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.
originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
Without dismissing what you said, evidence and economic research matter too. Are you deeply acquainted with the evidence and research I briefly mentioned? Just like blind leftists there are also many conservatives who are operating based on ideology and a insufficiently informed belief system.
Again, lots of economic evidence suggests we don’t live in a meritocracy nor that we have substantial economic mobility relative to what is claimed.
Government can be problematic, but often the evil government you think is entirely to blame is bought by more powerful entities, the so called military industrial complex. This includes many of the rich, major corporations, media empires, etc.
a reply to: ketsuko
originally posted by: links234
a reply to: pexx421
Billionaire children born to billionaire parents 'earned' their fortunes and don't deserve to be taxed more just because we have an underpaid working class in America. That is the argument presented by modern conservatives; economic inequality is OK because the wealthy deserve the product of society's labor more than the laborers' deserve compensation.
originally posted by: links234
a reply to: pexx421
Billionaire children born to billionaire parents 'earned' their fortunes and don't deserve to be taxed more just because we have an underpaid working class in America. That is the argument presented by modern conservatives; economic inequality is OK because the wealthy deserve the product of society's labor more than the laborers' deserve compensation.
originally posted by: pexx421
a reply to: Breakthestreak
It’s good that you have such a clear view of who it’s ok to strip money from and who it’s not ok to strip money from. Taxing inheritances upon children who haven’t earned the money is apparently bad. Continuing to take a larger and larger chunk of the profit from the workers who create it is apparently ok. Wonder who fostered that ideology.
originally posted by: pexx421
a reply to: Breakthestreak
So it absolutely doesn’t matter to you that productivity has almost doubled in the last 40 years, that workers make far more profit than 1970, and that all that increase in work we do and profit we make, our share of the profits, the percentage given to us as wages, has continually gone down? That makes no difference to you? Doesn’t affect you at all? Or that banks make up imaginary money, give you this imaginary money, and in return you pay them often almost twice the actual value of your house over time. From money that you actually earn. These are ok forms of free handouts? But taxing a portion of money inherited, only over 10 million dollars, is bad? Just trying to understand your logic here. So, you, your kids, all your descendants will continue to get less and less of the money you actually create in profit, and you’re completely fine with that. And someone with $50 million, who got that money exclusively by siphoning off the profit of workers who worked for them, they die, and their child only gets 22 million, and that’s what you’re upset about. Hm.
originally posted by: pexx421
People who take money they haven’t worked for are bad. People who live off others labor are bad. People who exploit others to take money they create while not adding productivity themselves? Yes, bad. But I suppose it’s much to expect work ethic and responsibility from a trust baby.