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.

 

So rich going to have to accept less or have it taken from them?

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No one has an issue with getting ahead. It's getting so far ahead at everyone else expense they have a problem with.

If the rich weren't hoarding more and more wealth and were actually using it and putting it back into the economy we wouldn't be where we are now. There's a breaking point where too much has been hoarded away, too little has gone back into the economy, and something must be done, by force if necessary.

No one wants things to go the way of war and revolution. All that's needed to prevent it is for the rich to practice a bit of responsibility. This is a problem of their own creation.




posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Xeven

Oh yes, I agree. That is the trend that is coming. The masses can only put up with so much before they take it. This is something that is proven time and again throughout the history of the world. Though I really hope it doesn't come to that and we all can agree to do things reasonably like I suggested before things get too late.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 07:54 AM
link   
we shouldn't be taking a ton of money from the top income brackets just to hand over to the bottom income earners but we should:
a. put pressure on big corps that seem to be taking for granted that the tax pool will keep their employees alive or shipping the jobs overseas for lower cost of labor while they read billions in profits and pay their ceos and upper management millions/yr.

b. cutting out the tax breaks and such that enable companies to pull in billions in revenue and walk away without paying any taxes and I suggest that we start this process with those companies I described in a, as an attempt to force them to at least take care of their employees!

we can't take from the poorest, since well, they are already in poverty and being a tax burden. regardless of what we do, if they can't earn enough to live on, or they physically can't work, or there is no job for them to do, well, one way or the other we are gonna end up paying for them, either through social programs or through the blight, crime, disease, and other problems that come with extreme poverty.. if we take more from the middle class we risk having some of them drop into the poor and becoming a tax burden. So just where do you think the money should be coming from, no one seems to want to invest in our treasury bonds anymore and it's getting harder to borrow. and by the way, social security is full of IOUs now with little cash so don't bother looking there.

what we need to do is look at every item that we spend the money on and give out tax breaks, and judge just how it benefits us, and if it doesn't serve a purpose of improving our economy then it should go.... and you tell me, just how does fighting wars for the last ten years improve our economy? we need to redesign the way we've been doing these things asking ourselves just how does this build a country that we would want to live in. i think we have plenty of money coming in but in lots of ways the way that money is spent serves to undermine us more than anything else. tax breaks are given to rich buddies to build hotels in areas that don't need any more hotels, while the small would be business person with the idea that could change the world is left out of the game, countries are bribed to have a portion of their product made in other countries, we borrow money to give to aide to other nations (like Isreal) while we say sorry we can't help you to the homeless vet in this country. and oh, yes, we have wars.. so we can make more broken homeless vets! we don't really need more money, we just need to quit being so stupid!!!!



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Is there a link to any real hard data to back Bernie's plan?

With the trillions of extra spending that he is advocating, is there enough money made by the rich to pay for it?

Yesterday, I read that taxing every person making a million dollars or more per year at a 100% rate, there wouldn't even be half as much money as needed to pay for his spending plan. I don't doubt it, but where are the figures?

Does Bernie plan on increasing tax rates on everyone to pay for his spending? Does he plan on borrowing the money?

I know that everyone wants to punish corporations, but doesn't anyone see that the corporations have shifted a lot of manufacturing overseas? Do they expect that these evil corporations will just sit back and take it.... or will they move out completely?

Personally, I can see why people are falling for his crap, because they are angry. That is the same reason that Trump is popular.

BUT.... I think that both Trump and Bernie are living in a fantasyland that exists in their own minds.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   
I'd like to know why (all of a sudden) people are believing what politicians say. It's not like they have a track record for honesty.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 07:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Xeven


Donald is not exactly what you think he is. You heard it here first. He will do what is best for America wether it is conservative or not. He is not an ideology that has to stick to a particular point of view. He is free to do what is right. If he will or not is the question.


Donald is definitely not what you think he is. He has always done what is best for Donald.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Puppylove

I don't disagree here. Socialism used to be accepted by both Republican and Democratic parties, but was co-opted by special interest groups (mostly related to the Koch brothers) in the 50's who exploited the Communist scare and they slowly put pressure on the Republicans until Socialist became a dirty word to them.

Fun Fact: The Winthropes from the movie Trading Places (you know the asshole rich brothers who ruin Dan Aykroyd's and Eddie Murphy's life in the movie over a $1 bet and didn't give out Christmas bonuses on Christmas?) are based on the Koch brothers.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xeven
Seems people have decided enough is enough and now either wealthy can put money back in the economy or people will elect people to come and take it? What do you think.


I think the people are not allowed to elect someone who will "come and take" money away from "rich" people. When was the last time we elected a president who didn't promise to make those "rich fatcats" pay their "fair share?" Yet those rich fatcats keep getting richer and fatter, and the people actually paying those taxes are the ever vanishing middle class.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigent
What a nice communist though you got there comrade


As if socialisme is such a bad thing to begin with. Being Social is quite a good thing actually you know. Extreme socialisme just like the extreme capitalisme we are under right now on the other hand are very bad things since both incite extreme uncontrolable corruption that can only escalate.

So currently a bit of socialisme is needed to balance things out.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:05 AM
link   
It's quite simple really, Rich people help out your fellow man or there will come a time when we are going to eat you.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: everyone

If unbridled corrupt capitalism is like a cancer of the body, then socialism would be the chemotherapy, because it kills everything.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheVinylPollution
It's quite simple really, Rich people help out your fellow man or there will come a time when we are going to eat you.


There!

Beautifully put!




posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

They're footing the bills? They don't even pay their fair share in taxes! Some pay "0" in taxes! They hide their money in overseas banks! Who bailed out the banks and the auto industry? - That surely isn't capitalism! When was the last time the average American who was losing their home and declaring bankruptcy were being bailed out?

Who reaps the benefits of an Educated and technically trained populace? - businesses and industry! They should be paying a percentage toward a country's education system. They surely dictate what schools should be teaching to accommodate their businesses. If education is the basis for a strong economy, why do conservatives want to keep cutting funding?

Trickle down economics surely didn't work. Monopolies are illegal, yet how many banks and businesses are buying competing businesses to gather more of the market and control consumer prices? They've surely found their way around that! The last time I checked, competition is the basis for a Capitalistic society?

There's been a move by conservatives to eliminate the bargaining rights of workers. I wonder who's behind that?

Give me a break. Before attacking socialism, ask yourself what programs in this country have benefited the majority of taxpaying citizens? Take away social security and Medicare and I can guarantee Washington will see a revolt it has never seen before. Take a look at countries that have a right mix of Capitalism and Socialism and how small businesses, education, access to healthcare and yes their economy are flourishing.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:30 AM
link   
it was inevitable that this would happen,when the wealthy say "let them eat cake" bad things happen. This time there doesn`t have to be a revolution with torches and pitchforks the people can just vote to take wealth away.
I bet the wealthy never saw this coming.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

Nope voting won't work, and the corruption will be so obvious when the actual popular candidate by super majority is passed over for the establishments golden children, it may very well cause those torches to be lit.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:36 AM
link   
I usually can not stomach listening to Alex Jones, but he has some good points in this video IMHO.

The 1% reference is not accurate regarding the wealthiest individuals.

It is more like the top 0.0000008% of the population controls 50-60% of the wealth.

And that is where the problem lies, they are untouchable. Taxing the 'rich', half a million up to even billionaires, is not going to come close to covering the planned spending.

The people in control know the reality, even Bernie knows the reality.

Look, what he SAYS sounds great, but it is NOT based in reality.

Just more hollow promises of hope and change. There is NO hope in any of our candidates. There is no fixing this without total collapse. Then a planned one world fix is in the works. Smoke and mirrors, bread and circuses. Give us hope for change to distract until it is to late, then implement the planned fix and be praised as a savior.

Here is the video if you care. Main point I took away is the 1% talking point is another fabrication.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Xeven




Seems people have decided enough is enough and now either wealthy can put money back in the economy or people will elect people to come and take it?

I think its way to early to think the outcome of this election is going to have any significant impact on how the system works.

Although I do see the positive from people rallying behind Trump and Sanders as an indication that a section of the masses are beginning to wake up and see: that Both the DNC and the GOP are corrupted at the core.

So that is good. However, the problem I see is that out of desperation can come very bad decisions for the future.

Trump:
His appeal is that he doesn't care about PC and APPEARS to be not liked by establishment.

Personally the only thing I like about him is his ego and his willingness to speak without thinking ahead, because that can be the establishments worst nightmare. If he was pushed by the public with low ratings during his presidency, he would throw congress and the lobbyist to the wolves to safe face . That is why the Establishment doesn't like him , he is to much of a loose cannon and a high risk that could expose the inner workings of the system.

However it can also be our worst nightmare. So IMO there is a 50/50 odd that he is either going to run this country completely to the ground or perhaps change things for the better but no middle ground with him. I wouldn't be surprised if he would go full retard and turn a tyrant with that same ego and dismiss congress when he doesn't get what he wants.


Sanders:
His appeal to me is that he is the only one talking about corruption and conflict of interest which is our NUMBER 1 issue . You can't expected a group of corrupted politicians with conflict of interest to fix anything dealing with the symptoms of corruption that dominate the focus of the rest of the politicians such as : healthcare, economy, wages, SS, Medicaid , Foreign matters, jobs, education, energy, etc, ...

So my best outlook for Bernie is: him getting elected but hopefully having a lame duck congress.
His plan to make gov't bigger and increase taxes to the upper middleclass and above with an actively corrupted gov't ,makes no sense to me. His first term presidency should only be to focus on corruption and shrinking gov't control to build it back up once the corruption layers are closed.

Corporations aren't evil , they are doing what they are suppose todo even though its an unrealistic and unsustainable goal to always beat last quarters profits while infinitely growing as a company. The problem with corporations is that they have the money and power to control the gov't and out of desperation they have crossed deep into areas that were once grey.

Bernie should just concentrate in removing those conflict of interest ,revolving doors and corruption between gov't and congress. He should concentrate on reforming lobbying laws so not only those with deep pockets are heard and making congressional term limits.

Then we can look at other areas that are broken once we can really see the truth of the matter.


The Rest (Hillary, Cruz,Rubio,Bush) will just keep the cycle we are in going and the Oligopolies will continue winning on the expense of the upper middle class and below.

So I do like the possibility of some change coming with a Sander vs Trump ticket but that change has a 50/50 odd of really making a positive difference for the masses or really Cluster F@@@ our Country up.

I think Sander would be less likely to Cluster F@@@ our Country than trump because of a lame duck congress and he is bringing corruption to the forefront. Hence I created this thread





edit on 39229America/ChicagoWed, 10 Feb 2016 08:39:37 -0600000000p2942 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tardacus
I bet the wealthy never saw this coming.


Are you kidding??

They PLANNED this. At least the 0.0000008% did.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigent
a reply to: Xeven

And I'm bottom 10% but forced redistribution is the most Comunist thing in the world, and it's not going to happen, rich people dint got rich by standing idle while others took their money

You seem to know very little about Communism. The op is only talking about taking wealth not taking property as well. The op is talking about socialism which redistributes wealth. Thomas Jefferson said the wealthy should be taxed for every cent they could get out of them and I fully agree with that because the wealthy and the corporations they own use up the most resources of a nation so why shouldn't they pay the most in taxes. Not to mention when the wealthy paid 80% in taxes this nation did far better than it is doing now.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: buster2010



You seem to know very little about Communism.


wanna come to live in Venezuela with me?



new topics




 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join