So rich going to have to accept less or have it taken from them?

a reply to: peter_kandra For most of my working life, I worked two jobs. Because even though I worked at a large corporation and made a high wage for the time, I was a single parent and wanted my children to have
good things, so I worked a full time job and a part time job. I managed to buy a home on my own without help from any
government program. It takes two incomes usually to raise children now, so don't have them if you can't afford to care
for them or unwilling to work enough to manage the burden.

I am sorry for those who can't work for one reason or another, but most people are guilty of ignoring the first rule of
holes: if you are in one, stop digging.

If governments didn't get in the way and weren't protecting the rich, you could just form a warband and raid them for it. Ahhh, the good ole days.

originally posted by: Konduit

So in your mind civilization hasn't advanced over the past 8000 years, and if you barely manage to scrape by and survive as a wage slave selling away the hours of your life, all is well because it's human nature?

Who let this sheep out of the pasteur?

Red herring much? Of course we have advance, not sure your point there. My life is great BTW I'm far from slaving away or barely getting by. We are all still surviving but in a different way, and so that part has not change though our lives are better. I do not think anywhere in my post I suggest anything you wrote about so once again what is your point?

originally posted by: Xeven
Draw it or have it drawn for you. It is coming, if you can't see it then your ignoring it cause your comfortable or stupid.

Who is going to draw the line then?

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
'the evil rich'.

There is no such thing as "the evil rich". That's just a stupid name the right wing has given to the wealthy because SOME people are asking them to pay their fair share. That doesn't make them "evil" any more than poor people are saintly.

This is so disingenuous. All Bernie and his supporters do is demonize the rich.

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
'the evil rich'.

There is no such thing as "the evil rich". That's just a stupid name the right wing has given to the wealthy because SOME people are asking them to pay their fair share. That doesn't make them "evil" any more than poor people are saintly.

This is so disingenuous. All Bernie and his supporters do is demonize the rich.

well there are certain problems that have persisted through out all of human history
the wealthy exploiting the poor has always been one of them

doesnt take much to demonize a concept that has repressed and destroyed since the dawn of human civilization (im sure they would have started earlier exploiting the dirt and rocks for cheap labor if such a thing were possible..... but no they had to wait for society to form to get that)

The fact is that they get all their wealth from us, and much of it is extorted or immorally gained, so they have no right to keep it IMO. Health Insurance companies denying coverage to people that paid for it is one example, or the whole pharmaceutical criminal industry is another that is in the news lately. Or how about companies that pay pennies for extracting resources on government lands, or sports stadiums that give owners all the profits and the fans just higher taxes?

The fact is they are criminals and they have been committing war against the rest of us for decades, so yes it's only fair that they have to pay now.

a reply to: TheBandit795

Where did I specifically say that I prefer those that don't target the rich?

You listed the taxes you object to.

Income taxes and property taxes also target the poor or middle class.

As is well known, income tax is normally scaled so that those in higher income ‘brackets’ pay a higher percentage. That is, they are skewed to fall more heavily on the rich.

And the more property you own, the more property tax you pay. Rich people tend to own more property than poor people.

I hate imposition of will. I hate when people force other people (rich or poor) to do things against their will.

Then why should the rest of society be forced to subsidize the rich?

a reply to: Astyanax

I repeat. I never specifically said I prefer taxes that don't target the rich.

And if you pay taxes based on your property, it means you've never even owned that property in the first place. Stop paying and the government either fines you or confiscates it. You cannot respect property rights if you have property taxes.

Exactly, why should the rest of society be forced to subsidize the rich? Let everyone earn their money honestly and not use government to force others to hand over money to them for their benefit.

a reply to: TheBandit795

I never specifically said I prefer taxes that don't target the rich.

Not need to. You already specified the taxes you object to. No wriggling out of it now.

And if you pay taxes based on your property, it means you've never even owned that property in the first place.

What nonsense. Ownership rights are recognized in law and are not affected by taxation. Does having to pay sales tax mean you don't own the things you buy?

Your position is unrealistic, childish and absurd.

a reply to: Xeven

Define rich. I sit comfortably with my pay for my services...should they be confiscated to supply those who are not "making it"? By the way, I am making barely median wages for my area...

a reply to: CB328

You got your way...Health Insurance companies by law, are to cover pre-existing conditions. Pharma I think I agree with you, but the cause we probably do not -- hint, I blame the Government for that one. Most of what you refer to is allowed by the Government via Governmental loop holes; tie those up. Let the free-market decide.

i'm sure the 1 percenters are already plotting their escape to a tax free haven somewhere in the caribbean. meh I think its all just doom and gloom, any real "socialist" change is not going to happen either way because sanders ideas will be fought all the way tooth and nail by the republicans just like they did to obama.

a reply to: Astyanax

Once again, you're putting words in my mouth.



Furthermore, you obviously don't understand what I'm talking about. So let me give an illustration from the following article.

You know, the annual tax you pay that is based not on whether any income was generated, but rather on the underlying value of real estate you supposedly “own.” There is no way to pay off this obligation in one fell swoop; it stays with you for as long as you “own” the property.

In actuality, you don’t own anything which you must pay property taxes on—you are merely renting it from the government.

Suppose you bought a sofa set and coffee table for your living room for $5,000 cash, and then had the obligation to pay $100—or a percentage of the furniture’s value—in tax each year for as long as you “owned” it. Then suppose that for whatever reason you’re unable or unwilling to pay your furniture’s property tax. It won’t take long for the government to swoop in and confiscate it to pay off your delinquent taxes. You get to “own” it as long as you pay the never-ending annual fee—stop paying and you’ll find out who really owns it.

www.internationalman.com...