- Joined
- Apr 14, 2008
- Messages
- 13,012
- Reaction score
- 5,741
- Location
- Huntsville, AL (USA)
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
It's here that I applaud you. It takes tons of courage, hours of sacrafice and lots of determination to change your life condition and move beyond it. It's like ending a trend of divorce or abusiveness as was your case within your family tree. At some point, somebody's got to recognize the merry-go-round aspect of your family dynamic and decide to make a change. So, I applaud you for being the first to see the need to do not only more but better for you and yours.I said nothing about everyone being born with the same opportunities. Point of fact many spoiled rich kids die from suicide because they also FAILED. They end up in rehab because rich mommy and daddy pampered them and then the real world kicked them right square in the mouth. Birth into a rich home is no predictor of success. Hard work is.
Im the first person in my family to graduate from high school. My father went through wives like babysitters. I never knew my mother. I went through multiple instances of abuse. Education was never stressed nor emphasized. I bounced around from home to home most of my early years. I wasnt what you would call primed for success. I vowed my family wouldnt go through that. I vowed my kids wouldnt. I worked my ass off 2 and 3 jobs AND went to school. I sat in night and weekend classes with others committed to changing their futures.
Do I believe it? Hell yes. I lived it and I see others living it daily.
It's here where you lost some brownie points. My post wasn't about blaming anyone for my shortcomings whatever they may be by any means nor was I complaining about my status in life. I was merely acknowledging (or rather reminding some) that not everyone starts off with, has access to or are fortunate enough to have the same opportunities at success as others. To ignore that is just plain foolish.You fail...blame yourself. Period. Quit whining and bitching about how unfair life is and CHANGE YOURS...stop being so damn pathetic and envious of others.
It's here that I applaud you. It takes tons of courage, hours of sacrafice and lots of determination to change your life condition and move beyond it. It's like ending a trend of divorce or abusiveness as was your case within your family tree. At some point, somebody's got to recognize the merry-go-round aspect of your family dynamic and decide to make a change. So, I applaud you for being the first to see the need to do not only more but better for you and yours.
It's here where you lost some brownie points. My post wasn't about blaming anyone for my shortcomings whatever they may be by any means nor was I complaining about my status in life. I was merely acknowledging (or a reminding some) that not everyone starts off with, has access to or are fortunate enough to have the same opportunities at success as others. To ignore that is just plain foolish.
I'm a long way from being rich monetarily, but I love my life and work hard just like everyone else to ensure my family is well provided for. I don't envy others for what they've achieved. I celebrate it and wish them the best. Would I like to live a more comfortable lifestyle where I never have to worry about how my bills would be paid or where my next meal would come from should illness befall me or I should loss my job? Of course! Who wouldn't!! But I'm a long way from complaining about my life or my status in it. If I gave you that impression, you misunderstood me entirely.
Those with the ability have the oppurtunity.
Unless, of course, the government over-regulates that oppurtunity out of existance.
I disagree. As VanceMack even points out even those who are capable and have opportunities placed at their feet don't take advantage of them and fall short. Therefore, I would revised your statement to read:
Those with the ability, access to information and know when the opportunity presents itself and are willing to take advantage of same are provided an avenue to success.
The government rights the rules that the private sector and state-government must follow. In most cases, the fed sets minimum standards. It's up to the states to adhere to those "minimum" standards or raise the bar and develop programs whereby their residents can get off that merry-go-round of welfare-state dependency. People keep looking at the federal government the wrong way, IMO. It's not the feds fault that a state offers welfare to a young mom with 5 kids and doesn't provide a way for her to get off the cycle of state-sponsored dependency. Educate the young mother. Give her access to meaningful job/skills training that she can put to use. Place limits on what state services she can obtain. Until states start taking steps to manage their federally sponsored programs better and enact rules that halt the "revolving door of welfare privilege", the cycle of dysfunctionality will never cease.
I don't blame the government for establishing meaningful social services programs. I blame the states for mismanaging them.
Providing this government...democrats, republicans, and this president access to more taxpayer dollars will translate to one thing...more spending. Thats simply fact. You give them more they will spend more...not less. You cannot possibly say it WOULDN'T increase deficit spending because that calls for you to make the assumption they wouldn't just spend more and more recklessly. And based on their current track record...you REALLY want to bank on that?
i cannot see the logic in going deeper into debt to pay for tax breaks for billionaires. so, explain why doing so is a prudent action of government
"The repeal -- I don't care if it is 5 percent -- that's 5 percent that would create a job," he told Obama during a meeting with about 70 people in a couple's back yard in Des Moines.
"Five percent on millions of dollars of profit creates many jobs . . . As the government gets more and more involved in business and more and more involved in taxes, what you're finding is you're strangling those job-creation vehicles."
Before Greenspon could complete his question, his microphone was cut off and taken out of his hand.
But because he files taxes as a Subchapter S corporation, all his company's earnings are calculated as personal income.
Iowa businessman tells Obama repealing Bush tax cuts would be a jobs-killer - NYPOST.com
i cannot see the logic in going deeper into debt to pay for tax breaks for billionaires. so, explain why doing so is a prudent action of government
We arent discussing going deeper in debt to pay for ANYONES tax breaks. The conservatives (and at least 47 democrats) haver recognized that allowing the wealthy to keep MORE of THEIR wealth puts more money in the markets and encourages economic growth.
You REALLY want to tell me the answer to a government that has already spent 14 trilllion MORE than what they have taken in in taxes is to give them ACCESS to MORE? You HONESTLY believe they would use that money to pay down debt or suddenly display fiuscal responsibility?
Perhaps you should read the article, before you post it.
You are adding three plus truck and getting a total of ostrich. No one can set UNREALISTIC goals and expect them to acheive them. Woody Allen cant be Michael Jordan. However there are any number of smaller players that have acheived success in the NBA. If THAT is his goal all he has to do is WORK at it. He could have been Woody Allen, NBA great alongside smaller players like Nate Tiny Archibald, SPudd Webb, J Will, John Starkes, John Stockton, and any number of great smaller point gurads and shooters.
HARD WORK equals SUCCESS. Excuses GUARANTEES failure. Theres the stink of a whole lot of failure going around.
math is your friend. use it
every dollar in tax breaks given to the billionaires is another dollar which will need to be borrowed (probably from the chinese - only to be paid back by our children)
so pick your poison, either give the billionaires tax breaks or tax them equitably and diminish the amount of deficit borrowing
only one of those choices is fiscally responsible. from your posts i don't think you will be able to distinguish which one that is
The hell of it is that the rich will never be taxed equally because they can afford the services of people who spend all day, every day looking for ways to shelter the assets of those said rich, and no law that could ever be passed would prevent that from happening.I would like to see the libs get their dream come true and have "the rich" be taxed equitably. They would **** their pants screaming and crying. "the rich" already pay a greater % of their income in taxes than do any other group. what the hell is "equitable" about that?
I just wish for once the libtards would be honest and admit that what they really want is for "the rich" to be taxed punitively
The hell of it is that the rich will never be taxed equally because they can afford the services of people who spend all day, every day looking for ways to shelter the assets of those said rich, and no law that could ever be passed would prevent that from happening.
Common sense is your friend, use it.
If you don't have the money to spend, then don't borrow it so you can.
The hell of it is that the rich will never be taxed equally because they can afford the services of people who spend all day, every day looking for ways to shelter the assets of those said rich, and no law that could ever be passed would prevent that from happening.
so, if we do not have the money to spend and we recognize we cannot afford to give billionaires tax breaks - unless we borrow the money necessary to offset those tax concessions - then it makes no sense to offer up those tax breaks. that assumes we do want to be fiscally responsible, and not just talk about it
do the math. see for yourself
and yet they somehow still pay more $$$ in taxes than everyone else combined.
Running a government is like running a business. If your business revenues $1,000, you can't turn around and spend $2,000 and expect to stay in business. There is the option of raising the price per unit on your product, to meet the $1,000 deficit you've created, but the danger of that is, you may price yourself out of business, creating an even bigger deficit, or having to declare bankruptcy and close the doors all together.
Like I say, common sense.
thanks for your example. let's examine it
let's let the revenues be $1,000 as you have expressed
and recognize that $2,000 will be spent
unless this is an infrequent, short term abberation, then the entity is destined for its demise due to the recurring deficit spending
but a smart business owner shows up and recognizes the $1,000 in revenues has resulted because the market price of $2,000 has not been charged for the goods/services provided. and now turns the company around by charging the true value that is due
$2,000 revenues results, offset by the same $2,000 expenses. the business remains solvent
in this example, the new, savvy business owner recognized that there was no need to discount the billionaire buyers because he was in no position to do so
again, thanks for your example
math is your friend. use it
every dollar in tax breaks given to the billionaires is another dollar which will need to be borrowed (probably from the chinese - only to be paid back by our children)
so pick your poison, either give the billionaires tax breaks or tax them equitably and diminish the amount of deficit borrowing
only one of those choices is fiscally responsible. from your posts i don't think you will be able to distinguish which one that is
Nothing about this resembles how an economy works, so I'm not sure what relevance it has.
Census finds record gap between rich and poor
Even if the release of this was timed, it's still relevant to the midterms and taxes.
Now is not the time to give an additional tax break to the wealthy and super-wealthy.
I agree, the example has nothing to do with economics. Its about the distribution of our income and taxes. All I did was explain the chart. I hear this "Redistribution of wealth" comment tossed around. For the last 10 years we have had just that. But it looks like the haves are getting more and the have nots are getting less. Most people I know work very hard. To say they are lazy or dont work hard for what they get is just WRONG.
Solution?so it is to be expected that the rich get richer as the years go by. So tell me Ender, what is your solution?
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?