nobody would ever say he built the roads

 

[The Rabbi]

Doesn't the rich guy who owns a trucking company benefit from good roads? Yet he didn't build those roads nor does he maintain them. Certainly the owner of the trucking company uses the roads more than the single individual. So if he is using them more he should pay more. There are lots of such examples.

Yes, HE DID and helps to maintain them

Now maybe you mean he helped pay for them with taxes and helps maintain them with taxes. That would be correct. But he did not break the shovel out and build them himself, nor does he maintain them. The government does those things. And since he puts way more wear on them than the guy who has a single car, it makes sense he pays more.

The government did not do that. Individuals, usually private contractors, built the roads. Which is irrelevant. What is relevant is who paid for it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well it's just one example of how the very rich get more benefit and hence should pay more. I think the security company example is great. Certainly you can't disagree that the person with 5 houses, several warehouses, and a few office buildings should pay more for security than the guy with one house? If you do please explain.

Doesn't the rich guy who owns a trucking company benefit from good roads? Yet he didn't build those roads nor does he maintain them. Certainly the owner of the trucking company uses the roads more than the single individual. So if he is using them more he should pay more. There are lots of such examples.

The owner of the trucking company pays for the roads through:
Income taxes
Wage taxes for his employees.
Tag, title and other taxes for his trucks
Fuel taxes for his trucks.

Seen that way the freeloaders are the workers.

You seem to be missing 1.000 here.

The rich guy doesn't pay wage taxes, that comes straight out of the paychecks of the workers. Those other ones are also paid by other people. The old retired guy down the street who has a truck also pays income taxes and stuff for his truck, but nobody would ever say he built the roads

The workers' paychecks are written by whom? yeah, right.
The company owner must pay fuel taxes and all taxes connected with his trucks. The old retired guy down the street does not pay income taxes on a truck. He doesnt pay income tax at all, likely.

 

[Brain357]

Yes, HE DID and helps to maintain them

Now maybe you mean he helped pay for them with taxes and helps maintain them with taxes. That would be correct. But he did not break the shovel out and build them himself, nor does he maintain them. The government does those things. And since he puts way more wear on them than the guy who has a single car, it makes sense he pays more.

The government did not do that. Individuals, usually private contractors, built the roads. Which is irrelevant. What is relevant is who paid for it.

So without the government you think we would have such an effective road system do you?

So who pays more then? The individual who has one car or the owner of a trucking company who has a fleet of trucks? I'd say the person who uses it more should be paying more.

 

[The Rabbi]

The problem isn't that rich people are rich, I don't care about that. The problem is that the rightwing thinks we should get down on our knees and kiss their feet. They think the rich are doing us a big favor when they "create jobs" They're not. They only hire people to make money for themselves. Nothing wrong with that but don't try to make them out to be some kind of heroes. The right is also constantly trying to skew the playing field, for example limiting the ability of unions to donate to political campaigns, but the Koch brothers can give as much as they want to anti worker right wing candidates

Wow, so much misinformation.
Please post links of rightwing people thinking we should get down on our knees.
Yes, they hire people to make money for themselves. In the course of that, they hire people and pay them salaries and benefits. Is that bad?
They take great risks to get their wealth and enrich the economy an the lives of many people around them. Shouldn't people be grateful for that? How much time has Microsoft's products saved you? Cisco? Etc? How much easier have they made your job (assuming you actually have one)? Aren't you grateful for that?
The Koch Bros do not have the ability to give as much as they want to any candidate. That is simply a lie.

 

[The Rabbi]

Now maybe you mean he helped pay for them with taxes and helps maintain them with taxes. That would be correct. But he did not break the shovel out and build them himself, nor does he maintain them. The government does those things. And since he puts way more wear on them than the guy who has a single car, it makes sense he pays more.

The government did not do that. Individuals, usually private contractors, built the roads. Which is irrelevant. What is relevant is who paid for it.

So without the government you think we would have such an effective road system do you?

So who pays more then? The individual who has one car or the owner of a trucking company who has a fleet of trucks? I'd say the person who uses it more should be paying more.

Probably more effective. But that is irrelevant. You failed to refute my point that people pay for it.

The trucking company pays far more, out of all proportion to how much he actually uses it.

 

[Brain357]

The government did not do that. Individuals, usually private contractors, built the roads. Which is irrelevant. What is relevant is who paid for it.

So without the government you think we would have such an effective road system do you?

So who pays more then? The individual who has one car or the owner of a trucking company who has a fleet of trucks? I'd say the person who uses it more should be paying more.

Probably more effective. But that is irrelevant. You failed to refute my point that people pay for it.

The trucking company pays far more, out of all proportion to how much he actually uses it.

Of course people pay for it in taxes, nothing to refute. The point was who should pay more.

 

[The Rabbi]

So without the government you think we would have such an effective road system do you?

So who pays more then? The individual who has one car or the owner of a trucking company who has a fleet of trucks? I'd say the person who uses it more should be paying more.

Probably more effective. But that is irrelevant. You failed to refute my point that people pay for it.

The trucking company pays far more, out of all proportion to how much he actually uses it.

Of course people pay for it in taxes, nothing to refute. The point was who should pay more.

The trucking company owner already pays more.
What were you trying to prove again? You flunked.

 

[Brain357]

Probably more effective. But that is irrelevant. You failed to refute my point that people pay for it.

The trucking company pays far more, out of all proportion to how much he actually uses it.

Of course people pay for it in taxes, nothing to refute. The point was who should pay more.

The trucking company owner already pays more.
What were you trying to prove again? You flunked.

I guess your saying then that the trucking company owner should pay more than the individual with one car. That was my point. I am proving that the rich guy pays more in taxes because he gets more benefits. Which is something you clearly cannot refute.

 

[The Rabbi]

Of course people pay for it in taxes, nothing to refute. The point was who should pay more.

The trucking company owner already pays more.
What were you trying to prove again? You flunked.

I guess your saying then that the trucking company owner should pay more than the individual with one car. That was my point. I am proving that the rich guy pays more in taxes because he gets more benefits. Which is something you clearly cannot refute.

He pays more in taxes than he gets in benefits. Something you cannot refute.

Who benefits from programs to teach Chinese hookers how to drink alcohol responsibly? Who should pay for that?

 

[Wyatt earp]

The problem isn't that rich people are rich, I don't care about that. The problem is that the rightwing thinks we should get down on our knees and kiss their feet. They think the rich are doing us a big favor when they "create jobs" They're not. They only hire people to make money for themselves. Nothing wrong with that but don't try to make them out to be some kind of heroes. The right is also constantly trying to skew the playing field, for example limiting the ability of unions to donate to political campaigns, but the Koch brothers can give as much as they want to anti worker right wing candidates

Again the Koch brothers have Union companys they fund alot of PBS shows like Nova, they cover all there bases well... they are not the boogie man that the left talking points want them to be seen like. If they really really wanted to use their money and power just partisian.. well..