Why do people believe in redistrubution of wealth and more taxes for the rich?

Originally posted by kirkulator
reply to post by Klassified

 

can i ask how you think the national government would fund all of the things it does for the American people without taxation?

just curious. not really sure by what you mean when you say it could fund it all on 'good business practices' alone.

Good question.

The government isn't supposed to be doing all those "things it does for the American people". (Which should read, things it does for itself to maintain the welfare and nanny state.)

The government was supposed to support itself with tarriffs, sales taxes, and corporate taxing(within reason).
The government is supposed to insure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for the American people. It isn't to tax the income of the people nor their property.

And, our government is supposed to made up of American people in public service to the American people. We are their employers. Not the other way around.

You can learn a lot more from researching how the founding fathers originally intended the Fed to work, than I can go into here.

reply to post by Honor93


When your property tax revenue goes away or is hindered someone's gotta lose their job in order to close the gap.

Originally posted by Xtrozero
1 million in 1980s dollars is the same as 2 million today so that increase is normal with inflation...

I don't see anything really damning about the charts.

I'm sorry I should have made this clearer...

This chart is adjusted for inflation.

Now taking that under consideration, this chart should be VERY disturbing to you.

reply to post by ThreeThreeThree

Why should someone pay more taxes because they make more? Just because they make more? That is not an incentive to invest in small business opportunities that create more jobs for those that have less money. If you want to make more money- go make it yourself. So many leeches in this country.

For the past couple decades, all the money from the tax breaks the wealthy have enjoyed has either sat in a bank or been used to build factories in low wage countries. The whole tax breaks create jobs mantra is a MYTH. If it wasn't, the thirty or so years of this fairy tale your ilk has been marketing should have created a country awash in jobs, Strangely enough, we have something approaching a 19 percent UNEMPLOYMENT rate.And beyond that, where is it written in stone that the idea that institutionalized greed should ever be acceptable?If ten people work at a company, and each worker creates 150000 dollars worth of wealth,ie profit after cost, why should one person be able to decide what share of that wealth they keep? Why should he just arbitrarily decide to keep an obscenely unfair portion for himself and give the workers the least he can get away with? Why should that one guy be able to keep 90 percent of the wealth from the labor of those workers and give them the crumbs? How do you justify that? Companies should benefit EVERYONE who works for them, not just the ones at the top.You want to make money, what makes you think those who labor for your profits don't? People should ALWAYS be paid a living wage. The smart companies do this, the shortsighted train wrecks that make one guy filthy rich and eventually throws all the workers who helped get him there to the street take your route.You can sugar coat it any way you want but its simply naked greed and exploitation that you espouse. People sell their labor to you and you want to give them nothing and yourself everything. That is what has created the mess and the inequity of wealth we see now. Your whole "go make your own money rationalization is pure BS. How many workers make enough money to do that when they are being paid 8 dollars an hour and it takes every penny they make just to TRY to survive? How can anyone be able to save money when no one pays a living wage any more? I implore you, please keep spouting your nonsense. I hope millions of you spout this nonsense. I will give you this, people are STUPID for submitting to such a lousy arrangement. I think they accept it mostly because the labor market is price fixed and they dont have much in the way of choices. Maybe if people start to realize this they will pool their limited resources and start co-ops and employee owned businesses and people who think like yourself will find themselves with no one left willing to be exploited

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by Honor93

 

When your property tax revenue goes away or is hindered someone's gotta lose their job in order to close the gap.

so, where does "tax breaks for the rich" enter the equation?
that is where you began ...

Police officers, firefighters, civil service workers are being laid off in record numbers due to the rich getting their tax breaks. How is this right?

emphasis mine

i didn't present property tax revenue as "tax breaks the rich get" ... why are you?

how is losing a job or suffering a decrease in property tax revenue "due to the rich getting their tax breaks"? which "tax breaks" do you think apply in either situation?

reply to post by Honor93


Because end the tax breaks and city budgets wouldn't be stretched so thin whereas they must pick and choose who gets paid today.

Furlough days would not be needed if they were paying their fair share.

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by Xtrozero
1 million in 1980s dollars is the same as 2 million today so that increase is normal with inflation...

I don't see anything really damning about the charts.

I'm sorry I should have made this clearer...

This chart is adjusted for inflation.

Now taking that under consideration, this chart should be VERY disturbing to you.

somethings wrong withyour percentage charts it equals 101%

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

I paid 32k in federal taxes last year and I kind of personally feel that anyone who paid less doesn't have a leg to stand on to say I should pay more. IMHO

Say what??? You paid 32k in taxes? News Flash --- that is more than the min wage worker EARNS...even someone earning $12/hour doesn't make $32k in INCOME!!

A leg to stand on??

Like I said before. You need to zip it.

You are right that is a lot of money and it doesn't come out of my beer fund. It hurts a good deal. Yes, I don't eat cup-of-soup nor do I live in a 1 bedroom apt, but you make my point in you don't care what I pay and maybe I should pay more in your eyes and others, but from my point of veiw it sucks when so many pay nothing but need to still comment.

Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by ThreeThreeThree

 

Why should someone pay more taxes because they make more? Just because they make more? That is not an incentive to invest in small business opportunities that create more jobs for those that have less money. If you want to make more money- go make it yourself. So many leeches in this country.

If ten people work at a company, and each worker creates 150000 dollars worth of wealth, why should one person be able to decide what share of that wealth they keep? Why should he just arbitrarily decide to keep an obscenely unfair portion for himself and give the workers the least he can get away with? Why should that one guy be able to keep 90 percent of the wealth from the labor of those workers and give them the crumbs? How do you justify that? Companies should benefit EVERYONE who works for them, not just the pricks at the top. You can sugar coat it any way you want but its simply naked greed and exploitation that you espouse. People sell their labor to you and you want to give them nothing and yourself everything. That is what has created the mess and the inequity of wealth we see now. Your whole "go make your own money rationalization is pure BS. How many workers make enough money to do that when they are being paid 8 dollars an hour and it takes every penny they make just to TRY to survive? How can anyone be able to save money when no one pays a living wage any more? I implore you, please keep spouting your nonsense. I hope millions of you spout this nonsense. Then maybe enough people will band together to start hundreds and thousands co-ops and employee owned companies and you will end up with no one to exploit.

edit on 19-10-2011 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)

are you joking ???
which employer creates "wealth" ????
i've never met any of those. some that create cash, plenty that manufacture product, lots that provide services but create "wealth" ... ooohhhh, you must be talking about those multi-level-marketing dealios that only create wealth for the top tier (kinda like their own 1%ers) -- ever notice how even they get rich based on what YOU buy? same principles, different package.

90% profit in legal business dealings ... you're not a businessperson are you?
in one word ---> overhead

if you don't understand that operating expenses, insurance, shipping, processing, manufacturing, marketing and all the products that go into each are ALSO purchased with that 90% 'profit', then it is no wonder you think as you do.

and as for the "value of the contracted employee" ... this is why unions came to be
yes, safety was an "issue" but the necessity arose from the INABILITY of the workers to negotiate their contracts, themselves.

in the beginning, unions did many good things to improve workplace conditions, benefit packages, wages, harassment, employer abuse ... lots of good things but again, that was then and this is now and all they do now is pollute every industry of which they're affiliated.
pick one ... education, transportation, logistics, medicine, construction, service, lobbyists ... there are plenty in need of reform from the union influence.

and with this ...

Then maybe enough people will band together to start hundreds and thousands co-ops and employee owned companies

we kinda almost agree ... only once upon a time, they were called "states".

wow, really?

profit

Definition
The positive gain from an investment or business operation after subtracting for all expenses. opposite of loss.

there ya go, that may help ya out. Since when do businesses create wealth? They create employment opportunities, goods and services. You do realize that every business has liabilities right? Well, see you take the gross revenues, subtract ALL operating costs such as payroll, utilities, supplies, office supplies, taxes, regulation fees, disposal fees, excise taxes, legal fees, business licenses, permits, property taxes, payroll taxes, machinery expenses, employee benefits, maintenance, research and development, expansion, construction (if any) etc etc, the list goes on and on. You subtract ALL of that from your gross revenues and there you have the net revenue or profit.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by Honor93

 

Because end the tax breaks and city budgets wouldn't be stretched so thin whereas they must pick and choose who gets paid today.

Furlough days would not be needed if they were paying their fair share.

and, yet again you are trying to make a hodgepodge out of two different revenue streams, entirely.
tax breaks the rich enjoy do NOT apply to civil projects ... never has and really shouldn't.

tax breaks corporations abuse is another story entirely.
if you want to talk details, be happy to but if you're gonna mix it all in one pot and claim "oh, that's toxic" ... i won't argue cause you're right, but, the fact is ... it's "toxic" because we're lumping it all together, all the time.

that is exactly how SS got raped repeatedly ... that is exactly why bridges and roads are failing ... that is exactly why we are in this mess in the US.

city budgets are stretched thin for a variety of reasons in EACH location.
some are similar, some are not but it has nothing to do with "tax breaks the rich get".

in my area, i can point fingers to the double-dippers, excessive medical fraud, useless union activity, public apathy, slanted law enforcement, excessive regulations, pompous inhabitants, all kinds of things ... reduced home ownership, folks like Madoff, drugs, pill mills, educational cuts, illegal immigrants, outsourcing and even 4 major sports groups who could do much more for their host community but for whatever reason, do not.

what do furlough days have to do with either revenue stream?
if you are furloughed, you are not producing any revenue so how does that apply?

reply to post by Honor93



I noticed you were pretty selective in your response. Do you think the tax breaks of the past 30 years have created jobs? Do you think the average CEO should make 600 times the income of the average worker? You are right about one thing, employers dont create wealth, their WORKERS create the profits which is wealth. We pay the bills and the fat cats count the bills.

Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by Honor93

 

I noticed you were pretty selective in your response. Do you think the tax breaks of the past 30 years have created jobs? Do you think the average CEO should make 600 times the income of the average worker? You are right about one thing, employers dont create wealth, their WORKERS create the profits which is wealth. We pay the bills and the fat cats count the bills.

selective ?? how?
which tax breaks over the last 30 yrs, there have been MANY ... some have, some haven't, care to be specific?
it is not my concern what other CEOs make, that is their decision and their contracted agreement.
do you have a problem with it?
if so, then don't shop there ...spend your $$ elsewhere.
since YOU are the consumer, guess what ??? you have that choice.

do i think the above is a righteous and moral choice, (600 times the income of the average worker) no, i don't but that is merely an opinion.

reply to post by openminded2011

i just couldn't let this one go by unaddressed ...

You are right about one thing, employers dont create wealth, their WORKERS create the profits which is wealth.

employers create opportunities, employees create a "product" which is then marketed to us ... YOU have the final say in the matter, exercise it.

Watch this video and listen to what he says pay attention the solyndra rule and if you still want to raise taxes and redistribute the wealth then honestly your hopeless.

hey openminded...have you ever read the communist manifesto? seems like it's on your top 5 all time favs list. What is up with all the people regurgitating all the karl marx teachings lately and trying to say they are not socialists or communists? You want to be in a marx type society, move to China or North korea.

reply to post by SM2


So now fairness in wages= Marxism. Standard winger response, when people ask for social justice, label them Marxists or socialists. What do you prefer, feudalism? Fascism maybe? Corporations are socialists,they privatize the profits and socialize the losses. Tell me this, when Bush bailed out the banks with public money, isn't that socialism? When a small ruling class pays little or no taxes and all tax revenues come off the backs of working people, isn't that exactly what the communists did? What is that, the PLANTATION OWNER MODEL? Why are all rich people such freeloaders? They get a HUGE share of the society's assets, they our use our roads airports and ports to build their financial empires, payed for with the taxes of working people, but they don't want to give anything back. They want all the benefits of the infrastructure of our society, paid for by tax payers, but they don't want to contribute to that infrastructure. THAT is BS. Call me what you want but 99 percent of the country disagrees with you. What we used to call democracy you call socialism. What playbook do you use, Mein Kampf? I am not a communist. I have spoken out against communism in several of my posts. I all I am stating is people should get a fair wage for a fair days work. I want a capitalist system, but one that is regulated against lawbreaking and one that is fair to workers. And one that allows for the common good. like Denmark or Switzerland. These are two countries I am sure you would label socialist, but they have BETTER standards of living for their people than we do.Their people haven't become serfs yet. I don't think a historical reference to Karl Marx is helpful in this instance. But the one to Marie Antoinette works pretty well. PS if you want to live in a society with a ruling oligarchy and no rights for workers or the common people, try Mexico.

reply to post by openminded2011


Keep a couple things in mind, Obama also bailed out the banks. The reason the working class pays more into taxes is because there are more of them than there are the 1%. I agree that greed is what has gotten us here. However, it is not totally the fault of WS. It is your elected officials. If you want to change things, try electing new blood. Try buying your products from businesses who do not exploit their workers. It really is quite a simple solution. Tired of our jobs going to China? Quit buying at Walmart. Quit buying products made outside of the US. If you only buy American made, guess what, there is no demand for the other products so the stores will start carrying more of the Made in the USA products.

Blaming WS or the banks is a cop out. You and I are to blame. We wanted the latest gadgets and toys so we bought what was cheap so we could have it now. Guess what? That was a made in China or Taiwan product. So before you cast stones, you better check your own house as it may very well be made of glass.

Originally posted by ChesterJohn

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by Xtrozero
1 million in 1980s dollars is the same as 2 million today so that increase is normal with inflation...

I don't see anything really damning about the charts.

I'm sorry I should have made this clearer...

This chart is adjusted for inflation.

Now taking that under consideration, this chart should be VERY disturbing to you.

somethings wrong withyour percentage charts it equals 101%

There isn't anything wrong with the graph...

Except that it reveals the plutocracy has thrived while the economy gets worse.

The answer is theyre too lazy to find work and expect someone else to pay them for NOTHING