Jump to content

The Rich, The Poor, and that non-existent Middle Class


Recommended Posts

I'm just gonna stop commenting completely until MasterP realizes that I am not an Obama supporter, I am for the American people and getting us out of this *edited*ty economy that we are in right now. It's pointless for me to argue if all you are going to do is bash me because you think I support Obama, I am neither a socialist nor a conservative. I like the ideas from both parties. What I can't stand for right now is the inability for conservatives to see that the obnoxiously wealth are killing our economy. Do you not realize that defending them makes you look like a complete jack *edited*? Let's defend the guy who sits on a throne instead of the guy who makes an honest day to day living, YEAH THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, GOD I BET THE GUY ON THE THRONE IS PERFECT AND HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG HE DESERVES ALL OF THAT MONEY!

 

I didn't say Mellon's sole reason for doing the tax cuts was to lower what he paid, I am sure he had many other alternate reasons, I was just pointing out how much he saved in doing so, I am sure that was a pretty big reason for him doing it too though. "Oh hey look I can save about $800,000 dollars just by giving all the wealthy a tax cut, we deserve it we have been spending money in this country for a while." And so they have, again I cannot deny some of his other reasons, they do make sense.

 

So here is the honest to God truth, when the economy is down, we need to tax the *edited* out of the rich. When it is up and we are in peace times, national debt is down, give them a tax cut. I think that is a fair solution for everyone.

 

Also please provide links MasterP cause I honestly think you made up about 70% of your entire post.

Edited by Bitey
Link to post
Share on other sites

conservatives do. And socialists say conservative is bad. This is why I am neither nor. Both sides have good ideas, we need to start meshing things.

Edited by Bitey
Link to post
Share on other sites

thats the thing bitey if you aren't with them you are against them. That's the conservative mentality. their way or the *edited*ing highway. the know it all party man.

Edited by NuRayZ
Link to post
Share on other sites

again it's not all about money masterp, what did we have to show for those 8 glorious years of tax cuts, war, and spending?

The highest Dow Jones in the history of the stock market. I'd say that's at least worth something...

 

I'm just gonna stop commenting completely until MasterP realizes that I am not an Obama supporter

Where did I say you were an Obama supporter? Please, link it and I'll apologize. What I said was none of what you wanted would happen under Obama, which pretty much implies you to be the exact opposite of an Obama supporter.

 

From the tone and content of the rest of your reply it looks like you didn't actually read my reply earlier. It looks like you saw some Great Depression history that didn't jive with what you thought you knew so you skimmed down until you saw Obama mentioned then raged.

 

It's pointless for me to argue if all you are going to do is bash me because you think I support Obama, I am neither a socialist nor a conservative.

If you like high taxes, "big brother" government, and "make everyone equal" government programs then by definition you are either socialist, marxist, or communist. Your posts and ideals are textbook socialism. Go read what socialism means because you are it, you fit the definition almost exactly.

 

Since you didn't read my reply in the other post I'll quote it here:

While there's nothing wrong with socialism in theory, in practice it fails miserably every time. Sorry, I mean it just, does.

 

There's always going to be an upper class and a lower class. The most successful countries in history are those with a middle class, something that socialist countries generally destroy very quickly. We can switch to socialism, and everyone will be happy for a while, but after the love affair is over you'll find that those that were the upper class still are and everyone who didn't measure up is now essentially slave labor. I guess everyone being poor is fairer than the 13-17% we average now, unless you're in the 83-87% who isn't.

 

Sorry to be so mathematical about this but that's how you've got to look at it. There's always going to be poor people, and there's always going to be rich people. Your goal in life should be to get as high as you can without stepping on others. If you give all your money away while being poor, you'll always be poor, and the overall good you do for society will be minimal however if you focus entirely on yourself until you've planted your feet in solid financial ground you'll be in a much better position to actually do some good for the less fortunate. Yes I'm a greedy *edited*, yes I hoard my money, but that means that when I want to give to a good cause I actually have the money to make a difference. Everyone can give $5 to a cause but its the people that give $500 that keep those causes alive.

 

What I can't stand for right now is the inability for conservatives to see that the obnoxiously wealth are killing our economy. Do you not realize that defending them makes you look like a complete jack *edited*? Let's defend the guy who sits on a throne instead of the guy who makes an honest day to day living, YEAH THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, GOD I BET THE GUY ON THE THRONE IS PERFECT AND HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG HE DESERVES ALL OF THAT MONEY!

What you fail to realize is that the vast majority of the wealthy got it by honest, day to day living. The difference being they targetting their labor into more productive enterprises or simply rose the corporate ladder better. What you're saying is that since they're more successful than you are, as a nation, we should punish them with 90% taxes. How is that fair? Who determines what is and is not "wealthy"? What happens when people start thinking that anything above minimum wage should be taxed 90%? Surely you don't think THAT'S fair...

 

I didn't say Mellon's sole reason for doing the tax cuts was to lower what he paid, I am sure he had many other alternate reasons, I was just pointing out how much he saved in doing so, I am sure that was a pretty big reason for him doing it too though. "Oh hey look I can save about $800,000 dollars just by giving all the wealthy a tax cut, we deserve it we have been spending money in this country for a while." And so they have, again I cannot deny some of his other reasons, they do make sense.

So again I ask, are you saying Mellon's primary reason for creating the biggest short-term economic boom in this country's history was for personal tax savings? Will you not admit that what he did was smart for the economy as a whole and not just for his own wallet?

 

So here is the honest to God truth, when the economy is down, we need to tax the *edited* out of the rich. When it is up and we are in peace times, national debt is down, give them a tax cut. I think that is a fair solution for everyone.

So you haven't read anything I've posted here. Go re-read my first post which details how and why that policy doesn't work and gives a historic example of when the exact opposite worked beautifully. I'm not going to waste my time retyping it, it's not what you want to hear and puts a giant crack in your view of reality so I'm not really expecting you to read it. At least pretend like you did though so you aren't saying the same things over and over after being proven wrong by your own historic example.

 

Also please provide links MasterP cause I honestly think you made up about 70% of your entire post.

Everything I posted is supported by textbooks, wikipedia, and google. Sorry it hurts but socialists and liberals rarely know their history which is why your policies continually destroy our economy and those "greedy rich" conservative policies always spark growth cycles in it.

 

thats the thing bitey if you aren't with them you are against them. That's the conservative mentality. their way or the *edited*ing highway. the know it all party man.

Last I checked you can't raise tax on the "wealthy" to 90% AND lower them to 25% at the same time. I know the liberal perspective is hard to support with facts and examples in threads like this but at least try posting something constructive. Instead of random pop-shots at opinions, supported by facts, that you don't like.

 

I give kudos to Bitey for posting coherent sentences that aren't entirely made out of talking points. He at least expresses his own opinion and as wrong as I may think, it's his and his alone. Not identical in every way to that of half the people on TV and in Washington.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who says socialism is bad?

Anybody keeping on eye on Greece.

What happened in Greece? Oh yeah that's right, socialism failed. High taxation of the wealthy to support free healthcare and early retirement for the working class destroyed the economy and drug the Euro down for the entire continent nearly 15% overnight.

 

Just beacuse it's either failed or is failing in every other country means nothing though, it'll work here. We'll do it "correctly"... meaning in 50 years we'll be like Canada who is re-privating their healthcare system. Mainly because socialized medicine is expensive and not working...

Link to post
Share on other sites

again it's not all about money masterp, what did we have to show for those 8 glorious years of tax cuts, war, and spending?

The highest Dow Jones in the history of the stock market. I'd say that's at least worth something...

 

I'm just gonna stop commenting completely until MasterP realizes that I am not an Obama supporter

Where did I say you were an Obama supporter? Please, link it and I'll apologize. What I said was none of what you wanted would happen under Obama, which pretty much implies you to be the exact opposite of an Obama supporter.

 

From the tone and content of the rest of your reply it looks like you didn't actually read my reply earlier. It looks like you saw some Great Depression history that didn't jive with what you thought you knew so you skimmed down until you saw Obama mentioned then raged.

 

It's pointless for me to argue if all you are going to do is bash me because you think I support Obama, I am neither a socialist nor a conservative.

If you like high taxes, "big brother" government, and "make everyone equal" government programs then by definition you are either socialist, marxist, or communist. Your posts and ideals are textbook socialism. Go read what socialism means because you are it, you fit the definition almost exactly.

 

Since you didn't read my reply in the other post I'll quote it here:

While there's nothing wrong with socialism in theory, in practice it fails miserably every time. Sorry, I mean it just, does.

 

There's always going to be an upper class and a lower class. The most successful countries in history are those with a middle class, something that socialist countries generally destroy very quickly. We can switch to socialism, and everyone will be happy for a while, but after the love affair is over you'll find that those that were the upper class still are and everyone who didn't measure up is now essentially slave labor. I guess everyone being poor is fairer than the 13-17% we average now, unless you're in the 83-87% who isn't.

 

Sorry to be so mathematical about this but that's how you've got to look at it. There's always going to be poor people, and there's always going to be rich people. Your goal in life should be to get as high as you can without stepping on others. If you give all your money away while being poor, you'll always be poor, and the overall good you do for society will be minimal however if you focus entirely on yourself until you've planted your feet in solid financial ground you'll be in a much better position to actually do some good for the less fortunate. Yes I'm a greedy *edited*, yes I hoard my money, but that means that when I want to give to a good cause I actually have the money to make a difference. Everyone can give $5 to a cause but its the people that give $500 that keep those causes alive.

 

What I can't stand for right now is the inability for conservatives to see that the obnoxiously wealth are killing our economy. Do you not realize that defending them makes you look like a complete jack *edited*? Let's defend the guy who sits on a throne instead of the guy who makes an honest day to day living, YEAH THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, GOD I BET THE GUY ON THE THRONE IS PERFECT AND HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG HE DESERVES ALL OF THAT MONEY!

What you fail to realize is that the vast majority of the wealthy got it by honest, day to day living. The difference being they targetting their labor into more productive enterprises or simply rose the corporate ladder better. What you're saying is that since they're more successful than you are, as a nation, we should punish them with 90% taxes. How is that fair? Who determines what is and is not "wealthy"? What happens when people start thinking that anything above minimum wage should be taxed 90%? Surely you don't think THAT'S fair...

 

I didn't say Mellon's sole reason for doing the tax cuts was to lower what he paid, I am sure he had many other alternate reasons, I was just pointing out how much he saved in doing so, I am sure that was a pretty big reason for him doing it too though. "Oh hey look I can save about $800,000 dollars just by giving all the wealthy a tax cut, we deserve it we have been spending money in this country for a while." And so they have, again I cannot deny some of his other reasons, they do make sense.

So again I ask, are you saying Mellon's primary reason for creating the biggest short-term economic boom in this country's history was for personal tax savings? Will you not admit that what he did was smart for the economy as a whole and not just for his own wallet?

 

So here is the honest to God truth, when the economy is down, we need to tax the *edited* out of the rich. When it is up and we are in peace times, national debt is down, give them a tax cut. I think that is a fair solution for everyone.

So you haven't read anything I've posted here. Go re-read my first post which details how and why that policy doesn't work and gives a historic example of when the exact opposite worked beautifully. I'm not going to waste my time retyping it, it's not what you want to hear and puts a giant crack in your view of reality so I'm not really expecting you to read it. At least pretend like you did though so you aren't saying the same things over and over after being proven wrong by your own historic example.

 

Also please provide links MasterP cause I honestly think you made up about 70% of your entire post.

Everything I posted is supported by textbooks, wikipedia, and google. Sorry it hurts but socialists and liberals rarely know their history which is why your policies continually destroy our economy and those "greedy rich" conservative policies always spark growth cycles in it.

 

thats the thing bitey if you aren't with them you are against them. That's the conservative mentality. their way or the *edited*ing highway. the know it all party man.

Last I checked you can't raise tax on the "wealthy" to 90% AND lower them to 25% at the same time. I know the liberal perspective is hard to support with facts and examples in threads like this but at least try posting something constructive. Instead of random pop-shots at opinions, supported by facts, that you don't like.

 

I give kudos to Bitey for posting coherent sentences that aren't entirely made out of talking points. He at least expresses his own opinion and as wrong as I may think, it's his and his alone. Not identical in every way to that of half the people on TV and in Washington.

 

 

I am loling at this entire post, every thing you say is not a counter argument it is simply a dodge, as I was trying to say before there are arguments for it and against it, there are points in history where it has proven to work and where it hasn't. You can't quote history to me and then not observe other points of it. I am done with this, instead of trying to find a good alternative all you do is bash what I say and tell me I am wrong no wonder people get annoyed with you. It's quite an easy discussion about how we can get the nation out of debt, your way has worked in the past and so has mine, I propose an in between and I am wrong? Right... OK sure. Also stop making assumptions about me I read your entire post but unlike you I don't break apart every single *edited*ing thing you have to say and try to tear it apart. I hear what you are saying and some of it makes sense other parts is straight up garbage, I like how you conveniently ignored the part about you defending the wealthy, anyone who defends the wealthy is a *edited*ing idiot. I don't care that they got that far honest to goodness working, you know what, they still did it in this country, and now that they can they send jobs to china, oh wait weren't they supposed to be creating jobs? And if my family has to get by on barely nothing then why can't we rely on the wealthy to help with that? You're arguments really are full of holes, stop making excuses for someone who has everything and realize the situation it puts others and how it makes them feel. If everyone did that, we'd live in a different place.

 

Proof that you can't talk to a person who isn't in a position of nothing. You aren't in it anymore who gives a *edited* if you were at one time, everyones situation is different. I honestly believe that if you sat there and told me that you didn't want help when your family was hurting you would be lying to my face. I bet even Bill Gates if he was ever poor would wish and hope for support from a rich family, anyone who wasn't would be lying in my opinion. Do you know how much a measly $20k would do for my family? That is like .20 cents to a person like Bill Gates, $20 bucks to someone like Oprah.

 

I get it, they "earned" this money, so obviously that entitles them to everything else too, you know what I earn every *edited*ing cent I make, so that entitles me to some bonuses too. One CEOs bonus would keep me in good condition for almost 5 years. Where it would last that CEO about 30 minutes, this is the difference that people live every day, you clearly don't understand or see that.

Edited by Bitey
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also many of your posts are very insinuating about my support to Obama and calling me a socialist. Listen my ideas for how we get the Nation out of debt may run parallel to the ideas of some socialists, that does not make me a socialist, that makes me a person with ideas that run parallel to socialism. Honestly I haven't looked at what a socialist is at all, these are ideas from my head based on how I see things.

 

You called me an Obama supporter somewhere, I am not accusing anyone of changing posts, but I know what I saw. If I saw it wrong then whatever considered it ignored.

Edited by Bitey
Link to post
Share on other sites
I am loling at this entire post, every thing you say is not a counter argument it is simply a dodge, as I was trying to say before there are arguments for it and against it, there are points in history where it has proven to work and where it hasn't.

So citing examples of turning a failing economy around by doing the exact opposite of what you propose is not a counter-argument, it's a dodge? When has lowering taxes ever not helped the economy? When has it ever increased unemployment?

 

I am done with this, instead of trying to find a good alternative all you do is bash what I say and tell me I am wrong no wonder people get annoyed with you.

So the exact opposite of what you propose isn't a good alternative? I said use the 1929 tax code, guess you ignored that. Since you want me to spell it out, I'll do so. Lower personal federal income taxes to 25% max and lower corporate tax to 5%. I would say cut the tax on the poor to something really low but the poor already don't pay taxes so there's really no point.

 

It's quite an easy discussion about how we can get the nation out of debt, your way has worked in the past and so has mine, I propose an in between and I am wrong?

You can't say "do this when this happens and do this when that happens". Who determines when to have high taxes and when to have low taxes? Who's job is it to lower the taxes back down? Who's supposed to enforce the lowering of taxes? What we need is a system that's PERMANENT, one that is always in place and doesn't change based on how arbitrarily good or bad someone thinks the economy is. Since there's always going to be poor people, there's always going to be someone who thinks taxes on the rich aren't high enough. Even if 99% of people aren't poor and the economy is great, there's still that 1% of poor that would make a racket about raising the taxes back up. Would that 1% be enough to raise taxes back to 90%? Your proposal creates a ton of questionmarks and leaves the entire tax code vulnerable to arbitrary interpretation.

 

Also stop making assumptions about me I read your entire post but unlike you I don't break apart every single *edited*ing thing you have to say and try to tear it apart. I hear what you are saying and some of it makes sense other parts is straight up garbage

It had nothing to do with you not tearing my post apart. I said that because your reply read like you hadn't read it. For instance, how my "garbage" is supported by fact and history.

 

By the way, what did I post that's "grabage" and where is your evidence?

 

I like how you conveniently ignored the part about you defending the wealthy, anyone who defends the wealthy is a *edited*ing idiot.

What's wrong with me defending people who earned their wealth themselves? Their success should be an inspiration that ANYONE can be successful in this country but instead of trying to create your own success you're trying to destroy theirs. Why is that? What gives you the right to take the wealth and success from someone who's worked all their life for it? When you work hard all your life and have enough to retire at 55 how would it make you feel if someone in their early 20s came knocking on your door and said that it wasn't fair that you're rich and they're poor and demands that you pay their health insurance for life and finance their early retirement? It would *edited* off 99% of Americans, would it *edited* you off?

 

I don't care that they got that far honest to goodness working, you know what, they still did it in this country, and now that they can they send jobs to china, oh wait weren't they supposed to be creating jobs?

Not every rich person sends jobs to China, in fact, the majority of business owners that do outsource are the ones that already avoid paying taxes, as I discussed earlier. I also discussed why they send jobs overseas and offered an alternative to keep them from doing so. You talked about Steve Jobs and how he dodges taxes, do you really think Apple computers are built in the US? No... they're built in China by third party companies.

 

If corporate taxes were low enough to warrant doing so, they would build them in the US. That would create JOBS. Same goes for GM, Ford, Chrysler, HP, Dell, the list goes on. If they build it in the US they have to pay taxes on it at every step. They're taxed when they buy the solder, taxed when they buy the chips, taxed when they buy the plastic, by the time the consumer buys a product it's typically been taxed at least 5 times, for PCs as much as 10. If they build it in China and ship it over here all they pay is the cost of frieght. Why? Because other countries actually WANT manufacturing jobs and set their tax rates to encourage business. They encourage growth, as in, lowering the taxes as you employ more workers. In the US, as a company grows, the taxes get higher. Why would you expand a business in this country knowing that your profits would decrease because of higher taxes? It makes no sense at all.

 

Instead of having lawyers as representatives, why don't we start electing businessmen and entrepreneurs to congress? Every time one is put up for election the media and special interests rips them apart and a ambulance chaser gets elected instead. If the government was run more like a business by people that actually knew how the economy and businesses worked we wouldn't have most of the financial problems that we do.

 

And if my family has to get by on barely nothing then why can't we rely on the wealthy to help with that?

Because you don't need to. My family was where you describe yours to be 40 years ago. You can't acquire wealth or prosperity overnight, and if you did you'd squander it like every lottery winner does. It takes decades of work. You may never really enjoy the fruits of your labor but you can at least ensure that your children, or grandchildren, never have to live in want like you did. Hollow words now but I promise you in time they'll become much more relevant.

 

Trust me, my family knows how your family feels. My grandfather came back from Germany without a diploma, married, and with nothing to his name but an old car. He cleaned aluminum vats at Alcoa for 30 years and not long ago got cancer from it. The difference? He invested every penny he earned and made the family live like paupers for it. He paid the $120,000 for cancer treatment in cash without a complaint or flinch.

 

If you get nothing else from this post, get this, you don't have to crutch yourself on someone else to be successful in life. Not only will you be more successful earning it yourself, you'll feel a hell of a lot better about it. For example, if a professor posted the answers to the test online before giving the test, would you look at them? Of course you wouldn't. Would you feel better when got an A on the test without cheating? Of course you would. The victory is hollow without the effort.

 

You're arguments really are full of holes, stop making excuses for someone who has everything and realize the situation it puts others and how it makes them feel. If everyone did that, we'd live in a different place.

So wait. Because some are rich and others aren't we should punish the rich to make the poor feel better? Do you have any pets? Well I don't and it makes me feel bad so I'm going to send Animal Control to your house to take your pets away because it'll make me feel better. How does that make you feel? EVERYONE has something that someone else wants; wealth, family, friends, love, XBOX, pets. What if you having a fiance makes me feel bad, is it then fair for me to do something to take that away from you? By your own logic, yes it is. What if Nickname being married makes me a sad panda, is it ok for me to try to take that from him? You say example is not relevant but is it really that different? Nickname worked on that relationship for 8 years, what's the difference between earning love and marriage and earning wealth? Many would argue that a loving wife is wealth...

 

Proof that you can't talk to a person who isn't in a position of nothing. You aren't in it anymore who gives a *edited* if you were at one time, everyones situation is different. I honestly believe that if you sat there and told me that you didn't want help when your family was hurting you would be lying to my face.

So because I earn a few dollars an hour more than you I'm wealthy and don't understand anything about being poor? *edited* you *edited*.

 

And btw, no, we didn't want help. You know why? Because we knew that we had to create our own success, that no one else would create it for us. No amount of temporary aid creates permanent success, just a permanent crutch.

 

One CEOs bonus would keep me in good condition for almost 5 years. Where it would last that CEO about 30 minutes, this is the difference that people live every day, you clearly don't understand or see that.

I understand. What I don't understand is why that matters. 5 seconds of income from Steve Jobs would keep me good for a year but I'm not Steve Jobs and I'm not going to get his money. So why does it matter? What I don't understand is the mentality that beacuse I have less than someone else that obligates me to take it from them. The grocery store has more food than I do so does that entitle me to go take food for free? If you think it does, try it, but don't be surprised when reality kicks you in the *edited* for it.

 

I bet you've even cursed a power company before during a high-usage month, those *edited* corporations charging high rates for something that should be freer than it is. What you don't realize is the government controls their rates. What you also didn't know is almost every power company will NOT turn you off for nonpayment during the hottest and coldest months. It's called corporate mandated compassion for the poor. Hard to grasp, I know, but it does exist.

 

The difference between me and you: If the government mailed everyone a $5,000,000 check the first question you'd ask is "where do I sign" and the first question I'd ask is "why is this mine".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also many of your posts are very insinuating about my support to Obama and calling me a socialist. Listen my ideas for how we get the Nation out of debt may run parallel to the ideas of some socialists, that does not make me a socialist, that makes me a person with ideas that run parallel to socialism. Honestly I haven't looked at what a socialist is at all, these are ideas from my head based on how I see things.

 

You called me an Obama supporter somewhere, I am not accusing anyone of changing posts, but I know what I saw. If I saw it wrong then whatever considered it ignored.

I never once called you an Obama supporter. Not once. I mentioned Obama only in the context that your ideals can't/won't come to be under his administration.

 

You are, however, a socialist. Go look it up, I promise your ideas are textbook, old-school socialist. On that note, I was making conservative arguments long before I had even heard the term. It all boils down to how you were raised and the mentality ingrained by your parents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm done with this thread. No one's actually reading my posts, they're just skimming and scanning. Bitey thinking I called him an Obama supporter is a prime example of how well people are paying attention.

 

When you guys want a real discussion on this, let me know. Scanning my posts for key words and replying completely out of context is not what most call a discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read everything and I am not scanning. I don't go back and reference *edited* while I am posting though.

 

Honestly I see what you are saying, and oh btw I was raised conservative, maybe that is why I still have certain conservative ideals. Yes I would accept a check from the government, I used to care about "earning" it for myself, now I don't give two *edited*s. Ask me what I would do with the money some time. Does that make me lazy, sure it does, anyone who says differently is a *edited*ing liar. I can't believe you would sit there and tell me that you wouldn't accept a check for that money. You see here is the difference you believe that you can apply yourself and gain anything, call me in 5 years or however long it takes you when you do that. I will look forward to that call, it isn't that I doubt you, but in this economy at our current state of things, nobody is going anywhere, the people who hold the seats of power will continue to. Sure I am mad that I am not rich, I don't want to "punish" anyone and I hardly think taking a few more dollars out of a 300 million dollar persons wallet is going to hurt them. Because at the end of the day they will still be rich. Yet at the end of my day I will just go farther into debt, is this my fault? No it isn't. And *edited* you if you say it is. I didn't make any decisions for our economy over the past 100 years, why do I have to suffer because of poor decisions? You will say oh everyone else is in the same position, yeah that is exactly my *edited*ing point.

 

I think that is the main point that I just really wish you would agree with me on, you see taxes are killing me, debt is killing me, and I know that like I said just 20k from a millionaire would be like a heaven send to me. I don't dwell on that, sure I wish for it, but I just keep working day to day, paying off what I can. You related taxing of the wealthy to that you would send Animal Control to my house because I have a dog and you don't like it, while I can see what you are saying in reality that is nothing like being taxed. Let's make it realistic, I now have and own over 500,000 dogs, now send animal control and take 20 of them, think that is gonna matter to me? It wouldn't, I would not care one *edited*ing bit. That is the reality of the situation. You're example is of singular ownership, your example is much closer to what my family and poor people go through every time taxes come around. You got close to seeing how it is, but in your greedy nature you shined true for what you are, you are more worried about losing one thing. And also you related things of high importance, fiance, wife, dog, things that I personally would never want to give up to money, do you realize what kind of a person that makes you?

 

I am not hateful or resentful of rich people, get that out of your head right now, what I don't understand is their greedy nature. OK so you earned all this money and you could set aside MORE THAN ENOUGH to cover you, your family, and at least a generation after that, and I bet even some for a rainy day. So what do you do with the rest of it? Oh you hoard it. Makes perfect sense.

 

One thing I know that I would do and *edited* you if you say I wouldn't. I would invest most of my money into intelligent investments, keep a stash to the side that I never touch, for emergencies only. If I made the investments correctly I could live off of just the investments. Everything else I had would be focused into building more investments I would then give the investments to families in need, and tell them to pay it forward. Something like this most rich people could never do, it isn't in them. They are worried about buying another house, yacht, jet, you name it. But if they did, the difference that it would make would be tremendous. They won't though because it is a mentality thing, no one would like to see someone else rise to power beside them, well anyone that is surrounded by greed, thinks, breathes, and eats greed.

 

Rich people can't see the forest for the money, we could live in a utopia, not everyone would be equal but people would not have to struggle every day just to get by. Pride and greed will kill our world before any other of the 7 sins even show their ugly heads. Thanks rich people, you keep it classy.

 

 

PS - I had an epiphany while I wrote this, there are things in life that people can do to gain a living and wealth, really having no limit on it, like your dad he became an entrepreneur and did well and became successful. My career that I want doesn't involve entrepreneurship, in fact entrepreneurship is one of the few careers that allow you to control your salary, since your salary is everything you make minus expenses for your business. Honestly if you have a good idea it is the best way to go. I want to direct movies, guess what, I can't do that starting out, I have to work my way through, and I am fine with that, unfortunately due to my current location I have very little freedom to do so. But guess what I could do if I had the money, direct, you see I could buy my own equipment pay my own staff and since I was rich I would have the pull to get into peoples pockets so they would want to sponsor the movie I was making. Once I made one if it did well enough I would be able to continue making movies, I honestly don't care about being rich, what I do want is to not be tied down by the shackles of debt. That would give me the freedom to pursue my goals, and my debt looks to me like a mountain that I am terrified to climb, but to a rich person is a measly pebble in the road. That is what I think is lacking, I don't want to hurt the guy making $500,000 per year I feel for him too, I am sure he is worried about making his next payment on his yacht, but I just wish that people could understand the differences that we go through.

Edited by Bitey
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since MasterP wanted proof he is wrong, I am here to give it to you.

 

again it's not all about money masterp, what did we have to show for those 8 glorious years of tax cuts, war, and spending?

The highest Dow Jones in the history of the stock market. I'd say that's at least worth something...

Until you look at the fact that the Dow Jones DECREASED by over 2500 points while he was in office. On Jan 20, 2001, it was at 10659.98, on Jan 20, 2009, it was at 8077.56. Yup, seems like he did a great job.

 

What I can't stand for right now is the inability for conservatives to see that the obnoxiously wealth are killing our economy. Do you not realize that defending them makes you look like a complete jack *edited*? Let's defend the guy who sits on a throne instead of the guy who makes an honest day to day living, YEAH THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, GOD I BET THE GUY ON THE THRONE IS PERFECT AND HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG HE DESERVES ALL OF THAT MONEY!

What you fail to realize is that the vast majority of the wealthy got it by honest, day to day living. The difference being they targetting their labor into more productive enterprises or simply rose the corporate ladder better. What you're saying is that since they're more successful than you are, as a nation, we should punish them with 90% taxes. How is that fair? Who determines what is and is not "wealthy"? What happens when people start thinking that anything above minimum wage should be taxed 90%? Surely you don't think THAT'S fair...

I hate to say it Bitey, but MP is right here. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/rich_work_more_than_the_working_class If you work hard for the money and earned it... hard to argue with that.

 

So here is the honest to God truth, when the economy is down, we need to tax the *edited* out of the rich. When it is up and we are in peace times, national debt is down, give them a tax cut. I think that is a fair solution for everyone.

So you haven't read anything I've posted here. Go re-read my first post which details how and why that policy doesn't work and gives a historic example of when the exact opposite worked beautifully. I'm not going to waste my time retyping it, it's not what you want to hear and puts a giant crack in your view of reality so I'm not really expecting you to read it. At least pretend like you did though so you aren't saying the same things over and over after being proven wrong by your own historic example.

Again MP is correct. When the economy is down you need to lower taxes to increase spending and be willing to absorb that increase in national debt. When times are good, raise taxes and cut down the national debt. This is exactly what Clinton did in the 90s and it worked great, but if we weren't already in an economic upswing, raising taxes would have stalled out our economy.

 

 

Ok so really that is all I could comment on, and I only really found 1 thing he said that I strongly disagreed with so....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since MasterP wanted proof he is wrong, I am here to give it to you.

 

again it's not all about money masterp, what did we have to show for those 8 glorious years of tax cuts, war, and spending?

The highest Dow Jones in the history of the stock market. I'd say that's at least worth something...

Until you look at the fact that the Dow Jones DECREASED by over 2500 points while he was in office. On Jan 20, 2001, it was at 10659.98, on Jan 20, 2009, it was at 8077.56. Yup, seems like he did a great job.

 

What I can't stand for right now is the inability for conservatives to see that the obnoxiously wealth are killing our economy. Do you not realize that defending them makes you look like a complete jack *edited*? Let's defend the guy who sits on a throne instead of the guy who makes an honest day to day living, YEAH THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, GOD I BET THE GUY ON THE THRONE IS PERFECT AND HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG HE DESERVES ALL OF THAT MONEY!

What you fail to realize is that the vast majority of the wealthy got it by honest, day to day living. The difference being they targetting their labor into more productive enterprises or simply rose the corporate ladder better. What you're saying is that since they're more successful than you are, as a nation, we should punish them with 90% taxes. How is that fair? Who determines what is and is not "wealthy"? What happens when people start thinking that anything above minimum wage should be taxed 90%? Surely you don't think THAT'S fair...

I hate to say it Bitey, but MP is right here. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/rich_work_more_than_the_working_class If you work hard for the money and earned it... hard to argue with that.

 

I understand this will always be a matter of opinion though, I agree that a person that works should be able to keep their money, working "hard" is a pretty relative term though. I think I work harder than most CEOs and I make $10/hr, the cleaning lady at my work works harder than me and she makes minimum wage. Even you and MasterP I am sure work harder than most CEOs, I have seen your work ethic, so I know. Everything is backwards in my mind, it seems the less work that you actually do the more you get paid and the more benefits you get. Now some of these guys worked and worked their *edited* off to gain the positions they are in, I will never argue that they don't deserve it. Others had it handed to them through favors/shady deals/daddy owned the company kind of thing. Until you can truly understand that nature of all of this and what it means it is really hard to make a true judgement call on whether or not people these "hard" workers truly earned their money. Again it is all pretty relative.... My main point is at the end of the day after all taxes are taken out if you still make 100 million dollar/years, you're still rich as *edited* and you can suck my left nut if you want to whine about being taxed heavily.

 

So here is the honest to God truth, when the economy is down, we need to tax the *edited* out of the rich. When it is up and we are in peace times, national debt is down, give them a tax cut. I think that is a fair solution for everyone.

So you haven't read anything I've posted here. Go re-read my first post which details how and why that policy doesn't work and gives a historic example of when the exact opposite worked beautifully. I'm not going to waste my time retyping it, it's not what you want to hear and puts a giant crack in your view of reality so I'm not really expecting you to read it. At least pretend like you did though so you aren't saying the same things over and over after being proven wrong by your own historic example.

Again MP is correct. When the economy is down you need to lower taxes to increase spending and be willing to absorb that increase in national debt. When times are good, raise taxes and cut down the national debt. This is exactly what Clinton did in the 90s and it worked great, but if we weren't already in an economic upswing, raising taxes would have stalled out our economy.

 

This is where we will again disagree, this is because lowering taxes on the rich in most cases has been proven to increase spending, but right now, nobody is spending money, the rich are hoarding the money. Hence the problem. Nothing is stimulating the economy because the poor people aren't spending money, the middle class is trying to save up so they don't get reemed, and the rich are just saving up for no reason really. Rich people need to be buying *edited* like there is no tomorrow. If they aren't going to spend their money, then guess what we have to tax them. This is why there can never really be a "permanent" tax solution the economy will always dip and change and we have to accommodate for those changes.

 

Lastly Clinton raised the top tax in 1993 from 31 percent to 39.6 percent. Some conservatives would have you believe that this was the biggest tax increase in history, but as we know from previous things I have posted this is not even the case.

 

"From 1939 through 1944, overall federal general fund revenue from corporate and individual income taxes, excise taxes and other levies rose from $4.8 billion to $40.5 billion, a 744 percent increase. If federal taxes were raised at the same rate they were between 1939-44, the government would have taken in over $5.5 trillion last year, enough money to virtually wipe out the national debt in one year." (Keep in mind again that this article comes from 1998)

 

By the way from 1939-1944 the top tax went from 78% - 94&..... And were rich people still rich? .....Yep.

 

Ok so really that is all I could comment on, and I only really found 1 thing he said that I strongly disagreed with so....

Edited by Bitey
Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/06/03/peru.murder.case/index.html?hpt=T1

 

think rich people don't have it made? Check out Van der Sloot. Was the prime suspect in the Holloway disappearance in 05. Daddy has money and got him out of that mess. Donno if daddy is gonna be able to save this sick *edited* twice though. Peruvian woman found dead in a hotel room registered to Van der Sloot. This guy needs to fry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude there are always outliers to any situation. I know a lot of people that make crappy money and you know what? They do a *edited* poor job and don't work hard at all. Likewise I know a lot of people that make a lot of money and work their *edited* off to do it. Its pretty much impossible to speak of work ethic in general terms, but most people won't become a CEO by not working hard.

 

And BTW, I sure as hell know I could not run one of those fortune 500 companies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude there are always outliers to any situation. I know a lot of people that make crappy money and you know what? They do a *edited* poor job and don't work hard at all. Likewise I know a lot of people that make a lot of money and work their *edited* off to do it. Its pretty much impossible to speak of work ethic in general terms, but most people won't become a CEO by not working hard.

 

And BTW, I sure as hell know I could not run one of those fortune 500 companies.

 

 

Don't sell yourself short.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...