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.

 

Barney Frank: "plenty of rich people to tax"

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Is any further evidence needed to prove that democrats despise success and wealth?





posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Why is this man on TV?

Barney Frank should be in federal prison. Today.




posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:16 AM
link   
It's great to know there are plenty of rich people to tax!
Thanks for the good news, Barney.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Mr. Frank is rich. Why in all this time hasnt he been paying more each year if he believes in it so strongly. There are provisions allowing people to pay extra. Why dont these people do it and leave the rest of us alone?

Franks buddy Kerry is sitting on an awful lot of wealth. Let them fund the garbage they insist I need/want. I'm tired of government telling me I need/want things I never needed/wanted then forcing me to pay for it.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:26 AM
link   
There are plenty of limosine liberals. What about those democrats, how do you put those rich dems, into your equation that dems hate the rich.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:30 AM
link   
You're missing the point here friend.

Liberals don't like to spend their own money, they like to spend other peoples money.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:39 AM
link   
The interesting point is that HE and many Congressional Democrats define RICH as a family making $100,000 a year. Remember that it is Congress, not the President, that makes the bills. For many people in large cities, that level is certainly middle class, because the cost of living is so high there.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I think the proper term would not be liberal but unitarian.

And yes there are lots of rich people to tax. But, more important it'simportant for business' to actually pay their tax. not talking about little mom and pop business' but the big corporations. there is a trillion dollars of profit from these corporations, about a 3rd of which do not pay any of their taxes, that could pay their taxes.

Imagine the amount of dough that would bring in for the country. wanna watch the most powerful nation in the worlds coffers fill up. get those corporations to pay their taxes. Take advantage of america, get filthy stinking rich on us and then not pay your taxes. People are sick of it and that they want to actually have these companies pull their weight.

As far as people arguing that all this will do is make the cost of goods supplied from these corporations and companies go up. Not if the govt. imposes laws that prevent them from trying to keep the same asinine profit margins (all of which go to their CEO, Execs etc.) Pay your taxes!! Greedy rich people. don't take it out on your customers and employees that you neglected to include that little part (oh yeah the company will have to pay taxes) in the yearly budget of your companies.

You can still get rich, just have to do it morally and legitimately. not by cutting corners and screwing over america in the process.

See it's patriotic to have people pay their taxes, big bully like corporations too.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   
That is an interesting point to take note of.

The real issue for me though is this...

Who are they to define what is rich and what is not? How is that any of the governments business?



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by BASSPLYR
 


Ridiculous.

So you're suggesting that not only do we increase the tax rates for large companies, but we also enact legislation to keep them from maintaining their profit margins?



Okay, okay, let's say we did. These companies are not going to stand by and see their margins free fall. So where do you think they are going to go if they can't make them up through price increases?

That's right. They will start cutting jobs.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Evil Doer
Is any further evidence needed to prove that democrats despise success and wealth?


No further evidence needed. The wealth was gained on the backs of the blue collar worker. It is high time they take it back. Capitalism is an excuse to make money without working for it on the backs of the hard workers. Its thievery and its why the economy has died. To much wealth has gone to to few. They didnt really earn it they used loop holes and corrupt systems to steal it legally from those who actually pound out the widgets. Thank god the age of greed is coming to an end. You have woke the sleeping giant (Middle Class).



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   
It woulkd be nice if the "Rich" no matter the affiliation, woulod feel a moral responsiblity to help others achieve sucess, rather than maintain the attiude "get what you can". Perhaps then the gap between the rich and poor would not be so large.
Should it not be a moral or ethiucal obligation rather than a government decision to spread the wealth around?


It seems America has an addiction to to materialism, as documented in any Cadillac commercial.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Motoman 1000
It would be nice if the "Rich" no matter the affiliation, would feel a moral responsiblity to help others achieve success


They create jobs don't they? Those "evil" rich people are the ones employing most of us.


Should it not be a moral or ethiucal obligation rather than a government decision to spread the wealth around?


Absolutely not. Spreading the wealth around is not the answer, it would only be an addition to the problem. If you want a piece of the wealth, work for it. Earn it. Don't ask the government to take it form someone else and give it to you.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 

Exactly! When did Ted Kennedy spend any of his own money on his pet projects? What about Kerry? The Roosevelts were wealthy, but what did they do for those in the bread lines? Did they give away any of their personal wealth?
I think not.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
You're missing the point here friend.

Liberals don't like to spend their own money, they like to spend other peoples money.


Repeat that how many times till I believe it too? That tax and spend liberal myth some people like Bush 41 go around mumbling is a crock of extruded cow waste. Where are we supposed to get the money to pay for all of the spending that Bush and crew did? Somepoeple are going to have to drop the economic cliches as our present state of the economy is in shambles. A GOP lead government has helped to criple the economy. Admitting there is a problem is the first and hardest step.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 




Not suggesting nor implying that the wealth be given. Merely stating that from experience I saw the owner of a company who already made near a million a year, sell his company for upwards of 7 million, be put on board of directors with increase in pay and a severance clause of 5 years severance pay. In the process he approved over 200 hard working people in the company to be let go, the remaining were given much worse insurances benefits. Many of these people have families and lives and are important community members living in a small college town area were there is not a lot of industry (due to outsourcing) to find employment and moving to another part of the state is not an option for many families.

It is the owners right to do what he did. but I ask this, is it a responsible thing to do? How much money does one man need? Personally as many see it, he made money for himself off of others than when they worked hard for him he sold them out and kept the earnings for himself and an extravagant lifestyle.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Listen, the disparity of wealth in the world and especially in the U.S. has increased remarkeably over the last several years. The idea that concentrating wealth into the topmost percentiles is the very definition of elitism and horribly bad for any country. It results in social instability and the eventual breakdown of the society. Look it up.

The Gini coefficient for the U.S. is about .82 --- just about as high as it can get. The top 5% of society own more wealth than the other 95% combined. The top 10% own 85% of all stocks; 85% of all financial securities 90% of all business assets.

I see alot of people on ATS railing against 'elitism' and the NWO. But these same people bristle at the idea that entities --- businesses and people --- should be taxed according to their realtive wealth. I'm all for rewarding achievement and hard work. But not at the expense of the overall society. Another problem bother here on ATS and in the at-large community is that people insist on defining things in black-and-white. This is another situation whose solution lies in the vaast middle, grey area. Since the 70's we've seen an accelerating conscentration of wealth in this country. That is a very bad trend and will lead to our downfall. It was this very scenario that led the French to roll-out the guillotines.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Fairness used to be about working hard for your money and being respected if you made it big.

Nowadays it seems the liberal agenda is total equality, regardless of whether some people deserve it or not.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   

As far as people arguing that all this will do is make the cost of goods supplied from these corporations and companies go up. Not if the govt. imposes laws that prevent them from trying to keep the same asinine profit

You can still get rich, just have to do it morally and legitimately. not by cutting corners and screwing over america in the process.

See it's patriotic to have people pay their taxes, big bully like corporations too.


Don't you understand what large corporations do, when taxes go us?
THEY MOVE out of the Country. PEOPLE lose jobs. Raising taxes on those that control the jobs, will just cost Americans jobs.

Don't tell me it won't. I spent the majority of my career in the business world, before taking a Professor's chair. I can tell you for a fact that tax rates are a major reason for RELOCATION outside of the company.
You apparently don't get it, and neither does Obama.
Don't complain to Republicans when the unemployment rate soars under Obama, and believe me, it will, but apparently, people have to learn the hard way. As bad as it will be, I'm actually resigned to Obama's election, with all the crooked ACORN registrations and votes.
I think that perhaps America has to learn a tough lesson- namely that listening to a "Rock Star", and the mesmerized MSM will cost you jobs, high inflation, high taxes, and a world that will be dominated by Russia and China.
Have a nice day.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Blarney Frank & the soon to be installed Obama administration can start taxing the rich..

A tax can be made with a levy on the 10's of Billion$ that Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are presently receiving ...through the disbursement of funds to the Employees Bonus Pools
?what funds are these cash poor corporations using for paying out these Billions in bonus contracts???
~ None other than the recent $125 Billion the 9 'banks'got from the Fed/Treasury to unfeeze the bankers Credit Creation System->>
AKA: the bailout money...
with the rest of the remaining $700billion to flow into their pockets down-the-road




see this link: republicbroadcasting.org...
"Morgan Stanley's Bonuses get Saved by You and Me"
21 oct 08, -> bloomberg.com


thanks,

[edit on 21-10-2008 by St Udio]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join