Practical Application of Redistribution of Wealth

page: 14
16
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 30 2008 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Tax increases are not going to cover all of the proposed programs that are coming. Rich or poor we're all about to take it in the shorts. When the government is cash short they print more money. That doesn't raise the cost of anything. It instead devalues our currency until its worthless. There's a reason it's called a stealth tax. I wish they'd turn the IRS auditors loose on government agencies. If any of us handled our books the way they do we'd be in prison for quite some time. If the wasteful BS would be suspended we'd have plenty of money to cover the basics for every citizen and probably have a surplus. Any redistribution should be coming from BS programs that our govt. throws billions of dollars at.

"What happens when you give a politician viagra?"

He gets taller.




posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by pexx421
 



"Ok gormly, so i am to assume from your post that you imagine all the people who are not paying taxes now have also never paid taxes in their past, and will never pay taxes in their future, is that it? Further, they are NOT getting something for free. Everyone pays taxes, they pay taxes everytime they buy gas, everytime they buy food, clothes, alcohol, anything. They pay taxes every year on their car or home"

Right, so does everybody else, but WE all have to pay income tax as well. So, yes, they are getting something for free. All you described are the standard taxes that everyone in this country has to pay (not just citizens
) That's your "base taxes". Then you have 60% who have to pay income taxes too.

"Now only a person who actually MAKES 250k a year could imagine that its not much, and if you have 250k annually your income is hardly reduced to 50k after taxes, thats a pretty sad exaggeration."

Actually I believe if you re read the post you will see that he was referring to taxes AND ...a home, two college age children and you live in the north east. It's even less if you get that from "profit" of your own business," Please stop half quoting.

"I do have friends that have some nice homes with plenty room for several children and two middling cars, and they have household incomes of about 70-80k per year, and that seems like plenty to provide their needs. Albeit, most of these people if they lost their jobs would only be a month or two away from LOSING said house,"

Have you asked them to share their wealth with you?
Bet not, and that those last lines about "provide their needs" and about losing our houses, that right there is why I and those who agree with me don't want to be taxed more and then share it with others who don't deserve it. A lot of folks are strapped as it is and much more will break them.

"At any rate, when our forefathers first levied income tax, income was defined as money made from investments, as they recognized the immorality of taxing those working for a "living" at all, and only taxed those working for "profit". The idea was that sweat and work was a direct exchange for monetary gain to provide livelihood, and that did not equal profit, just subsistence. Too bad the people in charge of our country today cant see their way through to such moral clarity."

This is probably the best statement that you have made in this thread pal. No arguments from me there. My only caveat is, just because we have crappy tax policies now, don't take away my money to give to the poor. Do away with the Fed Res that led to the creation of those bogus taxes in the first place.

"Let me ask you this....in a relationship with a husband and wife, where the wife makes say....20k annually and the husband makes 100k annually. Now of course the husband wants a home that reflects his prosperity so say they buy a home that costs 500k, and the note is 3200 a month. In YOUR relationship, do the husband and wife BOTH pay 1600 each toward the mortgage because that is "fair"? It might be equal distribution of bills, but its a good way to foster resentment and anger in the marriage, and a quick way to a disfunctional relationship. Whether you understand it or not, we by sharing a society ARE in a relationship with each other, and a husband who sets himself up as the authority and mainstay of the relationship due to his higher income is one who is perpetrating emotional abuse upon the wife, who while making less may be doing something she believes in, and indeed something necessary."

All I can say to this one is WOW. I choose to share my money with my significant other. I'm not forced to by my parents. If I CHOOSE to share my money with you, fine. But no one has the right to tell me that I MUST. That statement was plain ate up with stupid.

"On another note, it is a sad fact that in our society of capitalism the lions share of the profits go not to those who contribute most to their fellow man, but rather to those who manipulate the system the best."

Fair point. Do something about it...see earlier posts


"Believing yourself truly seperate from your human brothers and sisters only gains you emptiness and estrangement, and will never lead you to true fulfillment or satisfaction."

That's a very broad statement from a bleeding heart. Who are you to presume what MY fulfillment or satisfaction comes from? Also, my separation from people that I don't know, or in your case, care to know, well quite frankly that doesn't leave me empty or estranged from my friends, family and coworkers. You make a pretty big assumption that you know my feelings. Leave my feelings to me buddy.

[edit on 31-10-2008 by midnightbrigade]



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 01:04 AM
link   
Well its because all our lives, everything that we do is about and for other people. Thats part of being human. A large home is empty and soulless without others in it, and a meal always tastes better with someone to share it with, thats a fundamental part of our humanity. Everything we do is about other people. If you dont believe that you on some level are attached with all the other humans on this world, that just shows the level of your spiritual development.

As to the nontaxed bracket getting something for free, that doesnt address my point that just because they are not getting taxed now does not mean that they have not been taxed in the passed, or wont be taxed in the future, so no they are not necessarily getting anything for free, they are getting what they paid for in the past or most likely will pay for in the future.

To your point about half quoting....that doesnt change anything. Any american I know would be ecstatic to have a business that brings in 250k annually. I beg anyone on this blog to differ.

No, i have not asked any of my friends making 35k(70-80k household) to support me, and neither would obama apparently, as 35k is a far cry from 250k or even 100k as some state it. Its still enough to begin you on the path to growth rather than subsistence.

I agree with you about abolishing the federal reserve.

As to my point with the husband and wife, my point was the definition of a fair relationship. We, as citizens of america, have every much as right to the resources of the country we are born in, so why is it right that those able to manipulate the system are able to demand more of them than the honest and hardworking? Do you TRULY think that the relationships among peoples is never a factor? That those who move fastest and greediest in our world to amass the resources available should have the right to enslave the others for basic subsistence because the first group already owns it all? Do you truly think that Gods gift to us all should be owned by the few that they may bring the many to their knees in servitude? If you believe in evolution then you must see that rewarding greed and ambition will cause those traits to be predominant among humans and do you really think that this is the best way for humans to progress? I dont think its the best path to secure our environment, our humanity, or our future. But thats just my $.02



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Im sorry, my point above was not to put down whatever spritual level you may be at, as we are all where we are, and theres nothing wrong with that.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:16 AM
link   
actually upon reading your posts, i see that my points have affected you, and will make a difference upon your opinions in the future. That is enough for me. Thankd you for reading my words and consideringthem. Namaste!



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:49 AM
link   
1'st: Yea, don't really care to bring people I don't know in to my home. I fill my house with friends and relatives (some of them) but that in no way means I'm connected, care to connect, or by lack of connecting some way spiritually hindered. Spirituality can be a very personal belief system that has nothing to do with other people. Again, you are assuming things you shouldn't be. Your way is not the ONLY way.

2nd: Tax bracket. Could be taxed? Might have been taxed? If a frog had wings would they bump his ass when he hopped? You cant assume that they WILL pay taxes in the future or HAVE paid taxes in the past any more than I can assume they WONT or haven't. We gotta stick to the here and now, so that leaves me at the point of right now...they are getting something for free.

3rd: I BEG TO DIFFER! I would hate to have a business that pays me what Obama wants to extraneously tax. I would downsize to avoid that. I would save money by not making as much. Also, you stated that any American would love to have a business that made 250k a year, first you gotta remember different costs of living. 250k isn't a whole hell of a lot of money in some areas. Secondly, You, being American, would fall in to that group that would love that cash yes? Doesn't that kinda defeat your whole argument about the rich being evil? 250k isn't rich anymore, but that does bump them into the tax bracket that would be taxed to spread the wealth...and those folks obviously don't want to part with their money..so by roundabout, you are saying if you made 250k a year, you wouldn't want your money stolen by Obama either.

4th: Obama is looking (on the high estimate) to tax those who make 250k for redistribution to across the 40% who don't pay taxes. We're talking MILLIONS of Americans. Break that down to 1 person, you, and that suddenly doesn't seem disproportionate to you asking your better waged friends to support you. They wouldn't have to make 250k to support 1 extra person. just 30 or 40k. Any numbers folks out there want to get crunchy and prove or disprove my analogy? I welcome it. I suck at computing math, but damn I can comprehend it and I hope I'm wrong.

Lastly: What truly bugs me about this last bit, is that yes, everyone is entitled to the resources that the country offers, I'm sorry your great great grandparents weren't born here to be first in line to claim those resources. But just because they got luck of the draw and got them first, how is it fair that we then take them away for being ingenious, crafty, shrewd, or even dangerous? I think you would have a different view from the other side of the fence. That's like 10 people running a race. The 4 that lost then go to the 3 winners and say cut up your medal, each of you are giving a piece of it to me. True, at the end of the day a winners would still have the majority of their medals, but would you want to loose a chunk of it just because you did something better than someone else? Also, wouldn't that cheapen the value of that medal? I mean, if you know you are going to get something for being the looser, 1, Does that medal mean as much to you as if you had earned it? and 2, wouldn't you rather stop fighting so hard to win? I mean the only people who are missing out are the folks that tried their asses off but weren't quite as good. I mean those 3 people who ran hard, but didn't win. What the hell do they get for their effort?

The rich stay rich, the poor get richer, but what about those poor bastards in between? You don't care about them do you? Cause they aren't in your class. How very humanistic of you.

As for evolution, Poor people are the ones with 12 kids. The middle class and the rich only have, on average 2.5 kids. So with my limited knowledge on Darwinism, doesn't that mean that we're passing on the genes to be LESS successful?

Sorry buddy, your glass just doesn't hold water.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by pexx421
actually upon reading your posts, i see that my points have affected you, and will make a difference upon your opinions in the future. That is enough for me. Thankd you for reading my words and consideringthem. Namaste!


Absolutely. We don't disagree on everything. If nothing else, you stuck to your guns, and as wrong as I may think you are, I can respect that.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 03:33 AM
link   
Come now, im sure you dont know a single poor person with 12 kids.

At any rate, for me, yes...i so like to share when i win. I often feel i learn more and gain more by losing. And despite this, i excell at all i do, wether it be martial arts, home construction, math, science, playing the guitar or whatever. I dont need to measure what i do in relation to others in order to feel accomplishment, and if others can do as well as me, then i feel great! and if they cant, i am happy to spend some of my time helping them.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 03:38 AM
link   
i wouldnt see it differently if i were on the other side of the fence because this is just who i am, and its not a product of how i was brought up, or of my class level. Most of my friends think very different than i, and they are in a similar class. One difference is yes, i am a bit more open minded, and i am buddhist, which makes me respect my fellow men more. And also i have read 15 or 20 books on americna history and policy while most of my friends may have read 1 or 2 outside of school, which perhaps broadens my perspective a bit.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 04:05 AM
link   
reply to post by pexx421
 


LOL, no, but I do know 2 family's that have six kids a piece.


Remember though, these' people with small companies making 250K are not winning, they're just playing better than we are. It's easy to give to the poor when you have an abundance of wealth. I'm reminded of the bible story where a woman brought a single coin to the offering plate. She was far more blessed because she gave all she had as opposed to the money changers who brought a bounty of offering. Just realised this too, Jesus warned us about money changers (bankers) 2000 years ago


Ya know, Buddha was a good man. As was Ghandi....so was Patton


They all have their place in the world, and maybe one day when there is no workers to be raped, and everything is done by autonomous but unintelligent robots, maybe then we could have a Star Trek style, moneyless economy..but that day is not today, and we don't need to start planning for that until the infrastructure is laid first.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 04:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by grover
 


Yeah, yeah, I've heard that argument before. For some reason every defense of Obama has to come back to "context".

The fact remains he revealed that he believes "spreading the wealth" is a good idea. The fact remains that his tax plan is going to be very detrimental to the economy (as already shown by the fear in the markets). The fact remains that they keep changing their story on who is going to get tax increases. ($250,000 to $200,000 to $150,000).

Obama and Biden are coming across as untrustworthy right now. Their ideas on the economy and redistribution of wealth are way off base.

**By the way, the quote you posted is exactly how I've heard the McCain campaign and everyone else play it. I haven't heard it any other "spliced" way.**

[edit on 29-10-2008 by nyk537]


ya, I love that idea that is being floated around....
the fear in the markets isn't because the value of all these worthless securities (and the subsequent leveraging of them) is probably more than all the dollars in circulation, or the value of all the real estate in the world....it isn't because local communities, state governments, companies big and small, and well the individual is finding their investments dwinddling down to near nothing, it isn't because countries themselves are falling by the wayside....
na, it isn't because the previous administration dropped the balls during their juggling act to keep this scam running!!
it's because the whole world is afraid, very afraid of this one man. afraid that they might take a few more bucks from the pockets of the ultra-weathy!!

let's see, what would happen if the middle class and the poorer class were endowed with a little more money through a pay increase, through a little more government help, ect....
well, since these guys don't hire big arse law firms and accountants to advise them on how to avoid taxes, more of the money would become taxable??
since these people are more inclined to spend their money on the little things in life ( a better tv, kid's college, heck, kid's medicine so they continue going to school, ect.) hey, the money is ciruculating around and......they are paying more taxes!!! what are the rich going to do with it?? invest it, preferably in a way that will give them more tax credits? decrease their tax liablity? so....they can pay less taxes??
and well....give a person making a few hundred dollars a year an increase in their salary, and well, you don't have any additional expense when it comes to social security, do ya....heck none of that increase will suffer at the hands of that tax!! but give it to someone making $6 or $7 or $8 an hour, and ya, you will have to pay a little more in that social security tax, and so won't the increase in the wages.....and, as an added perk!!! the person might be put over the limit when it comes to these social programs....money saved!!!

and, as a super added bonus!!!
some of these worthless securities that have clogged up the system, ya know....THE REAL REASON THE STOCKS MARKET IS SO DEPRESSING!!....might actually become worth something and cure your stock market blues.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by dawnstar
 


That's not it at all I'm afraid.

No one has ever said that the mess we are in now is because of people being afraid of Obama and his economic policies. That fact remains though that that is going on.

I've shown several examples of this going on in another thread already, so the information is out there for you to find. Obama is planning on raising capital gains anywhere from 5 to 10% as soon as he gets in (and that's if you believe those numbers either), so why wouldn't people want to sell their assets now as opposed to then?

Virtually every corporate tax there is will increase under Obama, so quite expectantly the markets are reacting.

The market is not some strange complicated beast some make it out to be, these things are really quite simple.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by dawnstar
 


That's not it at all I'm afraid.

No one has ever said that the mess we are in now is because of people being afraid of Obama and his economic policies. That fact remains though that that is going on.

I've shown several examples of this going on in another thread already, so the information is out there for you to find. Obama is planning on raising capital gains anywhere from 5 to 10% as soon as he gets in (and that's if you believe those numbers either), so why wouldn't people want to sell their assets now as opposed to then?

Virtually every corporate tax there is will increase under Obama, so quite expectantly the markets are reacting.

The market is not some strange complicated beast some make it out to be, these things are really quite simple.


ummm....because, if they sell them now....they will more than likely take a massive loss?? the only ones who should be selling now are those who are cash strapped and are being forced to...

as far as the capital gains tax.....
ummm........sure there's gonna be much to tax??



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 07:04 PM
link   
If the waiter was able to get his $10, he could have then paid the homeless guy to shine his shoes for say $3. Then the homeless guy could have gone down to the liquor store and bought a cheap bottle of Ripple with the $3. Then the waiter could have saved the remaining $7 into an IRA account. With compounded interest, his $7 investment would be worth about $50 at retirement. The liqour store owner would then pay about $.70 of the $3 in taxes. The waiter would pay about $10 in income taxes someday when he takes a distribution from his IRA.

..and so forth and so on.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   
OMG! I had no idea there were such mean spirited people out there.

The argument is framed in a everything I make belongs to me, I dont owe the government, my neighbour etc....

I thought taxation was the "redistribution" of wealth?

For those that think the govt has no right whatsoever to your money, then conversely I say that you have no right to schools, hospitals (except USA - apparently no-one needs healthcare there), roads, public buildings, libraries, etc etc etc...

...and to top it off... some of the people spouting this crap consider themselves christian...

Dave



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Unfortunately, you (or we) pay for that retirement one way or another. If you don't give it to those people, then they will just steal it. Laziness is inherent while being criminal is not. Laziness has no victims while criminal activity can carry grave consequences. I know it's not fair or just; however, it is for the greater good of society as a whole.


Laziness does have victims, ones refusal to work undermines the strength of the whole. What the hell kind of logic is it that would simply give someone something that they didnt earn simply on the grounds that they would just steal it anyway?

It is better to just give it to them than to put them in jail for stealing it?

How is this for the greater good?

How does this mentality make a nation into an econmic powerhouse?

How does this type of social system strive for the best possible product?

Why should the lazy sloppy not caring worker be entitiled to earn the same as me?

Why should someone not willing to do what i have to do to get the things I want be able to have them?

All I see that type of system creating is a bunch of people who may or may not do ok at the expense of not getting anywhere near thier best.



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 11:32 PM
link   
The problem with the economy is the government. Business uses the governments police powers, or its ability to use force lawfully, to make laws that favor one business over another. This prevents competition and artificially lowers the economies production which leads to an increase in the wealth gap through artificial scarcity, and favortism in gov subsidies.

Government spending also wrecks the economy since it redistributes assets away from ventures that the people desire which would otherwise be provided by the free market, and the extra debt and inflation the government creates to pay for what it cannot afford increases prices. Imagine how many extra pairs of blue jeans, shoes, or chicken mcnuggets you would have if the free market were able to create consumer goods instead of the labor and resources going to build trillion dollar aircraft carriers, and pay for multi trillion dollar concurrent wars.



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Jovi1
 


why on earth would you go to a resturant who has " lazy sloppy not caring workers" to serve you anyways???

not to mention grocery stores, and hey, did ya know....
the gaskets in the US Navy Jets are made by those same lazy sloppy, not caring workers!! that's right, so, well, I guess you should thank the Gods in heaven that one hasn't fallen on your head my now!!
I love the way the workers in this country are made out to be. it's rediculous. if they are such lazy sloppy, not caring pecople, why not just do the work yourselves? after all, you never know what kind cootie that worker might be passing on to you via their product or service.




[edit on 1-11-2008 by dawnstar]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jovi1
Laziness does have victims, ones refusal to work undermines the strength of the whole.


That statement is socialist in and of itself. One undermines the whole.... that makes us all connected. Leaving someone behind and poor in the streets undermines us as a whole.

Think about it.

EDIT: to answer your other Q's


It is better to just give it to them than to put them in jail for stealing it?


It would greatly reduce theft. Approximately 1% of all thefts ever lead to an arrest and conviction. so yes, giving will prevent the other 99% that don't get caught. Theft has a victim, handouts do not. handouts are not violent, whereas robery can lead to assult. Based upon this, handouts would be for the greater good.


How does this mentality make a nation into an economic powerhouse?


Why the need to be an economic powerhouse? Why not be self sufficient w/an economy that does not fluctuate. It does wonders for the mind. Economic problems are BY FAR the biggest stress in the USA. Less mental health issues, the less medical problems.


How does this type of social system strive for the best possible product?


You ask this like the US has made the best quality products in the last half century. Our country treats quality like the plague. If we cared at all, we would not export our jobs and import lower quality goods.


Why should the lazy sloppy not caring worker be entitled to earn the same as me?


I never said that they are entitled to make the same as everyone else, just that they come from poor, underprivileged backgrounds that have never been given encouragement, nor opportunity to pick themselves up by the bootstraps to better themselves. Placing more balance on the playing field gives them the opportunity to be the next Bill Gates...AND not feel like the cards are stacked against them. Despite what you may believe, IQ is not dictated by the family you are born into; however, how you use your intelligence is absolutely dependent on opportunity to channel it in a positive manner.


Why should someone not willing to do what i have to do to get the things I want be able to have them?


Again, how do you know they are not willing? Give them a REAL chance and opportunity and see what happens.



[edit on 1-11-2008 by Aggie Man]

[edit on 1-11-2008 by Aggie Man]





new topics
top topics
 
16
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join