Tax the Super Rich now or face a revolution

[MannyIsGod]

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.

Tell that to the founding fathers.

[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 con uous consumption.

Now if you wish to advocate a different cultural focus in a society in which everyone measures themselves by how much they have, good luck with that.

[Marcus Bryant]

Tell that to the founding fathers.

Ah yes, Beard's thesis.

[Stringer_Bell]

I mean, take for example this Zuckerberg dude. He steals and idea, creates a ty social networking portal, screws his best friend out of stock options, and becomes a young billionaire. Did he make anyone MORE poor?

How dare you claim the first incarnations of Facebook were part of "a ty social networking portal." It helped get a lot of people laid, and I am thankful I experienced the cusp of its greatness.

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 en lement programs of poor people. So either the government needs to cut costs or tax the rich to keep up.

[Marcus Bryant]

The ideological focus of the American founding was quite real, as well as the disputations against distant governmental authority in favor of local authority.

[MannyIsGod]

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.

[Marcus Bryant]

Sure, perhaps they bought into the propaganda. And then there were those who didn't go along with the malcontents.

[DarrinS]

Yes they do.

Ask Roubini about how much the financial sector cost the entire world. Its in the Trillions, and the biggest losers were the poor.

The bailout was paid for by poor people?

[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 en lement programs of poor people. So either the government needs to cut costs or tax the rich to keep up.

Now, we're getting somewhere.


There's already redistribution taking place, it's just not "progressive" enough.

[boutons_deux]

"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.

[MannyIsGod]

The bailout was paid for by poor people?

God sometimes you're such a ing idiot that I just don't understand it. You think the largest cost associated with a world wide economic situation was the bailout?

[DarrinS]

God sometimes you're such a ing idiot that I just don't understand it. You think the largest cost associated with a world wide economic situation was the bailout?

Instead of having a trantrum, why don't you explain how the poor are bearing the largest burden?

[MannyIsGod]

Now, we're getting somewhere.


There's already redistribution taking place, it's just not "progressive" enough.

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.

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.

[baseline bum]

God sometimes you're such a ing idiot that I just don't understand it. You think the largest cost associated with a world wide economic situation was the bailout?

sometimes?

[DarrinS]

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.

Whe DON'T have a progressive tax code in this country?

[MannyIsGod]

Instead of having a trantrum, why don't you explain how the poor are bearing the largest burden?

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?

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 bull ? Its one thing to have different ideologies its quite another to question the color of the sky.

[MannyIsGod]

Whe DON'T have a progressive tax code in this country?

[DarrinS]

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?

Like I said, a tantrum.

You really think the rich felt the majority of the burden of the economic crisis, Darrin?

No, I think the middle class did -- NOT the poor.

[DarrinS]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxatio...ressive_nature

[MannyIsGod]

Oh I see, a progressive tax code means we can ignore the consolidation of wealth. Thanks.

[MannyIsGod]

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.

[MannyIsGod]

Like I said, a tantrum.




No, I think the middle class did -- NOT the poor.

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.

[MannyIsGod]

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.

[DarrinS]

Oh I see, a progressive tax code means we can ignore the consolidation of wealth. Thanks.

This country allows people to become enormously wealthy -- many of these billionaires being self-made. Why does that bother you so much?

[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.

Actually, I wondered how someone like Mark Zuckerberg can make a poor person even more poor.