- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,389
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Well you've heard the saying that "socialism is great until you run out of other people's money".
Well, I don't know about you, but I really need 5 lamborghinis and a private jet. I mean, that's just the bare necessities, you know? How are you supposed to survive without that kind of stuff?
Not only do you (again) misinterpret what has been said, you simultaneously assert that anyone who is poor or less wealthy is so probably because of their own mismanagement and fault.
Thank you for demonstrating just how deluded and sociopathic you are on this matter.
Taxing the wealthy a greater percentage WILL help alleviate the problem. (note: no one is arguing for 70+% or anything extreme like how taxes were in the 40's and 50's.)
Correct. This thread discusses only ONE ASPECT OF NEEDED REFORM. I and Sam agree that reform on government efficiency and spending reductions are also needed but dishonest debaters bring them up as red herrings to distract people from discussing tax reform on the wealthy.
however, to claim there is a moral imperative for the rich to pay more is fraudulent
And of course YOU would be king of the world and determine where necessity ends and discretionary begins. Hehehe, what a joke.
Yes because you, nor Sam, has presented any evidence to the contrary.
Not even close. But continue with your sociopathic rationalizations if it makes you feel better.Your position is at the very least, equal to mine.
yet another red herring and strawman.By doing what?
Does it change the behavior of those with no assets to get them to have assets?
I suppose you'd like evidence to prove that water is wet and the pope is catholic too.
Sorry but its nothing less than dumb to assert that most people are poor or lack wealth because they must be mismanaging their money. At the very most i could understand the position that most non-wealthy people lack wealth because they dont save enough. But your assertion is just an embaressment to yourself. One that even if proven absolutely wrong i dont see you backing down from.
When the median salary in the US is around $32k and the living wage required for a family of two adults and one child is somewhere around $40k, then its no surprise that most Americans lack any significant wealth.
But even if we dont go into the details of statistics your assertion is still laudable. Most US jobs pay wages that barely support a decent standard of living unless you are single without children. You would have us believe that anyone working these average American jobs mismanages their money and are entirely to blame because they arent pulling in a CEOs, engineering, or doctors wage.
Sam pegs your response to a 'T':
And lurking at the bottom of this morass one finds flagrantly irrational ideas about the human condition. Many of my critics pretend that they have been entirely self-made. They seem to feel responsible for their intellectual gifts, for their freedom from injury and disease, and for the fact that they were born at a specific moment in history. Many appear to have absolutely no awareness of how lucky one must be to succeed at anything in life, no matter how hard one works. One must be lucky to be able to work. One must be lucky to be intelligent, to not have cerebral palsy, or to not have been bankrupted in middle age by the mortal illness of a spouse. Many of us have been extraordinarily lucky—and we did not earn it. Many good people have been extraordinarily unlucky—and they did not deserve it. And yet I get the distinct sense that if I asked some of my readers why they weren’t born with club feet, or orphaned before the age of five, they would not hesitate to take credit for these accomplishments.
Not even close. But continue with your sociopathic rationalizations if it makes you feel better.
yet another red herring and strawman.
I ahree that having the rich and ultra rich pay fair taxes does not make the middle and lower class more wealthy. But thats entirely irrelevant to this discussion.
This discussion is about solving the budget crisis so the government can continue to offer necessary services and programs for its citizens. Nothing about wealth redistribution whatsoever.
Please list your approximate monthly expenses for your family for the following:I speak from experience.
My income (family income) for the past 4 years has been roughly $25k a year, yet I support a family of 4, have savings and investments, just bought a house and for some crazy reason I should believe that clap trap that the living wage is $32k.
Your coworkers mismanage their income so everyone else most likely is too. :roll:You want to know the most striking difference between me and my coworkers who have a similar income?
They grossly mismanage their money.
Each person expresses different behaviors in regards to their finances,
you'll likely find that people with low amounts of assets, treat their money with an emotional, not logical process
Then why bring up how much in assets people have?
Luck is a fantasy,
Please list your approximate monthly expenses for your family for the following:
1 Food - Approximately $100-120 per week
2 child care - $0
3 medical (insurance and any reoccuring expenses)- $21.53 per week Med, $4.43 per week Dental
4 housing/rent- $467.36 PITI
5 transporation (car loan + gas + repairs + registration, etc)- Gas per week is approximately $30-40, I just bought new tires with the rebate it comes to $250, registration was $60 this year, I do my own oil changes which usually comes to around $30 but I do buy the premium oil.
What state do you live in? Georgia
If you are going to advertize yourself as a poster child then prove it. Otherwise i think you are lying or grossly misrepresenting.
Your coworkers mismanage their income so everyone else most likely is too. :roll:
I agree.
Even if they did (which i am not conceding) they still have to be making a high enough income to even invest. Saving a couple hundred a month isn't going to pay for retirement. Only a new fridge, car replacement, and rainy day fund.
Because it demonstrates the rich and ultra wealthy are in the best position financially and ethically to pay a greater percentage without adversely effecting their life and finances as compared to others.
:roll: of course.
You werent lucky to be:
1 born intelligent
2 in this country
3 in this time period
4 without cerebral palsy
5 without downs syndrome
6 not orphaned before the age of five
You werent lucky to not have been bankrupted or unemployed by mortal illness of yourself or spouse.
Harry Guerilla succedded and avoided all these pitfalls on his own merit, skill, and talent. :roll:
As requested in bold.
Monthly Expenses | Guerrilla | Standard of living | Notes |
food | $440 | $450 | 450 sounds reasonable if you make all your meals at home and buy in bulk. |
childcare | $0 | $200 | $10/day * 20 days a month |
medical | $100 | $200 | for a family of 2 or more, its at LEAST $200 a month for complete coverage. I pay $282 for myself and wife from a company with outstanding benefits. I don't know how you only pay $100/month for 3-4 people. |
mortgage | $470 | $800 | Low end rental rates are about $800 for 2-3 bedroom. Purchasing a home today even with low interest rates still puts you above $800/month not including insurance, PMI, repairs, etc (150k house, 5.5% rate, 30 years). So i think at LEAST $800 is a more reasonable number for the average American. |
transport | $71 | $318 | $50 to fill tank and fill 2.5 times per month = $150 Registration = $60/12month=$5/month. Car insurance minimum coverage $1/day → $30/month Car payments = $5000 vehicle with 5 year loan at 0% APR = $83/month Assume about $50/month for repairs/oil change/maintenance/tires/etc |
other | $60 | Other: toiletries, clothes, shoes, phone, tv/internet | |
utils | $200 | electricity, gas, trash/sewer, water, prop taxes, home owners/renters insurance | |
Monthly total | $1,081 | $2,228 | |
Yearly total | $12,970 | $26,736 |
If I'm the Queen of England.... you get the picture.If they are a verifiable example of the American public, the problems are of their own doing.
What type of rate and return are you anticipating exactly?A couple hundred a month certainly can pay for retirement, compounding interest and a dedicated savings plan would see to that.
Members of a society both reaps rewards and share the burden of consequences. Everyone is responsible for their fair share, rich or poor.Ethically, it is wrong to make people pay for damages they did not incur.
How does that have anything to with your LUCK being:I take care of a family member that was born with a life long physical disability, that was shuffled around to different family members because their parents did not want the responsibility.
Luck has nothing to do with it.
Nope, I had help from others, but my response to those events was the make or break moment, of whether or not, I succeed or fail.
scourge99 said:How many Republicans who have vowed not to raise taxes on billionaires would want to live in a country with a trillionaire and 30 percent unemployment? If the answer is “none”—and it really must be—then everyone is in favor of “wealth redistribution.”
I think Mr. Harris far underestimates the committment to ideology among some republicans. While attending a conference in Tulsa, Oklahoma for two weeks, I asked almost this very question to many of the local attendees (most of whom worked in higher education, I might add, so presumably these were among the more liberal people to be found there). I didn't keep track of numbers, but the vast majority said not only yes, but hell yes, they'd rather see that than any higher taxation on the wealthy. There were a few who answered differently. But not many.
Anyway, I find the article almost spot on. Most of the wealthy did not really earn their wealth, and none who did any earning earned it all on their own. Wealth is a product of society as a whole first, and only of individuals as a distant second.
the lengths people go through to justify confiscating wealth they had nothing to do with creating.
turtledude said:the lengths people go through to justify confiscating wealth they had nothing to do with creating.
fredmertz said:If I make widgets and sell 5 million a year at a $1 profit each, it was my innovation and work that created the products. Sure, I needed to hire people to help make the products, but the people hired had agreements with me as to exactly what that help was worth and there was mutual consent between us.
The bolded bit is false, because you're leaving something out. Adam Smith, and most of the other classical economists, recognized this, and it ought to be plain as day. Once all land (including, I suppose, the "virtual land" of other means of production) is owned, the people who are in the position of "making widgets" have the power to compel the nature and terms of that agreement.
People claim society is repsonsible (sic) for the success. I find that idea disgusting. I just don't understand...
If I make widgets and sell 5 million a year at a $1 profit each, it was my innovation and work that created the products. Sure, I needed to hire people to help make the products, but the people hired had agreements with me as to exactly what that help was worth and there was mutual consent between us. Sure, I needed people to buy the product, but I also had agreements with in terms of the worth of the benefit of each product to each consumer and so they paid a price for the product. In each arrangement, it is a win/win situation - mutuall (sic) beneficial and mutual consent. The workers don't get more money because I make more money. Their worth is determined seperately (sic) based on what others are willing to work for and what I'm willing to pay. The customers don't get my money because they found it beneficial to buy my product. I don't understand what debt I owe to any part of society... Could someone explain this to me? How is wealth a product of society and not an individual? Because society didn't prevent me from earning wealth? So a person who runs a marathon should thank me for not tripping him?
View attachment 67116010
That's what responsibility is all about. I hope this has cleared things up for you.
warren is just another pimple on the ass of capitalism
Call me crazy, but I'm going with Yes.... Obviously.
As long as gov't is so damn expensive we HAVE to go where the money is for new revenue... and with a trillion-plus in debt, somethings got to give somewhere.
View attachment 67116010
That's what responsibility is all about. I hope this has cleared things up for you.
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?