- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,389
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
wrong-as usual-but the left tends to be the parasites who are rich because of the government.
No disagreement here. Gotta love that military industrial complex that one Republican president warned us about. Funny though how your list is absent many of the right side parasites. I guess in your mind you can only be a parasite if you are on the left side of the spectrum.
wrong-as usual-but the left tends to be the parasites who are rich because of the government.
Businesses will grow where there is a market for their services. Someone will be there to take that plunge. The reason they are not growing is because there is less buying.
So how does this make her a parasite:
Narrative: Much of the Pelosi family wealth is held by her husband, Paul, including commercial property in San Francisco valued at $5 million to $25 million. He's also a limited partner in residential real estate in Sacramento, valued at $5 million to $25 million, and he is a limited partner in Sacramento Mountain Lions, a team in the United Football League, which is valued at $5 million to $25 million. He listed 20 separate transactions that involved investments in the league as well as the team. Those investments totalled between $2.6 million and $5.2 million. Major sources of income attributed to her husband include $1 million to $5 million in capital gains from the sale of stock in Apple Inc., and $100,000 to $1 million from an investment in a resort in Rutherford, California.
There is a simple explanation for a company or corp. that is doing well and not to be passing on the profits to employees or hiring for that matter.
In this economy with Obama at the helm the over whelming feeling is uncertainty and nothing kills business like the fear of an uncertain future.
If Obama hadn't lied so much and been so negative and wasted do much money we could have been on a real up swing last year.
I know more about how to run a business and I think it's transferable to being fiscally responsible in Government.
It worked well for me in City Government.
I guess you are ignorant of the sweet heart deal her real estate developer husband got
google pelosi and "sweet heart deals" and see what you come up with
Better yet, why don't you support your accusations?
Is it a fair wage for a fair days work, or is it stick it to the working man as much as you can? These are not new issues. There is a natural conflict between managment and labor. Both have self interest. And both have to know when they go too far.
However, it is clear that the trickle down effect many espouse is less certain than some proclaim.
The super rich of this country are not Americans. They belong to a very different international community and they have no loyalties to our country.
Can you elaborate on that and share your knowledge?
Let's cut to the chase. You want people here to live like they do in China, to work for the same wages, and in the same conditions, so that the private industries can increase their profits.
I gotta say, I'm surprised how many people still defend big business and their right to keep the lion's share of the pie. And if the workers don't like it they can - what? Move to another country? Is this just the way it's going to be? Is the American dream over? *unless of course you know how to be an internet marketer*
Trickle down economics won't work, as long as there is a government that is creating instability within the private sector.
Accordiing to Turtledude
The average man is not paying much in taxes and certainly is not paying their share of the federal government expenses in the US
The average man has no excuse in that case
I see no real evidence it works regardless of government.
You may look into the history of unions and why workers have had to organize in the first place. It wasn't because of government involvement.
That's exactly right. You're catching on.
The 'average man' isn't paying much in taxes because he isn't making very much money anymore because he no longer gets paid for his services what he was once paid.
The average family income for the bottom 90% (adjusted for inflation) is almost identical to what it was in 1980. For the top .01%, it has risen more than 5 times.
Work is no longer valued in this nation. That is why we tax income earned through work at a rate higher than we tax income gained by shuffling things around.
Articles like this expose the laughability of the claim that rich people shouldn't pay more in taxes because they would then be contributing an amount disproportional to the services they get. The entire system as it currently exists seems to benefit solely the rich.
Maybe compared to a third world African country.The people who aren't, "rich", and pay no taxes don't benefit from the current system?
Maybe compared to a third world African country.
Yeah, that sounds nice taken completely out of perspective.The top 5% of wage earners pay 95% of the taxes.
The top 5% of wage earners pay 95% of the taxes.
Then they should reduce all taxes to one dollar so the top wage earners only have to pay 95 cents. :roll:
What is this argument? Do you want the top wage earners to have more than one vote?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?