Millionaires to Obama: Tax us

WE HAVE LOST!

In the U.S.... Keep your eye on the ball people. Stop debating about who should pay what taxes. That is part of the illusion and confusion the Central Bankers want us focusing, not the central thesis which is END THE FED, and END THE IRS, and END THE INCOME TAX.

Some sheeple in this thread continue to argue about "paying its fair share of taxes". Nonsense.

No one need pay an income tax, save we must pay the interest on the ferns (Federal Reserve Notes) lent to the U.S. government by THE FED. In other countries is would be other Central Banks... all reporting to the IMF. If we returned the printing/coining of "money" to the congress (the people) then we wouldn't pay kinko's, I mean THE FED to print it!

Debt is slavery. Taxes = slavery. The only people who would be out of business if we ended the ponzi scheme or pyramid scheme of the Federal Income Tax would be THE FED Elites and IRS employees (oh dear how sad).

WAKE UP.. FOCUS!

reply to post by projectvxn

I'm not giving up my tiny one bedroom house so that the bum down the street can have it. I work for this, I pay for it through money I legally earned.

I don't know if you bothered to read any of my posts, but you clearly would rather throw out right wing emotional catch phrases, than engage your brain. You talk about economics after throwing out a BS political statement like this?

Through tax policy, give your house away to the much more conformist minded people, who never stood up for their rights in their lives (or their ancestors either) is exactly what corporations want to do, and they are doing it with our tax dollars.

Rather than stand up for your rights, you would rather bow down and kiss the feet of the super rich. Then one day you find that you came to the land of the free, only to turn it into a land of slaves, like the place where your ancestors probably came from.

reply to post by poet1b


Yep, that's it...I haven't been talking about fairness and simplicity or anything. I didn't mention a single word about mitigating the co-opting of government power by corporate interests.

Geez, man. I was using that as an example. My position is that if you earned your wealth in a fair and legal way you should be able to keep that wealth. Did you bother to read the post I was responding to? Probably not huh?

reply to post by Aim64C


Know a few CEOs, and have no desire to set in on a board meeting.

Do you know that the board meeting is nothing but a formality? All the decisions were made behind the scenes?

Have you ever considered that you have no clue whatsoever about reality?

Many CEOs and upper-tier executives/managers/administrators are the most dedicated to the founding principles of the company (often because they are part of the founding party or descendants thereof).

I am sure there dedicated CEOs and upper tier execs out there, but at the end of the day, they are all doing their jobs for the same reason the rest of us are, to bring home the bacon. Their are dedicated people at all levels of every corporations, not just the execs holding the whole thing together.

Us trained monkeys are also often targets by competing corporations and businesses for recruitment.

The reality of my statement remains.

These CEOs and other execs walking away with 50M plus bonuses don't give a rat's a## about the business, if it closes or gets shipped overseas, or the peoples lives he has destroyed in order to get their money.

Most of these CEOs and execs didn't build the business, they are nothing but private sector politicians. Many of the people laid off did in fact help to build the business, and make it succeed, and many of them get screwed for their efforts.

Bigots like you could care less, you will stay busy kissing the behind of the person above you.

Back to the topic of the discussion

Our own tax dollars are being used against us, and you people can preach about getting rid of the Fed all you want, but the reality is that as long as you support politicians, which most of you who preach this government hate do, the fed will never be eliminated, because every pol running around preaching free market ideology fully supports everything the fed does.

reply to post by projectvxn




Quite the contradiction, right there in the same post.

I haven't been talking about fairness and simplicity or anything.

My position is that if you earned your wealth in a fair and legal way you should be able to keep that wealth.

Obviously you have been talking about fairness. You are just trying to put the discussion in the box of your choosing, so that you can continue to cling to your delusions.

reply to post by DINSTAAR


You have some intelligent things to say, and I am running out of time. Maybe I should have addressed your points, and ignored the others.

Here is the thing I think you are missing.

At least I am not defending violence against my fellow man. Greedy people have way more morality than anyone advocating that we rob everyone with the point of a gun.

You support violence, theft, and intrusion. You have no legitimacy on the subject of morality.

Hypocracy is offensive.

Greedy people do not have morality, they are hypocrites to the very last one, and when they aren't the ones committing the acts of violence to satisfy their greed, they do back the people who do the violent theft and intrusion.

Our lives, our freedom has been stolen.

Here is the big point. The only reason we have any freedom, or any property rights for that matter, is because men were and are willing to take up arms and fight for their liberty.

reply to post by BoatRock1

WE HAVE LOST!

Maybe you have, but I haven't.

Wake up to this reality, representative government is the only reason we have any rights in the first place.

If you don't see this, then you are brain washed.

reply to post by projectvxn


I should read my messages more often. Obviously you have been reading my posts.

I still stand on my position on fairness. Talking about economics while trying to ignore fairness is like taking about cooking and trying to ignore the topic of taste.

The central premise of markets and economics is the fair trade of goods and services. Nobody wants to trade anything, unless they think it is a fair trade.

I also don't think you can separate government from economics. God knows I would love to eliminate politics from business, but I don't think that is possible.

I see government as a necessary evil, because when properly ran, good government protects our liberties. Somebody has to pay for government, and it all comes down to what is the fair share we should pay. I think the very rich (10 mil and up personal net worth) are paying too little for what they get out of government, and the rest of us are paying too much, especially the upper middle class.

The Turkey is in the oven now, I gotta clean house before guest arrive. Happy Thanksgiving.

reply to post by poet1b


There's a big difference in my idea of government intervention and that of most people on the right and left in this country. Even the right wants to tell you what you can and cannot sell, to whom, and for how much. I don't believe this is the original intent of how government is supposed to participate in the economy over all.

Should they be enforcing contracts? Investigating and prosecuting criminal activity? Should the government be protecting the rights of ALL parties while ensuring equitable arbitration between opposing sides? YES to all.

Should they be telling you and I what to buy? Should there be a tax code that affects you and I, yet is impossible for you and I to fully comprehend? Should the government subsidize industry and create monopolies? HELL NO.

I posit that the lack of fairness in how laws are written, and how juris prudence is applied to it, is the very reason for many of the disparities we see in our economic model, which, by all accounts, is most certainly not a free, equitable, and fair market.

reply to post by projectvxn


Yepper, we completely agree on this, except for the concept of a free market.

The reason everything has gotten so mess up is directly due to attempts to create a free market, which is a foolishly idealistic concept that pretty much accomplishes the same thing as communism, creation of an all controlling government that caters exclusively to the super rich.

reply to post by poet1b


That's not what the free market is. That's despotism, an oligarchy.

I recommend starting with Adam Smith-and work your way to Mises and Hayek. These men understand what a true free market is. The Federal Government is antithetical to a free market, so are monopolies, central banks, and progressive taxation(it also violates the equal protection clause).

Free market economics is not a political system. It is supposed to function independently of the state, what we have today is what the term "State Capitalism" which is just another fancy term for centralized wealth, centralized power, and disenfranchised everyone else.

reply to post by catwhoknows


I am posting an answer to my own post because no-one else did.

Why is no-one saluting Bill and Melinda Gates, who not only donate billions, but they also travel to suffering countries. And they keep their kids real - not spoilt, and that is difficult when you are so rich.

I salute Bill and Melinda Gates.

reply to post by projectvxn


Adam Smith believed in the Market, not some free market ideology.

Mises and Hayek know free market ideology as well as Marx and Engels knew about communism.

If you recognize the need for regulation of the markets, to prevent crime, then you should see that there is such a thing as over regulation and under regulation, and neither is free.

When are people going to wake up to what a complete scam the whole free market concept is. It ruined Ireland and Iceland's economies, as well as the U.S., and Mongolia back in the day, and you people keep clinging to this foolish idea.

It is very frustrating to me how so many people can not see what is so obvious.

reply to post by catwhoknows


Because Microsoft is evil, foisted upon us by big business.

As the PC becomes a thing of the past, and the personal computing device (cell phone of the future) takes over, people will drop Microsoft like a bad habit. Microsoft has destroyed its image so badly, that there is no recovery.

The 40 millionaires is a publicity stunt: they are all supporters of the Obama administration.

They will never pay a meaningful proportion of tax, since WEALTH is not taxed--only income is. And their income is only the tiniest fraction of their true wealth.

But hey (reasons the big govt pr-machine), if they are willing to put up with higher taxes, then you should be, too.

reply to post by Aim64C


Your problem is that you joined the Air Force where you only work on one piece of hardware. In the Navy, you get to work on everything.

Yeah, with your military school training your job is simple, because the enlisted run the military, teach the schools, and manage maintenance. The training you get in the military is by far superior to any courses I have taken outside of the military, be they at colleges or other types of courses. The reason being, in my opinion is because they were not taught by college grads, but non-college grads. I have met so many incompetent college grads in my life, I have no respect for our university system.

In addition, you are working on a piece of equipment designed to milspec standards, that was only put into service after passing environmental testing, and came with a ton of documentation analyzing every aspect of its performance. Your equipment was designed with maintenance and calibration in mind, with a well written manual telling you how to check every important operating characteristic.

In the civilian world you would be working on equipment with virtually no documentation, and technical specs will be written in the most confusing manner possible, designed to force purchasers to sign the expensive maintenance agreement. The equipment is designed for planned obsolescence, and considerable engineering effort is put into making it as difficult as possible to access critical components. It is a whole different world.

One day you will figure out what a bunch of con artist most management types are.

reply to post by poet1b


Yeah, but the path that Marx and Engels undertook did not account for human ambition and nature. Their whole reasoning was predicated on the idea that you could create a society that exists solely to feed itself off of itself, when that didn't work they began expanding into other countries, and the revolutionaries of the Americas adopted the same philosophy, but through subversion and overthrow. And now even Cuba admits that such a system was never meant to work, opting instead to begin creating new markets, and reducing the government workforce to free up resources with which to accomplish this.

I don't think you've ever read Mises and Hayek. They weren't revolutionaries, they weren't political zealots, they were men who understood that the very same principles that applies to all of natures systems applies to human systems as well, and should be regarded in the same light when discussing economic regulation. Adam Smith understood this as well. He believed the greed of a man would eventually be punished by loss in the market. You're right to say that he believed in the market entirely taking care of the most grievous of frauds-His mistake was not seeing that if the market is to be truly free, it requires impartial arbitration. That's where the government comes in, and such is written into the fabric of the Constitution and American jurisprudence.

Where regulation contrasts with the free market is when government assumes the role of ADMINISTRATOR of the market. It distorts prices through inflation, it distorts whole industries through mandates, it restricts personal economic freedom in favor of opening up markets for those who pay the most to keep the market cornered, creating monopolies. Regulation ceases to be regulation and morphs into arbitrary government, and eventually despotism, where the market serves only the oligarchy.

That's where we are today. When we have corporations writing the regulations that everyone but them is to follow, with the blessing of the overseeing agency, the deck becomes stacked against the small and mid size business owner, the average worker looking to gain more independence, and the average worker who depends on the stability of the business they work for for their livelihoods. The only people that gain are the people at the top who have gotten cozy with the regulatory agencies in charge of overseeing their corner of industry. The JP Morgans, B of A's, the Rockefeller's, the Wal-Marts. The point is, if the government is so big and uncontrollable it becomes malleable to interests who are very powerful. If we keep giving government more power, these interests will only seek more ways to co-opt that power..

Indeed, what we need is to reform government from top to bottom. We need government to be fair in it's regulation and arbitration in the market, we need government to respect the rights we're granted by our humanity, out creator. We need government that is responsible with the lives and money of the people. We don't have any of that right now. And so long as we maintain that status quo, the more we allow government to centralize wealth and power to distribute to their co-opting cohorts, the more and more suffering and injustice we will see.

reply to post by projectvxn


I don't have to read Mises, Hayek, Engel, or Marx to know that their ideology, while sounding good on paper and in a speech, are unrealistic ideals.

Yes I know about the numerous attempts to create communist style economies, and their numerous failures.

What I am wondering is how much damage will continue to be done to the great U.S. economy in the foolish attempt to create free markets.

Yes, market systems are self correcting, this I believe. The market system will return to a equivalency, but depending on how badly the markets have gotten out of balance, the return to equivalency can be extraordinarily economically destructive. The self correction will not be in a manner that punishes the guilty and evens up the balance of wealth, nor will the correction result in a functioning and balanced market.

Most importantly, the government that enforces laws of any nation is inherently tied to the functioning of the market within that nation, and this can not be separated.

We have corporations writing laws because the politicians who preach free market economics had those corporations write those laws. All these people out there protesting against government, upset that corporations wrote their own regulatory laws are the same people who voted those politicians in power. This is a huge disconnect with reality for these people to pretend they did not support that which created our current economic woes.

First of all, the term free market is an oxymoron. If it is free, it is not a market, and if it is a market, it is not free. People then say, but you are free to participate in the markets, But only as long as you have something to bargain with. The real truth is that you don't have any choice but to participate in the market system. Even in communist countries, people wound up bargaining for goods and services on the black market. Trading resources, human and natural, are implicit functions of human interaction.

Market systems are not necessarily efficient, and third world nations that take up most of the land mass on the planet are proof of that.

What makes market systems efficient and allow them to flourish?

Regulation by a strong democratic state, with degrees of socialism injected into the system. This is the proven formula throughout the first world.

An evenly enforced fair set of rules that creates competitive markets is what creates the efficiency and the prosperity.

Get rid of the rules or the enforcement of the rules, and the crooks take over, which is what has happened every time politicians have attempted to put in place a free market system. The reason they have failed every time is because free market ideology simply can not work. It is ideologically flawed. Given the opportunity, humans will inevitably take advantage of anything and everything they can, if they believe they can escape the consequences. That is what happens when free market ideologists eliminate the rules and the enforcement of the rules.

reply to post by DINSTAAR


Now that I have some more time.

So if the government gave me no choice in what I "got out of them", I would still have to foot the bill. That is like a murderer charging the victims family for the cost of the bullet.

What we do is make the murderer pay for his crime, either by a lifetime in prison, or execution. If the murderer has any wealth, that is also taken as restitution. However, most murderers have little or no wealth. What we wind up doing is all of us pay for law enforcement and incarceration in order to maintain law and order. In the old day, the town would put together a posse to chase down the suspected murderer after which he would be given a trial and hanged if found guilty. We spent a lot less on police and jails, but the system wasn't always exactly just.

The drug companies didn't ask to be regulated. You can't force a 'service' on someone and make them pay for it.

You mean like traffic laws, mandatory insurance, drug prohibition, building ordinances, health inspections, and the numerous other laws that regulate individuals? Funny how the people so much against the regulation of business are also the people who want to regulate individual behavior, even tell people what they can do with their wives in their own bedrooms.

Who should pay for these things, if not the people who purchase these products and services? The cost of regulating businesses who handle very hazardous material to prevent large scale pollution poisoning water supplies, land, and air; of regulating drug companies and food producers to prevent unscrupulous management from cutting corners to increase profits which leads to mistakes that cost 100s if not 1,000s of peoples live; of regulating nuclear power plants where mistakes could take out millions and turn large swaths of our country into uninhabitable zones, should be paid by the businesses who participate in these markets. The cost of regulating those businesses who should be regulated, should be a part of the cost of the products produced.

Maybe we should do it like the old days. If some drug company cuts corners to increase profits, and a bunch of people die, we get together a posse, round up the corporate executives, give them a fair trial followed by a first class hanging.

You lecture me on violence, but you support economic policies that lead to children dying of cancer because some local company poisoned the communities water supply, or sold poison as medicine or baby food. Let us not forget child labor, how humanitarian is that?

the system is as we know it has been corrupted by materialism and greed. the corporations are in bed with the government. it is coming to the point where we are no better than the communists we bad mouth at every turn. the elites in communism did it to the common man then, and the government and corporations are doing it to us now! think about these 2 recent developments, corporations announce 1.66 trillion dollar profits last financial quarter, government employees salaries keep going up w more and more government employees making over $100, 000. what does the common man get.......less hours less pay and less benefits not to mention all the jobs that have been cut or sent overseas. the corporations are making a killing while small business is getting killed. they are saving millions through cut labor costs because of technical upgrades i.e robots or machines are doing the jobs americans used to do, and jobs are being sent overseas. is this the future? the corporations making trillions profit while the rest of the world is either living on slave wages or a robot?