Wealth redistribution

Quote: AZDuffman

Romney took a bath on the issue because the media made a big deal of a true statement. Either side is going to get 45-47% of people no matter who they run. The bottom 45-47%, by coincidence, pay no or effectively no income tax.

If you think the entirity of the '47%' no income tax payers are democratic voters, then well, you still don't get it. Correlation is not causation.

Quote:

Sorry, but the Clintons, Gore, and Obama are far into the 1%. Heck, Clinton and Obama never stopped bragging about it. Yes, I just listed Democrats as liberals are the ones who have a problem with someone earning money. Please read my sig to see my position o the issue.

The 1% of the 1% is the statement I made. The top 1% of the 1% of top wealth -holders- (not income earners) are to the 99% of the 1% that the 1% are to the rest of the world's population. The appropriation of wealth into the hands of the few is the norm, historically.

Edit : to be perfectly clear... the US income taxation system is broken by too many tax breaks to the middle income earners. It's is a highly progressive taxation system, that doesn't need fixing by a flat tax (which is much the other way). I don't have a problem with a low tax rate being set for low earners.

Edit : Useful source for numbers of actual tax rates paid of various income sectors (rather than marginal rates) http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-individual-income-tax-data-0 - will try to find a summary for a different industrialized nation.

Quote: TheCesspit

If you think the entirity of the '47%' no income tax payers are democratic voters, then well, you still don't get it. Correlation is not causation.

I don't at all think that bottom 47% are all Democratic votes. However, I don't see the point of all this demonization of the 1% or 1% of 1% or whatever. What we have today is as if 1% of the population said they will buy 47% of the population a buffet dinner at Bellagio and the 47% complains because there are not enought chefs at the live-action stations and they have to wait.

Put another way, 1% of the population is pulling the cart with 52% walking beside it and 47% ridint in it yelling, "PULL FASTER YOU GREEDY SOBs!

Quote:

The 1% of the 1% is the statement I made. The top 1% of the 1% of top wealth -holders- (not income earners) are to the 99% of the 1% that the 1% are to the rest of the world's population. The appropriation of wealth into the hands of the few is the norm, historically.

The amount of wealth the 1% owns is irrelevant to me. It does not affect me. I hope they invest as much of it as possible in drilling for oil and gas, but other than that it hardly affects my life. The government stealing their wealth affects me only negatively (less money to drill) but indirectly. I really do not understand why a person thinks just because Mark Cuban has a Cadillac then they should get one too.

Quote:

Edit : to be perfectly clear... the US income taxation system is broken by too many tax breaks to the middle income earners. It's is a highly progressive taxation system, that doesn't need fixing by a flat tax (which is much the other way). I don't have a problem with a low tax rate being set for low earners.

The US Constitution should be changed to prohibit income taxes and go straight to a consumption tax. This way when the 1% buys all their stuff they can pay "their fair share" and everyone is equal in what they pay. At the same time, the 47% start pulling the cart and stop voting for Obamacare-style schemes when they realize free stuff isn't free.

Oh, so the US Constitution should be changed? Wow! I thought it was perfectly fair and democratic already and no need of change!

The amount of wealth in the hands of the 1% of the 1% may seem irrelevant to you... but it isn't. The power in the hands of the very few is something that will make your own personal, much loved liberty suffer as much as your worries over socialized health care.

Again, you fail to realize what '47%' actually means and who that is. Never mind, I don't need to convince you of anything.

Quote: TheCesspit

Oh, so the US Constitution should be changed? Wow! I thought it was perfectly fair and democratic already and no need of change!

Perhaps you need to remember Civics-101. The writers of the US Constitution knew changes would need to be made, that is why they had the amendment process. Heck, they knew as soon as it was written it needed to be changed, so they added the Bill of Rights.

I think you are confused. The Tea Party movement does not say we are not supposed to change the Constitution by amendment. We state that it is a contract and the meaning when it was written is them meaning you are supposed to use, you do not change the meaning to suit your needs at the time. IOW, It is not a "living, breathing document," but rather a contract between government and the people.

Quote:

The amount of wealth in the hands of the 1% of the 1% may seem irrelevant to you... but it isn't. The power in the hands of the very few is something that will make your own personal, much loved liberty suffer as much as your worries over socialized health care.

Again, you fail to realize what '47%' actually means and who that is. Never mind, I don't need to convince you of anything.

I realize who Romney meant by his comment, it is liberals and the media who do not get what it means as they took it as an offense. Funny how they have a cow over that but not over those of us "clinging to our guns and religion."

Or they take offense because they realize my comments about whining about the free buffet are really true? The amount of people in the USA who get upset when someone makes a profit on anything is scary.

Quote: AZDuffman

The amount of people in the USA who get upset when someone makes a profit on anything is scary.

Very scary.

Quote: chickenman

Very scary.

What is scary is I think the number is getting close to 30-35% with a few more being upset at "corporate profits." This segment of society thinks nobody deserves to make a profit on something people "need" and thinks too much profit is "unfair."

Sadly I feel it will only get worse.

Quote: AZDuffman

nobody deserves to make a profit on something people "need" and thinks too much profit is "unfair."
.

The Robber Barons in the 19th and early 20th century made
obscene profits, but they also supplied most of the industrial
jobs in the country. 1880-1920, one in five employed men worked
for a railroad. The rest made cars or furniture or steel or
worked some part of the economy controlled by about five
different men. People loved the jobs and even then, resented
the men who provided the jobs. Go figure.

Quote: jeopardy

$500

The condition where people think talking about problems is actually taking action on the problem.

Quote: AZDuffman

I realize who Romney meant by his comment, it is liberals and the media who do not get what it means as they took it as an offense. Funny how they have a cow over that but not over those of us "clinging to our guns and religion."

It's the continual way you use it as a short handed insult makes it clear what -you- mean by it.

Quote: TheCesspit

It's the continual way you use it as a short handed insult makes it clear what -you- mean by it.

Liberals want it to mean a certain thing so I accommodate them.