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 Better Mouse Trap
LOL, It's always the rich greedy people who made their money on the blood sweat and tears of someone else who worry about something being taken away from them.
Anyone who works hard for their money CAN then spend it how they deem FIT.
These very elitist would rather blow money on a vacation in Spain then to be taxed a little more.
What the hell does that MEAN?
Face the facts, prevention is the best path to take.
Isn't the prevention of DASTARDLY deeds, the responsibility of the PARENT? OR is the government the parents?
For example, if we were taxed in order to have after school programs and this prevented the youth from doing dastardly deeds, that cost would be minuscule when compared to housing that very same adolescent in the jail system.
I'm afraid, I can't help you, if you don't know the definition of what I described above.
You get the picture I'm painting?
DID you see what the video is about? Kiddo...am I right? SINCE you believe YOUR income is not yours I'LL BE GLAD TO TAKE IT...PLEASE SEND IT TO ME.
Originally posted by Evolution2012
the "re-distribution" of wealth DOES need to occur but not in the obama socialist way. 96% of the world's wealth is held by 1% of the pop. that ain't right!
srsly tho...obama FTL.
Originally posted by wrill
Communism is a last step in human evolution and we cannot escape it, now there are two different ways to approach it, however. One is a lenin way, where he argues that small group of true pure communism believers must cling and do whatever is necessary to transition into communism, and another is European way, where people decide for themselves and within time everybody sees benefits of socialism and with upcoming technology breakthroughs ( free energy) communism will occur.
In the belief that "people cannot change", governments under the banner of communism have caused the death of somewhere between 40 million to 260 million human lives. Dr. R. J. Rummel, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii, is the scholar who first coined the term democide (death by government). Dr. R. J. Rummel's mid estimate regarding the loss of life due to communism is that communism caused the death of approximately 110,286,000 people between 1917 and 1987.
Today, communism continues to rule over one-fifth of the world's people.
THESE ARE THE PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE TAX INCREASE.
The present day elitist don't work hard for the money, most of it was passed down to them.
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
You are well an truly ignorant if you think "redistribution of wealth" is the core argument against this tax system and healthcare reform. Redistribution of wealth can be applied to so many things, in so many ways.
Ahh on that note: Nobody gave the lefties the idea to 'dictate' what is OKAY in terms of taking my INCOME and using it FOR THEIR PROJECTS either. But at the VERY least should YOU not have DIRECT SAY on your own income. Or does the GOVERNMENT HAVE SAY on HOW your income should be used.
Nobody gave you the authority to dictate whats "acceptable" redistribution of wealth and whats not.
Then get rid of the military spending, and give me back my money.
If you are going to make distribution of wealth your core argument your going to loose because: -The overgrown military you fellas go on about, that depends on redistribution of wealth, 20% of our taxes go into the military, thats a piece of MY money going into your "strong defense" so if your going to tell me you dont want money taken out of your backside I dont need to be forced to pay for your overgrown military.
-Redistribution of wealth is inevitable regardless of what system you implement and this is what rightie purposefully ignores just to smear a different system. The tickle down system under Bush was still redistribution of wealth, it was only the other way around where the wealth gained the lionshare of tax advantages. For you to argume about this tax system benefitting the middle class but completely ignore the redistribution of wealth in the other system, you are a complete tool.
ALL of these things can be provided in the PRIVATE sector if need be. I don't need to be taxed to be given lousy police protection. When was the last time you filed a STOLEN property report and the POLICE actually took the time to even bother looking for said property AND GAVE YOU BACK your property?
-Just as easy for you to argue about redistribution of wealth in this system and can argue that the fair tax system in redistribution of wealth as it continues to take out the income of individuals through their expenditures of goods and services so it still redistributes their money in a collective form vai product taxes. Fair tax is still redistribution of wealth becuase you are takening money from those who earned it and are redistributing it into federal and state services such as police and fireman.
Go for it! I'll debate you till the cows come home or until you DEVELOP some reasoned thoughts.
I can really go on.
Ah..you mean just like the military spending you don't like?
There are so many scenarios redistribution of wealth could be applied to. For to argue against it under one system is real ignorant and I believe just a way to smear a system you don't personally like.
Originally posted by orderedchaos
Redistribution of wealth only happens between middle and lower class!
Originally posted by Gateway
But, if you are talking about LAWS enacted to help a few corporations, like subsidizing, the OIL companies, the Banking sector, Car manufacturers...or others. Then LOOK AROUND my friend coz it's still happening under OBAMA
For some reason most of the discussion in Washington and the media of the bank bailouts is overlooking their central feature: taxpayer dollars are being used to sustain the income of incredibly rich bankers. The public should be furious over this upward redistribution of income.
The basic story here is very simple. If we got the government out and left things to the market, virtually the entire banking sector would be bankrupt. Citigroup, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and almost all the other big banks, and thousands of smaller ones, would be out of business. (My bet is that even "healthy" banks like Wells Fargo would be in bankruptcy before too long. They hold plenty of bad debts, too.)