Printable View
All those protests in Wisconsin? Don't mean a thing. Back to the weekend regatta in your private lagoon. Oh. Wait. The Wall Street Journal said what?
Tax the Super Rich now or face a revolution
Commentary: A ‘Super-Rich Delusion’ is leading us to ruin
Tax breaks for millionaires and corporations, shared sacrifice for the rest of us. Too bad Obama doesn't have the guts to fight the trend.
Not raising taxes on the rich has wide bipartisan support.
Of course - both parties are marching to the same neoliberal drumbeat.Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
"Not raising taxes on the rich has wide bipartisan support"
In Congress compromised and corrupted by "rich" money. Human-Americans are for taxing the rich.
Fucked, unfuckable, VRWC, Repugs.
That should just about cover it. Take the rest of the day off.
Damn VLWC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt Bringdown
My accurate VRWC sure beats sterile debating about minutiae that obscure the big picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Grimmtons needs his own reality show. I mean, really.
Your supposedly accurate description is the night in which all cows are gray. As a description and as a discussion, it blows.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
Being a broken record blows.
:rollinQuote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
Minutiae is all you're good for. You're basically just a wind-up doll who spouts off "VRWC" anytime someone pulls the string in your back by opening up a new thread.
The possibility of a revolution is long gone. Unlike the 30s, the establishment did not expect a tightening of credit and liquidity, but the reverse. If this cluster was going to collapse, the opportunity was in a rapid and vastly more severe deflation brought on by the credit crisis.
Further, calls for revolution from the lower 99% who themselves live in a society in which the main anxiety for the majority is whether or not they can afford a daily Starbucks run is a bit much. Or, get over yourselves and see how the rest of the world lives.
The 'Wall Street Journal' didn't say dick, some Marketwatch commentator did. The guy's pretty much a Johnny One-Note:Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt Bringdown
More Paul B. Farrell
March 22, 2011 New Civil War erupts, led by super rich, GOP
March 15, 2011 Toxic Charlie Sheen virus infects Wall Street
March 8, 2011 The 2008 crash isn’t over, only covered up
March 1, 2011 Four time bombs that will blow up Wall Street
Feb. 22, 2011 Market Crash 2011: It will hit by Christmas
Further, holding up public sector unions and their comfortable sinecures secured at the expense of the people by the politicians they purchased before their apple cart was overturned as some kind of plot by the "Super Rich" to stick it to the people is absurd.
Cheerleading the immiseration thesis -- ghost dance for mechanical materialism?
So true. So fucking true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Neither party wants to bite the hand that feeds them.Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
Affording a daily starbucks is a bigger concern than having a job, being able to afford a mortgage/rent, or coping with out of control medical and education costs? Are you serious?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Sure. It doesn't fit the fairy tale, but then neither does life, and given the shallow self-centered society we live in, a lack of affluence is of greater concern than providing for the basics of life.
Our gripe with the "Super Rich" appears to be that they can afford more nice shit. Naturally this would be the type of revolution America in the 21st century would birth.
Marcus, like WC, says the UCA Human-Americans should compare themselves to Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Chinese peasants, and STFU, and let the VRWC continue its thieving predations.
Starbucks? how about finding enough money to keep the utilities on? or make the rent? or buy gas a couple gallons at a time?
croutons, like the rest of would be American latte revolutionaries, assumes any critique of his arguments to indicate support for the bogeymen of his conspiracy theory.
You know something is bad when it's supported by all the assholes in congress and not just half of them... the bailout, the Iraq War resolution, No Child Left Behind, and so on.Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotes_geek
Wow, that article had just a tad of hysteria, didn't it?
MB, the VRWC is real.
Your placing the blame for the fucked up UCA on the citizens is typical shilling for the VRWC, just like WC criminalizing the poor.
There won't be a revolution here until the people really suffer. The quality of life overall is too high to foster a revolution.
The tooth fairy, Santa Claus, and the Easter Bunny are "real" to a five year old.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Even if the level of privation or misery were so great as to cause serious social unrest, I doubt the great unwashed would have any idea who to shoot at. We'd probably see racial pogroms way before any expressly political insurrection.
How long do you anticipate that being the case?Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
What does an American circa 2011 regard as "privation or misery"? I have a feeling the description would leave us embarrassed as fellow countrymen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
I like how he compared us to Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Very appropriate, considering that the entire Arab world has a combined GDP about equal to Spain's.
I don't know about that. I really don't. I mainly don't agree with that because I believe our main divisions today are definitely class related. Those lines tend to mimic racial divisions due to our nation's history but I just can't see middle class white people blaming Hispanics and African Americans for their troubles if the shit really hits the fan because its not like AA's or Hispanics are pulling the strings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Obviously there would be more racial violence but I don't think it would be the center of the events. I do think most Americans know who the real problem is but I also think they don't care enough to do anything about it because they live relatively comfortable.
Until oil prices rise enough to really hurt our economy. Energy prices going up is what will ultimately bring Americans back in line with the rest of the world's standard of living because our standards are held up by an amazing level of energy consumption. We're able to do this because of cheap oil. Once energy isn't cheap anymore, I do think America is in for a hell of a surprise.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
And therein lies the greatest trick the Devil ever played. The Credit Revolution has doomed this generation, and the next. We're still able to amass quantity, but the quality has definately diminished. The textbook example calls for our handlers to raise the stove temprature little by little so we don't jump out of the pot too soon, and it has work perfectly. Not until the people have nothing to fight back with will they want to fight, and by then they'll just roll over and take it. Just saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
For the rest of the Liberal ants that like to swarm all over the "tax the super rich" bandwagon, just remember that your lazy, less than $200K households aren't funding political campaigns. You are insignificant, go join a union or something.
I thought Howard Dean had it right when his campaign talked about the change in politics once regular people funded a campaign but the more I've thought about it the more I don't even think thats true - especially with the rulings on McCain-Finegold. Yeah, individual voters funding a campaign through small donations sounds great in theory, but even if we were able to out donate large and rich entities we would never be able to project the level of accountability that one single large donor can. Our power is too diluted. Further, with no checks on spending in campaigns the deep pockets now can exert even more pressure on the candidates.
Which in turn will cause food prices to shoot up. Then you have big problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
x1 million. I wonder how many people have seen what living conditions in a third world country are like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
there won't be a revolution that the rich don't want to happen.
Mr. Cunty-Bollocks needs to pull his head out of his ass. Go fuck yourself, you sniveling, privileged jackass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Thank you, Mr. Spurs Fan from Thailand. The surest sign you have lost an argument is when you result to insults rather than actually rebutting an opinion contrary to yours.Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt Bringdown
Insulting everyone who doesn't agree with him is his MO. Sadly, it's a very common MO.
I love you too, as well as your massfluent revolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt Bringdown
There will be no revolution until peoples' stomachs are empty. And in the land of America, 20 Taco Bell Tacos for $.02 on your local corners says no revolution anytime soon.
Money and power rules the world. It has been like this for thousands of years. It is the nature of man. Quit thinking this will ever change.
From each according to their ability, and extra espresso shots for all.
Quote:
Coffee.
Question:
Do rich people make the poor more poor? Poorly worded, I know.
I mean, take for example this Zuckerberg dude. He steals and idea, creates a shitty social networking portal, screws his best friend out of stock options, and becomes a young billionaire. Did he make anyone MORE poor?
A revolution based on envious materialist concerns won't get far. Reactions against a militarist state will have precisely the impact that they have had so far this century.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Yes they do.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Ask Roubini about how much the financial sector cost the entire world. Its in the Trillions, and the biggest losers were the poor.
Tell that to the founding fathers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Further, the people are aware that the wealthy have access to power and milk that for what it's worth, so it's not a matter of ignorance.
The basic problem is that for all its flaws, this wretched system works. Arguing against it from a materialist perspective is bound to fail unless you wish to gin up revolutionary angst about relative levels of conspicuous consumption.
Now if you wish to advocate a different cultural focus in a society in which everyone measures themselves by how much shit they have, good luck with that.
Ah yes, Beard's thesis.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
How dare you claim the first incarnations of Facebook were part of "a shitty social networking portal." It helped get a lot of people laid, and I am thankful I experienced the cusp of its greatness.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
And the answer to your question is "NO." Rich people don't make people more poor, but the lack of revenue they provide the government causes a strain on the entitlement programs of poor people. So either the government needs to cut costs or tax the rich to keep up.
The ideological focus of the American founding was quite real, as well as the disputations against distant governmental authority in favor of local authority.
The ideological focus for the leaders and founding fathers might have been real, but not for the people actually doing the fighting or the majority of those supporting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Sure, perhaps they bought into the propaganda. And then there were those who didn't go along with the malcontents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
The bailout was paid for by poor people?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stringer_Bell
Now, we're getting somewhere.
There's already redistribution taking place, it's just not "progressive" enough.
"bailout was paid for by poor people"
the poor, the young, old, sick, disabled are losing UCA safety net, middle class are losing homes and schools, EVERYBODY is paying for the Banksters' Great Depression except the Banksters.
God sometimes you're such a fucking idiot that I just don't understand it. You think the largest cost associated with a world wide economic situation was the bailout?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Instead of having a trantrum, why don't you explain how the poor are bearing the largest burden?
The top tier of people have gained more wealth while everyone - especially the middle class - has lost wealth and there is redistribution going on? Well, there is actually, its just not progressive at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
I've posted many threads on the consolidation of wealth in this country so for you to talk about redistribution is just another indicator of how you absolutely refuse to look at the actual facts of what is going on.
sometimes?Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Whe DON'T have a progressive tax code in this country?
A tantrum? How long am I supposed to endure your stupidity and refusal to look at the facts? Am I supposed to just have an endless supply of patience that you are allowed to draw from every single day?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
You really think the rich felt the majority of the burden of the economic crisis, Darrin? Have you not looked at the unemployment numbers that you've posted before? Have you not looked at the number of people who have lost houses? And thats just here in the United States. You think the poor around the world haven't been effected?
Instead of being willfully ignorant, why not actually gather some information BEFORE spewing your bullshit? Its one thing to have different ideologies its quite another to question the color of the sky.
:lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Like I said, a tantrum.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
No, I think the middle class did -- NOT the poor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxatio...ressive_nature
Oh I see, a progressive tax code means we can ignore the consolidation of wealth. Thanks.
Also, that tax code is completely set in stone. There are no loopholes. You pay a direct percentage of what you make with no way to lower it.
Interesting considering places like China that don't have much a middle class but had huge impacts on the poor. But I'm sure you can backup your beliefs with a quantification of how this hurt them the most.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Also, your initial statement was about whether or not the rich can actually hurt the poor and now you've moved the goal posts. Congrats.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
This country allows people to become enormously wealthy -- many of these billionaires being self-made. Why does that bother you so much?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Actually, I wondered how someone like Mark Zuckerberg can make a poor person even more poor.
http://www.heartlandalliance.org/wha...erty-final.pdf
Have a primer on how it affected those in poverty here. This isn't even to mention those living in 3rd world countries that were impacted in a devastating manner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Your own words, dipshit. I know you try to run from them, but those are your own words. Did Mark Zuckerberg make more people poor? Probably not, but not everyone who is rich is like Zuckerberg.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Can and do rich people make poor people more poor? The answer is an obvious yes, even if it doesn't apply to ever billionaire. Blanket statements are a specialty of yours so I can understand your inability to understand ....LOL....wait for it....nuance.
Strawman!!!! No one is saying its bad that people get rich. Try again.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
http://www.apa.org/topics/anger/control.aspxQuote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Rich CEO fights the regulation of derrivates such as CDOs and CDSes and undertake other irresponsible economic behavior. CDO's and CDS collapse the market and cause huge economic recession. People under the poverty line lose their jobs within this recession and suffer greatly.
Did you really need this explained to you?
If you want to be a billionaire, come up with a billion dollar idea. Otherwise, leave us conservatives alone and let America work the way it worked 200 years ago. Go on, live like a good American!
http://www.dpw.state.pa.us/fordisabi...ices/index.htmQuote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
In other words, an increase equal to more than half the population of the United States with even more yet to come.Quote:
The global economy is expected to shrink by 1.7% in 2009
1
Gross domestic product (GDP) growth .
in developing countries is expected to slow to 2.1%, and recessions are projected in Europe and
Central Asia (-2.0%), and Latin America and the Caribbean (-0.6%). This global recession is coming
at a time when the impact of the rise in food prices between 2005 and the beginning of 2008 is
estimated to have increased. For example, the proportion of the population of East Asia, the Middle
East, and South Asia living in extreme poverty has risen by 1 or more percentage points. Impacts
in some parts of Africa were less pronounced than others partly because of variation in the linkage
between local and global market food prices. Overall the number of extremely poor is estimated to
have increased by between 130 and 155 million globally between 2005 and 2008, with 53 million
more expected in 2009. Moreover, cash inflow to developing countries will decrease as result of
reductions in foreign direct investment (FDI), foreign aid and migrant workers remittance.
http://www.unscn.org/files/Publicati..._Crisis_4p.pdf
All because of irresponsible and downright criminal behavior by some rich people.
But no Darrin, its fucking impossible for the rich to make more people poor. I mean fuck, look at Mark Zuckerburg! Facebook!
Next up on Darrin's list - is it really possible for rain to make you wet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Why are you so angry?
Do you think it's responsible for us to be using 30% of our corn for biofuel when so many people are starving?
So....
The WSG journalist thinks this is a solution, or does he just want our rich to move to other nations?
Why are you so stupid?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Of course not. Ethanol from corn is a shit fuel to begin with. I've expressed my displeasure with biofuels a large amount on here but you're too stupid to remember that.
Classic. Quality post. :tuQuote:
Originally Posted by Stringer_Bell
A lot of divorces are happening due to the misbehavior made available through facebook. These divorces are causing some men or women to have to give up half of their assets to lawyers and the ex spouse. Zuckerberg made people poor. (shakes fist) DAMN YOU ZUCKERBERG.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
I think many on both sides of the aisle will admit that ethanol is a failed experiment.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
How many practical people ever thought it should have been done?Quote:
Originally Posted by LnGrrrR
I don't know, but I know that I do get frustrated every time I see the word.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
You should take something for that.
+ < I can't type a number large enough here >Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Remember when you asked if rich people could make the poor poorer? :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
That was funny.
We're nowhere near revolution, but the wider the income gap gets, the harder people will have to work to maintain a comfortable lifestyle.
There was a time not too long ago when a family could live comfortably in their own home in a fairly good neighborhood while being supported by one middle-class income. There is no reason a nation with our wealth can't reinvest into its own quality of living, and there's no reason that would have to come at the expense of very rich people staying very rich. As I recall, this country still had rich people when the top income tax bracket was a higher rate.
It's all about relativity though. No matter how many times one sees starving people in other countries, if everyone on the block has a new car but you, human nature means that you will feel pressure to do the same. It's only natural; outsiders tend to be marginalized, and being outside the pack means less survivability.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agloco
It's frankly unrealistic to think that the majority of Americans are going to say, "Well, I'm better off than third world countries, so I should be happy". That's not going to happen, even though it's true.
Unless you can get everyone to buy in to reduce their living standards, it's not going to happen. (Due to various issues, prisoner's dilemma, free rider, etc etc). If person X reduces their carbon footprint, that doesn't guarantee person Y will. The only ways to try to enforce it is through culture change, or through law. (Anti-smoking is an example of both, though I'm not sure which came first.)
Yeah good points. Changes which happen gradually are either generally unnoticed or tolerated well. I'm not sure of your age, but as a fresh graduate and young single man I became used to having a certain amount of buying power. By the time I was married 14 years later, that had changed noticeably (I'm fairly frugal compared to the average American). Our living standards (yes, very relative as you stated above) are decreasing already, and involuntarily I might add.Quote:
Originally Posted by LnGrrrR
I'm not sold on the notion that a tax or lack thereof on the super rich will be as strong a catalyst as most think though. I continue to be on the fence about it. A tax? Perhaps yes. How much is my question. I'm not well versed on it, but there appears to be a fair amount of latitude there as far as public opinion goes.
The problem thats going to happen eventually is that the lies of trickle down economics will eventually draw accountability. We've been told for decades now that as the rich get richer it will filter down to everyone. The tag lines have been that all some boats may rise faster and higher but the main focus is that ALL BOATS RISE.
Its just not the case. The rich have gotten richer and have a larger share of wealth, but - and especially the last decade - there has simply been no new wealth added to most segments of American society. As you said, Agloco, all of us have faced a reduction in purchasing power and its going to keep going down.
Why are you people worried about an income gap when wealth is so fluid. Just get more people producing wealth rather than expecting to steal others.