It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Your momma and daddy may have to give away much of your inheritance to someone else

page: 14
38
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 12:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

Cut the military and redistribute the money to the people.



Everyone on the entire planet could have mansions, cars, businesses and unlimited food with the money we spend on the military alone.



Its a waste of our livelyhood.




Should we redistribute the money back to the people who paid the taxes that paid for it?


Make the entire world a better place, thats what makes world peace.




posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 12:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt


Great, maybe you can explain it to me. How does taking a portion of anyone's disposable income not lower the amount of money available to be used for charitable purposes? Do you actually think those rich people just won't notice that they have less money? Do you think they don't budget their money?
BTW, I said simple arithmetic. I don't doubt for a moment your math skills---what I doubt is that you are fully aware of how much local charitable organizations---those actually doing the grunt work of helping those who are in need---depend on the local "filthy rich" to keep the lights on and the money flowing when times are hard.



Do you really believe that if taxes are raised slightly on the wealthiest that they will suddenly decide to stop donating to charity?


I am not going to break anything down Barney style for you. The assumption that higher taxes=rich people no longer giving money to charity is an invalid one.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 02:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod

originally posted by: diggindirt


Great, maybe you can explain it to me. How does taking a portion of anyone's disposable income not lower the amount of money available to be used for charitable purposes? Do you actually think those rich people just won't notice that they have less money? Do you think they don't budget their money?
BTW, I said simple arithmetic. I don't doubt for a moment your math skills---what I doubt is that you are fully aware of how much local charitable organizations---those actually doing the grunt work of helping those who are in need---depend on the local "filthy rich" to keep the lights on and the money flowing when times are hard.



Do you really believe that if taxes are raised slightly on the wealthiest that they will suddenly decide to stop donating to charity?


I am not going to break anything down Barney style for you. The assumption that higher taxes=rich people no longer giving money to charity is an invalid one.


Where on earth did you get the idea that I said rich donors won't be donating? You are doing the assuming. I'm saying what I've seen in the real world.
I said the pool of resources available at the local level shrinks when the government siphons off our local millionaire's money in the name of doing good.
Nobody has said rich people will stop giving to charity. I don't know where you got that idea.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:04 AM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord
I agree completely. Just stopping these useless wars would go a goodly way toward providing for those in need.
Given the opportunity, I could find a trillion or so in cuts to spending as any sane person could do if challenged.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 03:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I agree completely. Just stopping these useless wars would go a goodly way toward providing for those in need.

Given the opportunity, I could find a trillion or so in cuts to spending as any sane person could do if challenged.



The money we put into war would make the earth a paradise if we used it to help people rather than hurt people.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt


Had you been involved at that level, you would see where the financing originates----with rich people.

YES I KNOW THAT. I WENT TO THOSE MEETINGS.

And DON'T YOU DARE call me 'honey'.

It doesn't take a Masters of any kind to realize that when the resources of the "filthy rich" run out---having been taken by taxation---the local organizations will suffer.

Apparently it DOES take a Master's to realize that WHEN PEOPLE HAVE NO MONEY, THEY CAN'T SPEND IT on consumer goods or big purchases. They can't buy a car to get them to work. They can't rent a room to have a permanent address. They can't feed themselves or their families because they have NO MONEY. Likewise it doesn't take a Master's to relize that the 'filthy rich' will NEVER run out of money.

Jesus Effing Christ - get over your badass self. You're just a capitalist whiner - I've rubbed elbows with PuhLENTY of them. And try breaking your walls of text into legible paragraphs.

Or better yet, .
!!!
edit on 1/27/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs




They can't feed themselves or their families because they have NO MONEY.


Honey these people should not be having families if they have no money.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1


It's more selfish to not pay taxes, not employ workers, and advocate for taking money from others to pay for things you want.

I did pay taxes, have always paid taxes. It's the uber-rich who are hiding THEIR VAST, UNFATHOMABLE FORTUNES OFF-SHORE who are NOT employing Americans, NOT paying taxes, and they DO absolutely advocate eliminating social services because they don't want to chip in and pay for them.

Disgusting. Do you consider FOOD something to 'want'? Shelter - something to 'want'?

How about clothing - is that something to 'want'? And I'm talking about basic clothing, not fashion-plate big-ticket sweaters that cost $4,000, or a 'Vera Wang' dress. I'm talking about pants, a shirt, shoes, a coat. Maybe some gloves. Socks.

Try shopping at a Goodwill for a while instead of ordering out of 'Town & Country' or 'Elle' or 'Vanity Fair'. With luck you'll find one that offers rich people's discards because they buy an entirely new 'fashionable' wardrobe every 6 months.



edit on 1/27/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: thesaneone

Oh, how cute and clever, calling me honey. God you people make me sick. Furious, disgusted, and sick.

Heads up junior, LOTS of 'those people' already HAD families when they lost their jobs to some person in Bangladesh or India. When they lost their homes because they got 'laid-off'. Or were not given a break from the Bank to refinance or lower their credit rate.

Meanwhile, the Banks were getting fiat money at NO INTEREST. They all got their money back AND THEN SOME.
YES, they did - and they should be repaying the TAX-PAYERS who were FORCED to bail them out. Who are FORCED to pay taxes to cover what their pitiful wages don't for their 'employees.'

1700 PRIVATE JETS got the attendees to Davos. Where they're falsely talking about 'climate change' which they have no intention of addressing, and 'inequality' like they don't know what it is.





edit on 1/27/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)

edit on 1/27/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt

I wrote that based on what you have written in this thread. Do I really need to quote what you wrote?

This threads are all the same, someone takes a position like more taxes = less charitable donations from the rich, then when someone makes a valid point against your position, that poster retreats and acts like he/she said no such thing. It is not like the readers of this thread can't go back and read what has been written throughout this thread.


originally posted by: diggindirt

It doesn't take a Masters of any kind to realize that when the resources of the "filthy rich" run out---having been taken by taxation---the local organizations will suffer.


Also the 'filthy rich', the ones who will be taxed a little more are not at risk of having their resources and funds run out do to taxation. It is the middle class and below this is happening to, being forced to buy unnecessary goods and services like insurance that we do not need or want that is draining the resources of the common citizen.
edit on 27-1-2015 by jrod because: 3rd person is better than 2nd



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to queenofswords:


You like to ask a lot of personal questions. Let me ask you one. Do you think a family of six (wife, husband, four kids) is wealthy that earns $287,000 per year?


Here you go: What You Have to Earn to Be in the 1% in Every State



So, what does it take to make it into the 1% of earners? In Arkansas, you'd need to pull in $228,000 a year. In Connecticut, the threshold is $678,000, which also happens to have the greatest income disparity of all states. The Nutmeg State’s 1% makes 51 times more money than what the rest of the wage earners average in the state. By comparison, Hawaii’s 1% make just under 15 times the amount as other wage earners there.

Like I said - it depends on where you live, and how much the other people earn there.

This 'tax increase' is aimed at the gazillionaires. People with over 2 Million in income. Trust-fund babies. Get a grip.

edit on 1/27/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: diggindirt


Had you been involved at that level, you would see where the financing originates----with rich people.

YES I KNOW THAT. I WENT TO THOSE MEETINGS.

And DON'T YOU DARE call me 'honey'.

It doesn't take a Masters of any kind to realize that when the resources of the "filthy rich" run out---having been taken by taxation---the local organizations will suffer.

Apparently it DOES take a Master's to realize that WHEN PEOPLE HAVE NO MONEY, THEY CAN'T SPEND IT on consumer goods or big purchases. They can't buy a car to get them to work. They can't rent a room to have a permanent address. They can't feed themselves or their families because they have NO MONEY. Likewise it doesn't take a Master's to relize that the 'filthy rich' will NEVER run out of money.

Jesus Effing Christ - get over your badass self. You're just a capitalist whiner - I've rubbed elbows with PuhLENTY of them. And try breaking your walls of text into legible paragraphs.

Or better yet, .
!!!


As usual, you have no argument so you begin name-calling and telling the opposition to just shut up. That's absolutely juvenile. I understand.
I understand what poor people go through because I've been there, done that, faltered, fallen down and with the help of family and friends, got up, dusted myself off and went on with life. Since then I've worked with many of the organizations from which I got help and have helped to found other organizations to assist poor people. That's how I know these things---the time and effort I put in to help the people who were enduring hard times.
Yes, you have "attended" meetings. Good for you. Now how about doing the actual work of sitting down and parceling out the pennies on a monthly basis? Go and volunteer your time, lots of hours each month to make the hard decisions.
I think Don Henley said it best:


Have you noticed that an angry man
Can only get so far
Until he reconciles the way he thinks things ought to be
With the way things are


Get over your anger by channeling it to produce positive results. Yelling at me and others who are trying to explain the reality of the world to you isn't helping anyone.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod
Yes, you do have to quote where I said rich people will stop donating to charity because I never intended to say that and can't find it in my past posts.
When the pool of resources shrinks---as it will if the proposed scheme is implemented---what other possible outcome could there be? You say you are good at math but I don't think even you can make an argument that when the overall pool of resources is arbitrarily shrunk---by something between 3% and 7% or more---the remaining resources will still be shared out but at a reduced rate.
It matters very little whether the taxes are on the "filthy rich" or the middle-income folk---when the government forces them to give up more of their money, they have fewer dollars to give to charities.
I agree completely that the government forcing people to buy insurance is draining them of disposable income and having a big impact on the economy. Tell it to the people in DC. They're the ones who seem ignorant. They can't make a budget that stays within their means. If wealthy folk lived like the critters in Congress, there wouldn't be any wealthy people to rob.
So I'll say it one more time: It is a spending problem in DC, not an income problem. Going about robbing the rich isn't going to change anything.



posted on Jan, 27 2015 @ 09:57 PM
link   
*****ATTENTION ALL MEMBERS*****

We would like to remind you that we expect civility and decorum in all forums, topics, and discussions. Continuing to post in a manner not in accordance with the T&C's can and will result in post removals and/or posting bans. Please continue your discussions with an eye on the topic and not your fellow members. Please also remember to stay on topic and cease any and all attempts to derail the thread/discussion before you.

Thank you.

You Are Responsible For Your Own posts.

We Expect Civility & Decorum In All Topics.

*** Do Not Reply To This Post ***



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join