Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What's this "we" nonsense coming out of your mouth? There's no such thing. There's you stealing candy & lead toys to kids, and then there's the rest of us who know what an honest living looks like.
You don't seem to know about the 49.5% of us that don't pay income taxes but do collect what amounts to a refund on the amount they did not pay in. I think that money is called "earned income". For years my income tax lady talked about earned income credit and I saw references to that on my forms when I signed them and never knew what it meant.
I have wondered if I couldn't collect some of that "earned income" because Social Security money isn't really very big. Of course, paying income tax as a couple keeps me from doing so or did till my wife retired. I keep wondering, now that the Dems plan to bring back the marriage penalty if we should remain married at our house. If it turns out that we are paying too much toward supporting that 49.5% we may well do just that. Well we can do that until somebody from the IRS finds out, anyway.
This logic should have been applied before we started nation-building Iraq and Afghanistan. One of my biggest issues with our government today is this wealth transfer. The magnitude and the purpose - how do we explain this to our descendents?
Well, I have to say this is your best post I've ever seen. This is precisely why I came to America and why I voted for Ron Paul last week. this used to be common sense, but many people have been brainwashed into thinking Big Daddy Government has to take care of them
You just forced me to read your posts more than once from now on. I have not agreed with much you say up to now but I sure see a lot of sense in what you say here. I even repped you.
1. Yes you can. Its directly tied to your second line. When corporations and people are paying less taxes or through subsidy, then the entire tax base must pay for that. You can legislate people out of poverty, its called education spending, and its actually proven to give the tax payer their highest rate of return on investment.
2. When one person has had the breaks of paying 15% taxes, then yes, they are getting an unfair advantage. The middle class tax payers are left with the bill for them, and the poor. The middle class gets screwed, no government assistance, and no tax breaks.
3. In a country where imminent domain is the rule of law, then everything belongs to the government first.
4. Yes, you can multiply wealth by dividing it. Haven't you heard of "diversifying your investments"? You never put your eggs in one basket. The more investment by more people, the more jobs are created. The situation we find ourselves in now is that a small group of people can invest, most people can not, and that cuts the wealth creation, not increasing it.
5. Who said that half the people don't have to work? I'd like to see where only 150 million Americans are working. Unemployment is less then 10%, and long term added to that is likely 15%. That means that around 85% of people are working.
1. I have to wonder how you see this since so many of our people don't pay any income tax at all and that is where we get most of what has to be redistributed.
2. I am sure that you know enough math to know that the people you cry about not paying actually pay a lot at 15%. Somehow I believe that those you are talking about get to pay much more than we do from our house at very close to the same rate. Are you getting most of that information from something like Media Matters or Think Progress? Maybe CAP? Maybe even the information center run by Cass Sunstein in the White HOuse?
3. Now I know how left leaners see who really owns things. Sad but true, but you do know better, I think. If not I have to feel sorry for you.
4. I am sorry to see someone like you use this argument about what wealth is and how it gets created or doesn't.
5. How many of those 49.5% of non-taxpayers actually work? Surely you know what that old saw applies to but if you don't then I do truthfully feel sorry for you.
It seems that there has been a very large turn around in you thinking the last few months. What has caused that?
I would say that these sentences need to be read and thought out by every voter in our nation at least once a day. Try them out for veracity.
These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read:
Unfortunately, most voters don't know this.
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them; and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
So we should cut social security, medicare and all those other government programs upon which you depend? Let me know, so I can be sure that I understand your position.
Can't legislate the poor into prosperity? That's odd, what about all of those studies out there on upward mobility? They show that the laws of other countries make upward mobility much easier than the United States. In fact, upward mobility in the United States, statistically speaking, is lower than a lot of countries with higher rates of taxation and social programs.
Your first 4 sentences are more or less all the same. Why use 4? In terms of your fifth, as I noted, you're one of the ones that my taxes take care of. Feel free to let me know by how much your benefits should be cut.
Quote:
The largest US export is money/inflation.
Other countries were doing the same. Did you study economics in college? Did you even get in? Unless you really understand a lot of Macro and know enough to persuade the overall economic community, you shouldn't be on this rampage about the fed. There's a reason why right wing nut jobs mumble about it but mainstream business leaders with MBA's, PhD's and a lot of experience don't. Guess who is right.
Quote:
I have wondered if I couldn't collect some of that "earned income" because Social Security money isn't really very big. Of course, paying income tax as a couple keeps me from doing so or did till my wife retired. I keep wondering, now that the Dems plan to bring back the marriage penalty if we should remain married at our house. If it turns out that we are paying too much toward supporting that 49.5% we may well do just that. Well we can do that until somebody from the IRS finds out, anyway.
Let us know first how much we should cut your benefits. Payments to seniors for social security and medicaid make up almost half of the federal budget. Let us know how much we should cut your money. Also, I'm curious why you don't make more posts advocating that your own benefits be cut.
I know someone who inherited a house 20 years ago and sold the house at the top of the bubble. Who worked for the money in the windfall?
The person who bought the house originally - isn't that obvious? The house was paid for by someone who earned money, saved it, and purchased the property. That person gave it to an heir - who as the owner reaped the appreciated value of the home. Liberals don't think about things like that - they think if someone inherited money - it is an ill-gotten gain - ignoring the fact that the money was originally earned through blood, sweat, and tears.
The person who bought the house originally - isn't that obvious? The house was paid for by someone who earned money, saved it, and purchased the property. That person gave it to an heir - who as the owner reaped the appreciated value of the home. Liberals don't think about things like that - they think if someone inherited money - it is an ill-gotten gain - ignoring the fact that the money was originally earned through blood, sweat, and tears.
The person who bought the house originally - isn't that obvious? The house was paid for by someone who earned money, saved it, and purchased the property. That person gave it to an heir - who as the owner reaped the appreciated value of the home. Liberals don't think about things like that - they think if someone inherited money - it is an ill-gotten gain - ignoring the fact that the money was originally earned through blood, sweat, and tears.
By slaves
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is precisely why I came to America and why I voted for Ron Paul last week. this used to be common sense, but many people have been brainwashed into thinking Big Daddy Government has to take care of them
