It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Practical Application of Redistribution of Wealth

page: 15
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 10:58 PM
No one should feel sorry for the rich. The past 8 years of the neocons have elevated the top one-percent of "the highly compensated" to levels of pure, shameless greed, indecent selfishness and incomes that are totally out of line...beyond any measure of realistic compensation for CEO skills and labor.

Anyone making over $250,000 a year can afford a 9% increase in taxes and not be in danger of losing his obscene luxuries.

Most, if not all, of the new government agencies ushered in by Bush and his neocon country club cronies can be completely shut down, thus saving the USA enough billions to help the poor and needy.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 05:33 AM
Gee, what a brilliant experiment. Except of course, that the only "redistribution," which in itself isn't even accurate per se, is based on taxes. A homeless guy who earns nothing, doesn't get reduced taxes now, does he. Considering your "experiment" involved the wrong two classes of citizens, it doesn't make much sense, except as a sensationalist example, as I expect what is what you wanted.

Now, if your example involved a person making over a quarter of a million dollars a year, taking a higher % of taxes, and giving it to that waiter, I guess it would be slightly more accurate. It's funny so many protest this idea. Why it's fine that those who have a huge cash influx get breaks and bonuses, versus the working stiff who gets taxed over 25% of their income, baffles me. How many of YOU make over 225k a year? I'd venture not many.

All I know is that the regular working person busts their butt for meager pay that is taxed insanely. Their healthcare is high and sucks, and taxes are a backbreaker. As an example: I dug up a paystub from a year ago.

Gross: 2318 Net: 1587 Difference of: 731 bucks.

Fed taxes alone: 359 bucks - for TWO WEEKS of work. Wow.

Here is a little fact for you. When I was younger, households could EASILY have ONE PERSON working, and they'd get by. There was a reason there were moms that COULD stay at home. Because one income was enough to survive on. Now however, that's very implausible. Both parents work.. some have two jobs, just to get by!

I find it funny you support folks like the last administration, through whom their horrible policies have buried us deep in national debt. I used to be fairly neutral when it came to selecting who I wanted to be president. I actually based it on whom I felt would do the better job, not based on the fact I was this or that party. I felt that this was a ludicrous way to make a decision. It's your "team" so you just blindly accept all they say and do? hmm... weird way to select a leader imo.

But over the last 20 years, I HAVE noticed one thing. Every time a republican president takes office, their administration puts us more in debt. Whenever a democratic administration is running the show, it goes down.

McCain said "Let's not raises taxes on anyone!" What a pipe dream. Does he think we are going to magically get out of all the debt the last administration put us in? No.. I guess he feels freezing absolutely ALL programs is the way to go. What a crock imo. What a heavy-handed, non intelligent way to go about fixing things. I really don't agree with all the policies of either cantidate, but I fear McCain, and what he might do to our country, much more than I fear what Obama might do.

Socialism.. certainly is getting slung around a lot, but what Obama proposes is nothing close to real socialism. I don't know about you, but I think the middle man.. which is the MAJORITY of our working population deserves a break. Every time I work with tech support now for almost ANY computer product (being in the tech field), I get foreign tech support. I can barely understand the guy on the other end. Because a HUGE PERCENT of American companies are now hiring folks overseas. They go the cheap route. And so Obama wants to tax them higher. GOOD FOR HIM!!!

Socialism? No.. it's common sense. The American people can hardly afford to live now. The idea to give the largest % of working class a break is hardly a "bad thing." And when it only pertains to existing taxes, and taxes only, it's hardly full blown "socialism." When people mention socialism, Obama cracks a huge grin and shakes his head. Why? Because he knows it's simply being blown way, way out of proportion, to try and convince folks that he harbors Marxist ideals. Please. Have any of you actually READ stuff that guy wrote? In one of the books I've read written by that man, he tries to "improve" the working conditions of the general public, by changing the working hours for woman and CHILDREN to 15 hour days, 6 days a week.

Does that sound like what Obama proposes? No.. he only suggest a tax fix to help an ailing country, and yet people jump all over this like rabid dogs, comparing him to a guy that is absolutely NOTHING like this cantidate.

Something has to be done, we are in a massive hole, curtesy of Bush and Co. Would you rather pay MORE TAXES? The money has to come from somewhere. Our nations debt isn't going to magically pay itself. It has to come from somewhere. Taxes have steadily risen until they are just ridiculous now. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not see my taxes and cost of healthcare risen to a point where although I work in a tech support field, it's as if I work as an entry-level food service employee.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 08:36 AM

Originally posted by nyk537**Edit to add: Or is it $150 K a year?**

[edit on 28-10-2008 by nyk537]

This just in:

Definition of "Rich" Continues to Plunge
At first Obama was only going to loot those making over $250,000 per year, so that the rest might enjoy the fruits of their labor in accordance with the principles of socialists, pirates, muggers, and other wicked thieves. Then it became $200,000, then $150,000. It has now reached $120,000. According to prominent Dem Bill Richardson:

What Obama wants to do is he is basically looking at $120,000 and under among those that are in the middle class, and there is a tax cut for those.
The RNC comments:

At this rate, it won't take long until Obama is again raising taxes on Americans making as little as $42,000 a year.
Once these looters have consolidated power, the rich will be defined as anyone foolish enough to work for a living. Everyone else will get tax "rebates" — i.e., they will be handed your money in exchange for the political support they give Democrats.

No wonder liberals screech in outrage when the Ten Commandments are publicly displayed. They must find Thou Shalt Not Steal particularly oppressive.


Obama has always been a reliable vote for raising taxes. A hard habit for a liberal to break.

He will repeal the Bush tax break, which is then a tax increase.

Obama Voted In Favor Of The Democrats’ FY 2009 Budget, Which Would Raise Tax Rates For Americans Earning As Little As $31,850:

Obama Voted Twice In Favor Of The Democrats’ FY 2009 Budget Resolution. (S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #85, Adopted 51-44: R 2-43; D 47-1; I 2-0, 3/14/08, Obama Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #142: Adopted 48- 45: R 2- 44; D 44- 1; I 2-0, 6/4/08, Obama Voted Yea)

The Democrats’ Budget Would Raise Taxes On Individuals Earning As Little As $31,850. “Under both Democratic plans, tax rates would increase by 3 percentage points for each of the 25 percent, 28 percent and 33 percent brackets. At present, the 25 percent bracket begins at $31,850 for individuals and $63,700 for married couples. The 35 percent bracket on incomes over $349,700 would jump to 39.6 percent.” (Andrew Taylor, “Presidential Hopefuls To Vote On Budget,” The Associated Press, 3/13/08)

NOTE: Obama’s Vote For The Democrats’ Budget Is At Odds With His Rhetoric On The Campaign Trail, Where He Claims He’ll Provide Tax Relief For Working Americans. Obama: “I’ll give a tax cut to working people …” (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At A Campaign Rally, Denver, CO, 1/30/08)


posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 01:08 PM
I love how people make the 250 argument.

The rich who earned it are just as deserving as the poor waiter.

if you can't make the connection, think of it as a ratio. In proportion to the bum, the waiter IS a 250+ rich man, while the bum is not.

If you can't make that connection, well, now everyone knows why you support who you do.

[edit on 2-11-2008 by Gorman91]

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 03:47 PM

I began working is restaurants at the age of 11, as a bus boy. I have also worjked as a waiter, a bartender, a cook and as a chef.

Tips are not required. They are to be given for S E R V I C E, and far too many wiaters/waitresses forget that simple truth.

If a server were to wait on me wearing ANY political statement, I would tip them exactly 1 cent. 1 cent, so they would not think I was stiffing them.

I don't go to a restaurant for a political discourse. If the server is stupid enough to wear a button espousing one candidate, they frankly deserve what they get.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 04:00 PM
The people that own that restaurant have already risked THEIR capital, in a field where 90% of new stores fail within 3 years. They had to pay staff, pay for supplies and materials, pay for employee (and to a lesser degree patron) theft, pay insurance, spoilage of foods, etc., etc.

The waiter/waitress risks nothing.

The same principle works in almost all fields. The workers are paid for their work, but it is the owners that either win or lose at the end of the year.

So why shouldn't the owners get a much higher rate of return?

I worked hard, had to drop out of high school because of family economics, went through 9 years active duty in the Army, went to college on the GI Bill, and then put myself through Graduate School. I worked hard to get into my own business, and risked everything, and I mean literally everything including my modest 3 bedroom home, to make it.

Then some lazy bastard, that refused to work like I did, comes along and says, "I deserve a big chunk of your earnings"?

Bull S**T! If you want it, work for it. Get an education, and work YOUR ass off like I did,

I was 27 years old when I started college, 32 when I got my Masters Degree and I got out of college owing NOTHING, NADA, NOT ONE RED CENT. I worked weekends, holidays, and some weekday evenings to make certain I paid my bills.

Don't try to tell me that poor kids can't make it. My family was so poor that we literally ate dry dog food for weeks on end. Yet of the three kids my mother bore, two ended up with Doctoral degrees, one just got a B.A. (and he made more money than my sister and I combined.)

I went to 28 schools by the 11th grade. My mother was an alcoholic, and my father never paid a cent in child support. We lived in 7 different states, and yet we made it.

Stop making excuses for the lazy, the unmotivated, the ones that are just unwilling to even try.

I worked for years with developmentally disabled teens and adults. I learned that they would work their asses off, if only given the opportunity. With all of their disabilities, if they can make it, why can't all of those minorities, etc?

I will hate to see the USA become a communist country, but if Obama and the Democrats win big, that's exactly where they plan on taking us.

And my family will leave, before the revolution starts,.


posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 04:11 PM
Good news is that a revolution with nothing but talking heads is nothing more than talking heads.

The common man doesn't support communism, only the elites.

I doubt that we'll be seeing elites in the streets crying for the revolution, while the common man walks by uncaring.

posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 03:58 PM
I really feel that some individuals are taking the concept of redistribution of wealth and blowing it totally out of proportion.

posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 07:40 PM
JAJAJA... nice one.
What about expending the time on actual search for, let's refrase it, not redistribution of wealth but delivering more than survival living conditions for the let's say 60% of the world population.
Because let´s not forget it's a world out there, so # Obama and # McCain and hurrays for whomever is out there thinking for real how to achieve a better society.

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 12:07 AM
reply to post by OldMedic

God Damn right man. I'm glad that someone else sees that you make your own opportunity. It doesn't just fall in your own lap. Stars for you sir!

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 12:45 AM
old medic, yes, its possible to work your fingers to the bone and get ahead. But i bet that most people taking that path will die a nice young death of heart attack or other lifestyle disease from the extreme stress such a lifestyle over extended time puts on the body. Yes, people can work nights, can work two jobs and go to school at the same time, etc, but you have no idea how massive the burden of this is on the system of even a healthy person. Is it any wonder in our overworked american society, that our life expectancy has actually begun to DECLINE, alone of all advanced nations? That our levels of depression, anxiety, heart disease, diabetes, have all begun to sky rocket? Just because it CAN be done, doesnt mean it should.

IM sorry, but i consider it pretty sad that in todays world a person has to have their family live off of dog food in order to secure a future in a land where the GDP has doubled over the last 30 years. We're not talking the wild west or rule of the jungle here, we're talking the land of opportunity. People didnt come to america originally so they could eat dog food to get ahead. They could have raped and murdered and stolen their way up the food chain in europe as well, but in america, opportunity was supposed to be plentiful and REASONABLY attainable for EVERYONE. Now, a person who succeeds and achieves financial freedom is the exception and not the rule. That was never the american dream, and now we have it forced down our throats like we're supposed to be happy about it.

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 01:02 AM
Anyone who makes more than $10,000 per year is standing on the shoulders of other people. I bet that makes you feel really big doesn't it?

Don't kid yourselves: you work at a job because it's easier than the alternative. Having a nice warm home while it's raining outside is easier than trying to sleep in a field while you're freezing and it's raining on you.

My point is, anyone who makes more than 10k a year is a parasite because you only make that much money because of everyone lower on the totem pole than you are. If you really cared, you'd give away the money you make more than 10k and you would produce after that instead of spend because that's the average salary in the world.

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 05:09 AM
reply to post by k-string
actually, I am hoping you mistakenly dropped a 0 from your number, but in case you didn't....
if the average wage in the country was $10,000 the average rent would have to be around $300 to even be considered close to affordable.....try finding an apartment to house your family for $300 or less.....
as far as the waiters and the waitresses go, well...
it was the our fine gov't probably in league with lobbyists from the resturants that decided that they didn't have to pay them the minimum wage.....figuring that the tips would make up the difference. I've been a waitress before, didn't make up the difference and ended up paying taxes on money I never even earned!

go ahead, just let's all enmass refuse to tip the poor waitresses, and well, maybe the resutrants will have to start paying them at least the minimum wage and people won't have to pay taxes on imaginary money that they never got to see!!

I couldn't live on my own with the money I earn I don't think, and I make more than the minimum can't live on your your making the minimum wage, or I'd venture to guess anything less that $10.00/hr...
and yet, there's plenty of jobs paying less than $10.00/hr. many of them want years of experience, college education. anyone in their right mind would expect someone with years of experience to have families, which mean that their income would have to be much more than that $10.00/hr to support....
just like they would expect that person just getting out of school to move out of mommy's and daddy's home soon afterward and into their own place.....
but how? they can't, not making no $8 or so an hour. so, many will find a place for them and their significant other, then well, the babies come, and, instead of having to make around $10.00 and hour to survive, they are living off the gov't handouts.....
our policies, our wage setup, it all serves just to get the people more in the hole and less self sufficient. if we, as a country, claim freedom as our goal, this has to stop! you can't have freedom if their is no chance of independance!

an interesting note...
the wages kept keeping up with the cost of living a long time ago...but well....when the two were kept in check...guess could actually house a family on around $300 a month!!

[edit on 4-11-2008 by dawnstar]

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 09:13 AM
i really cant understand that people really think that obama will be different. i too hope so but we all know in reality that he wouldnt even be in the running without making those special " concessions" !!! revoultion. read it, live it breath it . god bless all my fellow humans

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 09:15 AM
reply to post by k-string

Rightly said. wake up people

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 10:49 AM
reply to post by nyk537

I really don't have anything to add to this thread, but I have to say, so far I am agreeing with 100% of everything you are saying.

new topics

top topics

<< 12  13  14   >>

log in