- Joined
- May 28, 2011
- Messages
- 13,813
- Reaction score
- 2,233
- Location
- Huntsville, AL
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
What do you think anyone can do to prevent the entire system from crashing? What will we call what comes after the experiment in self government has failed?I'd say it means that Americans are waking up to the fact that, since they actually like a lot of what the government does, they may actually have to pony up for it.
I have seen this somewhere before...let me see...who wrote that down..From each according to his abilities...oh yeah...Radical Karl...See, what you miss in your "fairness" analysis is that a middle class person who pays at a 17% rate is actually being taxed at close to 100% of his DISPOSABLE income, whereas a rich person being taxed at a 22% rate is being taxed at 22% of HIS disposable income. Does that seem fair?
Disposable income leaves too much to the imagination. Income is the key. Income period. When you take more % wise from a person it does become unfair. That is a penalty for being successful. Its discrimination. Treating a person of a certain class differently. Every person should be responsible for themselves. If they want more money, they need to earn more money. Not continually try to take money from those that do. All things equal, that is fair. Divisions amongst different groups of people is not.
Disposable income leaves too much to the imagination.
Hardly. Disposable income is what you have after you pay for basic food, shelter, transportation, and health care.
I suggest you give this a read. It's pretty revealing: Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power
Some of the highlights:
* The top 5% of income earners control 62% of the country's net wealth;
* The bottom 80% of income earners control only 15% of the country's net wealth;
* The top 5% control 72% of the country's financial wealth;
* The top 10% control virtually all of the financial wealth;
* The top 1% control 43% of the financial wealth;
So, why do the wealthy pay so much in taxes? A: because they have all the money.
And you know what? If you're carrying around a suitcase loaded up with gold bars, don't expect people to feel sorry for you because your suitcase is so heavy.
Does the fact that someone else has more than you inhibit your ability to gain success like them?
J-mac
* The top 5% of income earners control 62% of the country's net wealth;
* The bottom 80% of income earners control only 15% of the country's net wealth;
* The top 5% control 72% of the country's financial wealth;
* The top 10% control virtually all of the financial wealth;
* The top 1% control 43% of the financial wealth;
So, why do the wealthy pay so much in taxes? A: because they have all the money.
And you know what? If you're carrying around a suitcase loaded up with gold bars, don't expect people to feel sorry for you because your suitcase is so heavy.
Does the fact that someone else has more than you inhibit your ability to gain success like them?
J-mac
Have you ever stopped to consider why any of this is? Because I seriously doubt it. So many people are very upset about these numbers and never look at why. Instead they whine and cry and throw little hissy fits about the facts. The top 5% control the countries wealth right? Why not focus on the other 95% (or more) who are lining up the give the top 5% even more money? These guys are rich because they have hundreds of millions of people who can't throw money at them fast enough. 95% of the population or more who are upset about these discrepancies are sitting back waiting for the government to force these guys to stop making money. Rather than do anything themselves like people should be doing they are going to keep crying and whining and all the time they are doing that they continue to throw money at these people they supposedly don't like. How can you blame the rich for accepting the money you cant stop yourself from giving them?
But aside from that, this isn't about BLAMING anyone. It is, once again, a pragmatic argument. We ned to collect more revenue. The best place to look for it is the place where all the money is.
I might buy into the bolded part of your statement if it also contained a statement of cutting waste. My personal view is not to throw more money at a group (Congress) who seems to be bent on funding every little request. Cutting loopholes, pork barrell projects, is a place to start. Congress needs to let the taxpayer know what it wants to fund within a balanced budget under current tax structure. Then tell us what more they would like to do and the costs. Then hold them to it.
Wow, what an elitist attitude! 95% of Americans are lazy slackers who just aren't trying to get ahead! Amazing that you have so little regard for your fellow countrymen.
But aside from that, this isn't about BLAMING anyone. It is, once again, a pragmatic argument. We ned to collect more revenue. The best place to look for it is the place where all the money is.
It is about blaming. How do I have so little regard for my countrymen? Because I think if they want change they should do it themselves rather than just whine and cry? Did you not read what I wrote or do you just not understand it? To simplify that for you, if you don't like a few people controlling the money, give your money to more people.
Ok, so are you saying that people should be limited as to the wealth, or the rate at which they can amass said wealth?
Why?
j-mac
I do think you miss his point.
But let me ask you this. If the game is set to help those withmore the most, and it is with corporate welfare and other perks, and this leads to a small percentage having most everything, do the odds increase that you'll likely reach the top or decrease?
No, sorry, it is not about blaming. I'm not making a value judgment about the rich or poor. I'm simply pointing out the if you want to collect more revenue, the best place to look is the place where you will find the money.
Because the middle-class did. Let me ask you this. Why do you think it is fair for the middle-class rate's to not fluctuate accordingly (either up or down) as it does with the top 1%?
Since 2001, the average tax rate has fallen from 4.09 percent to 2.99 percent for the bottom 50 percent of tax returns and has fallen from 28.20 percent to 21.46 percent for the top 0.1 percent and 27.5 percent to 22.45 percent for the top 1 percent. TAXFOUNDATION
In order to make this statement true from you, then you'd have to be looking at incomes in the middle class as a whole. The only way you are arriving at your class war mantra is to take individual incomes as a percentage compared to other individuals and what they make. That is dishonest, and wrong.
j-mac
Could you restate that in English?
Simple...You could take 100% of the wealthy you've declared have "too much" and it wouldn't matter at all.
j-mac
Well, I never said that anyone had "too much", but if you took 100% of the assets of the wealthy it would obviously take care of the deficit immediately. If you take just the top 400 Americans you would net $1.4 trillion.
All of the wealth, that means everything they have, all for one damned year of deficit? Wow, great plan.....Here is a hint for you, It isn't your money!!! This country has topped $15 Trillion in debt! And Obama's responsible for a third of that in just three years! pathetic. You libs are just too much!
j-mac
Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably - 2012 Decoded
Does this mean the revolution will be called off?
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?