Wealth redistribution

Page 3 of 5<12345>
June 28th, 2014 at 9:36:19 AM permalink
boymimbo
Member since: Mar 25, 2013
Threads: 5
Posts: 732
It's okay that he says it that way. It's a Romney comment -- he lost the election -- and all it reminds me of is one of the reasons why the GOP lost.

Generalizing the left vs right by making the comparison of Democrat voters to non-contributing scum just polarizes the populace more, especially to the actual Democrats who work and pay taxes for a living (and there actually is alot of those) just infuriates them and minimizes the chance that working Democrats, who actually have a brain and pay taxes, might think about swinging their vote over to the other side.

Let the GOP and the Tea Party continue to fracture the right. At least you'll both go down swinging.

There are plenty of conservatives who are poor and receive handouts too.
June 28th, 2014 at 10:36:28 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18136
Quote: boymimbo

Generalizing the left vs right by making the comparison of Democrat voters to non-contributing scum just polarizes the populace more, especially to the actual Democrats who work and pay taxes for a living (and there actually is alot of those) just infuriates them and minimizes the chance that working Democrats, who actually have a brain and pay taxes, might think about swinging their vote over to the other side.


Funny how we don't hear the same thing about working Republicans who get upset about being told they are clinging to their guns and religion. And that was said out in the open. But take a Romney comment and change what he meant by it and it is the end of the GOP.

One side brags about women getting government help from birth to death, one side brags about giving away handouts, that side wins.

America lost.
The President is a fink.
June 28th, 2014 at 11:39:00 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 188
Posts: 18633
The guardian has compiled Romney videos, of his comment, and his further explanations.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2012/oct/05/romney-47-percent-remarks-history-video


I'm kinda of interested in Duffman's definition of stealing. According to him (if I understand) the poor are stealing. Yet, I'm pretty sure if my neighbor (who has a job) robs me while I'm not home, that is stealing.

Because basically if someone takes money from you and you have a right to it, it is stealing. Not just the poor. Tax breaks could be stealing if I don't get them.

If you believe in taxes at all, you ARE a wealth redistributor. You are voting for elected reps who help form the laws that say how the money for taxes is divided up. Currently we excuse those at the bottom.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
June 28th, 2014 at 12:00:03 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18136
Quote: rxwine

I'm kinda of interested in Duffman's definition of stealing. According to him (if I understand) the poor are stealing. Yet, I'm pretty sure if my neighbor (who has a job) robs me while I'm not home, that is stealing.


Sure.

Taxes are theft. They are tribute, no different than when a guy opens a bar and is "advised" he needs to join the "neighborhood association" and take a few vending machines into his business. You pay taxes because the alternative is worse.

The poor are indeed indirectly stealing. Welfare is theft. "Free health care" is theft. Food stamps are theft. Anything you take from another person without their consent is theft.

Tax breaks are not theft. When you keep what you produced it is not theft. How could anyone think otherwise?


I estimate 50% of what the government does could be handled privately. At the county level we probably need one, central place to keep track of land, birth, and death records. But do we really need a county dept of weights and measures? Schools positively can and should be privatized. Meat and other food inspections would better be private. On and on item by item.

Just because people are voting themselves money from the Treasury does not give them a right to it.
The President is a fink.
June 28th, 2014 at 2:24:18 PM permalink
Face
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 61
Posts: 3941
Quote: AZDuffman

I estimate 50% of what the government does could be handled privately.


Or done away with entirely. I suspect the "done away with" column exceeds 50% of current.
Be bold and risk defeat, or be cautious and encourage it.
June 29th, 2014 at 6:00:52 AM permalink
RonC
Member since: Nov 7, 2012
Threads: 8
Posts: 2452
The whole 47% thing was a huge mistake on Romney's part and keeping it alive in any form helps the left more than the right. There are too many people riding the wagon and not enough pulling it, but lumping the riders into a group helps them gain power against other groups by galvanizing them as a group.

The 47% included a whole lot of people that pay taxes (payroll and others) and most, if not all of them, pay the government in sales taxes and other things...so they do feel a tax burden and are not "living for free"; we should want them to move up the chain and pay more (in dollars, not necessarily in percentages) in taxes as they do so.

Since tax breaks given to individuals and corporations that generate the desired economic result are not considered "evil" by either side (though they will harp against ones championed by the other side), why don't we review all tax breaks at that level (ones that the wealthy get) and make more of them related to how much money they make and keep in the United States. Perhaps a little bit of strategic isolationism will combat the issue of not manufacturing enough "things" here in country. Make it more profitable to produce things here and more will be produced here.

There are a lot of pieces to the puzzle because we also need to push towards importing less from countries that allow their workers to be exploited because sending our money there does not help those workers (they never see it) and it props up governments with our money. The tax breaks could also focus on sending money (in the form of trade) to countries who support us as opposed to ones who don't. We have seen that the whole "be friends with everyone" thing does not work; they need to understand that with our friendship comes responsibility for your actions.

Of course, allowing unfettered immigration from countries that do not allow us to do the same thing us more harmful to the poor than anyone cares to admit--more people competing for the bottom tier of jobs and willing to work for less is not a good solution. Raising the minimum wage will not work; people with low skills will still be at the lowest wage and there will be even less incentive to raise their salaries if they are inflated artificially.

This requires thought, leadership, a sense of country over party, etc. These are all things I am not sure that many of our current "leaders" can even think of...they are too busy staking out their claims...
June 29th, 2014 at 6:36:01 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18136
Quote: RonC

Since tax breaks given to individuals and corporations that generate the desired economic result are not considered "evil" by either side (though they will harp against ones championed by the other side), why don't we review all tax breaks at that level (ones that the wealthy get) and make more of them related to how much money they make and keep in the United States. Perhaps a little bit of strategic isolationism will combat the issue of not manufacturing enough "things" here in country. Make it more profitable to produce things here and more will be produced here.

There are a lot of pieces to the puzzle because we also need to push towards importing less from countries that allow their workers to be exploited because sending our money there does not help those workers (they never see it) and it props up governments with our money. The tax breaks could also focus on sending money (in the form of trade) to countries who support us as opposed to ones who don't. We have seen that the whole "be friends with everyone" thing does not work; they need to understand that with our friendship comes responsibility for your actions.


Instead of trying to give tax breaks for behavior we want the better thing to do is lower all income taxes, possibly to the point of a national sales tax. 47% are not paying anything, and the number 47% is just coincedental to Romney stating that 47% is near the Democrat base.

Of course, allowing unfettered immigration from countries that do not allow us to do the same thing us more harmful to the poor than anyone cares to admit--more people competing for the bottom tier of jobs and willing to work for less is not a good solution. Raising the minimum wage will not work; people with low skills will still be at the lowest wage and there will be even less incentive to raise their salaries if they are inflated artificially.


It takes about $385K to make the top 1% that the 47% supposedly hate more than life itself. That is not the income level where you are moving money overseas. Actually more and more overseas banks say that Americans need not open an account.

A dirty little truth is it is not "the top 1%" who are responsible for offshoring of American jobs. It is a combination of things. It is Mr and Mrs 47% who want to pay low prices for made-in-china junk at Wal-Mart instead of buying a higher quality good. It is the Obama administration who is determined to skyrocket electricity costs due to a claim of global-warming, and suing Boeing for OPENING A PLANT IN THE USA! It is the UAW who sikes GM at one plant bottleneck, shutting production everywhere. It is people who say, "I don't want that kind of plant in my state, it's DIRTY!"

Until the USD finally gives up the ghost and is no longer accepted as fast as we can print them, until then manufacturing is not coming back onshore.

Quote:
This requires thought, leadership, a sense of country over party, etc. These are all things I am not sure that many of our current "leaders" can even think of...they are too busy staking out their claims...


With so much of the population caring more about silliness than what is important it will never end.
The President is a fink.
June 29th, 2014 at 9:05:18 AM permalink
RonC
Member since: Nov 7, 2012
Threads: 8
Posts: 2452
AZ, you simply don't get it. Saying the 47% number is near the 47% of the Democrat base is a good way to make sure no one listens to your argument. Once no one is listening, and I recognize that only a few ever really listen to both sides, you can say a whole bunch of great things and have no impact...
June 29th, 2014 at 9:42:17 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18136
Quote: RonC
AZ, you simply don't get it. Saying the 47% number is near the 47% of the Democrat base is a good way to make sure no one listens to your argument. Once no one is listening, and I recognize that only a few ever really listen to both sides, you can say a whole bunch of great things and have no impact...


I think of it as reverse psychology. "If you want to be in the 47% who take more than they contribute, vote Democrat."
The President is a fink.
June 29th, 2014 at 10:53:02 AM permalink
RonC
Member since: Nov 7, 2012
Threads: 8
Posts: 2452
Every time you say "47%" you are defeating your own purpose.

Every time you figure out how to get someone to open a plant, you are helping your purpose move forward.

Not all in the 47% are Democrats nor are they totally "takers"--if Republicans give them an avenue out, they'll move to our side. It won't take a swing of 47% to change things, 5%-10% is enough...

Democrats like victims.

Republicans using the 47% percent are acting like them and demonizing people.

Neither is good.
Page 3 of 5<12345>