Reply With Quote
Well no... but 47% of you people don't pay any net taxes... so you are 3% off.
People who don't have much are funny. They just don't get the concept of entrepreneurship. Therefore the idea of someone having more than them is mind boggling. Just astounding. So strange. Wow.
It's as if they can't fathom the idea of hard work-education-money makes money-intelligence-sophistication- All new concepts to the brain dead kool-aid drinking whiners of the world. Wah... whah...wah...life is unfair.
You will always have smarter people who know how to make money.
All new concepts to the en lement generation. This generation hates successful people.
Well no... but 47% of you people don't pay any net taxes... so you are 3% off.
What a sophisticated rant. You did everything but tell people to get off your lawn.
Another strawman from an ignorant right-winger.
I'm sure spursmania is from a different generation than obama
This whole thread is stupid. It only shows liberals don't understand wealth. The more you guys push on more socialism, protecting a class of non-productive people, the trend will get worse.
i just want to let it be known, on record, state facts
i'm not poor
i work hard
i have my own money
i'm educated
i didnt vote for obama
i'm not a socialist
just so yall can all know
And yet another strawman from another ignorant right winger.
"47% of you people don't pay any net taxes"
47% of what? 300M? 18+ year old adults?
Why explain something that's over other people's head, and would take several thousand words to make it complete?
Maybe if you can get past the class envy and class warfare, there could be grounds for beneficial discussions. Until then, I will not waste my time on such a complex topic.
47% of personal income tax filers.
Very arrogant response there. The only thing that flew over anyone's head was Manny's simple question that you keep dodging.
Class warfare is Reagan and every president/congress since him raping the middle class's postwar wealth and shifting it up, with predictably disastrous results. Nice how you and every other Republican here shift the class warfare to being the poor vs the rich so you have easy targets like welfare moms to attack though.Maybe if you can get past the class envy and class warfare, there could be grounds for beneficial discussions. Until then, I will not waste my time on such a complex topic.
Because society has decided these "working poor" don't have to pay income tax is not these peoples' fault.
Would any of you let's-beat-up-on-the-non-taxpayers assholes like to swap your taxed income for their non-taxed income? didn't think so.
These working poor also provide a disproportionate %age of cannon fodder to get killed and maimed in bull wars, where the income tax paying (middle/upper) families contribute much less fodder. Where's your gra ude for the lower class keeping your tax-paying asses out of the wars?
The income-tax non-payers still pay sales tax, FICA, property tax, etc, etc.
What is the income level, for family of 4, or single, at which no income tax is paid?
I didn't notice one directed at me, but I ignored most this thread because of it's stupidity. Especially Manny's numerous posts over, and over, and over...
What is the simple question you refer to?
I don't see that. I see the wealth being increased in those who strive for improvement. The larger the 'nanny state class" gets, the bigger the disparaging numbers will be.
No, it's you guys who do that. Why complain about the rich then? What can't you treat rich people with the respect you give someone who isn't rich?
There it is. Manny's been trying to get you Republicans to address it the entire thread, but no one has yet.
You don't see that the middle class's wealth has been shifted up and that the country is once again in a horrible shape with the majority of the country worse off than previous generations? I know, I know, everyone born after 1970 is a lazy .I don't see that. I see the wealth being increased in those who strive for improvement. The larger the 'nanny state class" gets, the bigger the disparaging numbers will be.
Right. This thread is clearly about how much ground the middle class has lost. But continue strawmanning away; it's all anyone expects of you anymore.No, it's you guys who do that. Why complain about the rich then? What can't you treat rich people with the respect you give someone who isn't rich?
That's not such a simple question. For one thing, they shelter their money as much as possible to avoid taxes of it. When they do that, the money isn't being very productive. If they didn't pay punitive taxes, they might be inclined to shelter less, take more as taxable income, and spend it in the economy.
You are right about this trend. There are several reasons for it. We are even worse off than it appears because our costs are down because of cheap imports. At the same time, we have less manufacturing jobs, and more people relying on subsidies.
However, it is not the rich people's fault. Blame the regulations and laws.
Everyone is losing. Not just the middle class. The wealthy seem like they aren't losing ground, but they are too if you compare it to real inflation, and not the phony government numbers.
Think supply and demand for wages, like anything else in life, it applies. We have less manufacturing jobs than before and more low skilled workers. wages are severely depressed. My lifestyle I had in 1978 was far better than today. My expenses are about five times greater, but my income is less than four times what it was then. I think many of us are in the same boat.
Look at what you complain about. What the media tells you to. Oil prices... What a joke. Why not complain in the ever rising food prices?
Maybe because food stamps comer so many people but we don't get gas stamps?
Stop focusing on these fake issues. Look at the real ones. Anyone who is poor and does want to better themselves can, but it is increasingly difficult. The democrats have these people right where they want them. Needing more help from democrats. This is political power. Holding the lively hood of voters. Nobody ho is beholden to the government will break free of this self imposed poverty.
It's REAL simple: all you have to do is look southward at the failed state of Mexico to see what happens when the rich/poor divide gets too large. Or, alternately, at late eighteenth century France. Mexico is us in like 25 years.
I know I know. Cut taxes for the rich and the rest of us will rise up because of their investment.
Oh...
Wait...
Really? Then explain the above information please.
You may want to look at the numbers again. They aren't losing it. We are. Thats the entire point.Everyone is losing. Not just the middle class. The wealthy seem like they aren't losing ground, but they are too if you compare it to real inflation, and not the phony government numbers.
I'm not a liberal by any means... nor have any socialist tendencies...
But a widenning of wealth inequality during hard economic times is a recipe for disaster...
I voted for Obama. Your insinuation of defining people as right wingers for having a particular opinion is laughable and tenuous at best.
This is easily a bigger deal than the OP, which (unsurprisingly) is actually an attack on the Republicans.
Avoiding taxes through various "legal and fair" methods and voting in ideologies that support more of the same will only break the back of those who actually do the paying.
What some of you folks don't understand is that wealth ALWAYS re-distributes at some point. The only question is will violence be involved? Keeping so much away from so many just isn't viable, long term. It's like continually turning up the heat on a pressure cooker. It's going to explode eventually. The pressure valve that has been effective is taxation, and more specifically, inheritance taxes on the rich. Those don't penalize hard workers, just ing lazy-ass kids like Paris Hilton. I can't believe how trailer-town was snookered into supporting the inheritance tax rollback that only affects like 2% of people, and then only after they're DEAD.
Fine, then I'll just call you ignorant (and leave off the right-winger part) for your ridiculous strawman argument. The fact that you voted for Obama when he made it clear in his campaign that he was going to try to deliver a public health plan that you railed against on this forum is quite laughable, and reinforces the point. Unless by voting for Obama you meant you did it in the primary because Rush told you to.
I will not debase you with insults for having an opinion. Yet, another generalization on your part, "because Rush told you" speaks volumes about your political make-up.
I know lots of people who pull out the "I voted for Obama" card and come to find out they did it in the primaries as part of Operation Chaos or whatever that was called. So you voted for Obama in the November 4th election even though all he did on the campaign trail was about the nation's disparity in wealth and how he was going to push a public health plan?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
