It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: JustJohnny
I'm just curious how you square your kindergarten understanding of what conservatism is, with the fact that we want to drastically reduce the size of govenment. If conservatism seeks to conserve the status quo, why would we conservatives be looking to change the status quo?
In other words. The establishment is big government and I want small government. Am I not a conservative?
Inequality begets further inequality. As the top 1% grow richer, they have more incentive and more ability to enrich themselves further. They exert more and more influence on politics, from election-campaign funding to lobbying over particular rules and regulations. The result is a stream of policies that help them but are inefficient and wasteful. Leftwing critics have called it “socialism for the rich”. Even the billionaire investor Warren Buffett seems to agree: “There’s been class warfare going on for the last 20 years and my class has won,” he once said.
This process has been most devastating when it comes to tax. High earners have most to gain from income tax cuts, and more spare cash to lobby politicians for these cuts. Once tax cuts are secured, high earners have an even stronger incentive to seek pay rises, because they keep a greater proportion of after-tax pay. And so on.
Although there have been cuts in the top rate of income tax across almost all developed economies since 1979, it was the UK and the US that were first, and that went furthest. In 1979, Thatcher cut the UK’s top rate from 83% to 60%, with a further reduction to 40% in 1988. Reagan cut the top US rate from 70% in 1981 to 28% in 1986. Although top rates today are slightly higher – 37% in the US and 45% in the UK – the numbers are worth mentioning because they are strikingly lower than in the post-second-world-war period, when top tax rates averaged 75% in the US and were even higher in the UK.
Nope, you're not.
You're an idiot with a kindergarten understanding of history and political reality.
Privatizations happened for decades, stop screaming at the sky you wannabe resistance of Oligarch cretins!
‘Socialism for the rich’: the evils of bad economics I should author a thread on this. Epic material for the pit dwellers.
originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: PublicOpinion
Conservatism has ALWAYS been based around “how many peasants can the aristocracy get to play for their team”..lol
Who said that?!?
On what planet is pretending like ANYONE is saying the problem of police accountability started with trump, a good argument?!?!??
Deflect the argument to something ridiculous no one is saying and then pretend like you “nailed it!”
I guessing they know they can’t win the argument on the actual policy proposal, so they strawman something ridiculous..
originally posted by: Dfairlite
One giant hole in your linked article begins in the first paragraph and is never addressed. Why is inequality of outcomes bad? Let's pretend for a moment you are a critical thinking, intelligent individual. Explain to me (a middle class guy) why bill gates or jeff bezos having a bunch of cash made my life worse.