Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-16-2012, 09:34 PM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,057,820 times
Reputation: 10270

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMOREBOY View Post
Okay this one of those issues where I'm both conservative and liberal.
If your a 1% it all depends on how you receive income; I say if your a 1% with a business that hires 99% then you should not have to be responsible for the "recipient class" since you actually hire them and you may even deserve a tax break if you hire more people. But if your a 1% doctor, lawyer or whomever doesn't hire 99% then yes you should take some responsibility for the recipient class since your only taking money from 99% most likely, your taxes should be higher for sure.
Nah.

One's income comes from their value to the market.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-16-2012, 09:40 PM
 
3,353 posts, read 6,443,006 times
Reputation: 1128
So what do you propose in order for the recipient class to stop feeding off the 1%? I mean lets be honest, most of the 1% wouldn't be where they are today without the 99%. Us 99% expect trickle down economics if we are going to support you by purchasing your services. I promised myself if and when I become a 1% I'm not going to be "greedy" but I'm not going to be a sucker either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2012, 09:43 PM
 
Location: Hinckley Ohio
6,721 posts, read 5,203,749 times
Reputation: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
We constitutional conservatives rely on the actual document.

Lefties rely on "case law".
No, a small segment of America, mostly nut cases rely on the document alone. The rest of America, the right minded ones, rely on and live by that case law you hate. Fact is that is how the law works, always has always will. If you lived in the real world with the rest of us you'd know that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2012, 09:45 PM
 
Location: Hinckley Ohio
6,721 posts, read 5,203,749 times
Reputation: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Nice straw man argument.
The response of someone sinking in quicksand of their own making, you self made man you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2012, 09:49 PM
 
Location: Hinckley Ohio
6,721 posts, read 5,203,749 times
Reputation: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
But they don't have the right to MY land, labor and capital.
Bull, if you don't pay your taxes they can, AND WILL, tale everything. Ask Willy or Wesley.

Last edited by buzzards27; 03-16-2012 at 10:16 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2012, 10:02 PM
 
3,852 posts, read 4,521,429 times
Reputation: 4516
Keep things as they are, and the recipient class will be lopping off your heads in town square like it's Paris in 1794.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,982 posts, read 22,163,168 times
Reputation: 13808
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
They paid the money back with interest. It was a money maker for the US Government. That benefits me. It would benefit you too if you lived in the US.
Yes, we were all tickled pink that after we lost our 401Ks that at least the some of the major players for us losing all that wealth, got all their money back. F&F we other major players in our economic disaster, and we are also thrilled to see billions of dollars going to them, again, and again, and....

The Bank Bailout's Ugly Stepsister: Fannie Mae Still Losing Billions - Forbes

Fannie Mae reported the latest of those Wednesday, booking a $16.9 billion 2011 loss capped off by the loss of $2.4 billion in the fourth quarter.


Fannie Mae asks U.S. for $4.6 billion after 4th-quarter loss - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-fannie-earns-20120229,0,2206301.story - broken link)

Taxpayers have spent more than $150 billion to prop up Fannie and Freddie, the most expensive bailout of the 2008 financial crisis. The government estimates that figure could top $259 billion to support the companies through 2014 after subtracting dividend payments.

Fannie has received more than $116 billion so far from the Treasury Department, the most expensive bailout of a single company.


It is very instructive isn't it, to learn that private banks and financial institutions "paid the money back with interest" but the entity backed by the US federal government is losing money hand over fist, and will never pay us back? Proof once again that the more involved government tries to become in the operations and actions of the private business sector, the more they **** it up.

Last edited by Wapasha; 03-17-2012 at 10:59 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 11:52 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,716,559 times
Reputation: 22474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Interlude View Post
Keep things as they are, and the recipient class will be lopping off your heads in town square like it's Paris in 1794.
Yes because the recipient class has no self-control or sense of responsibility and are outbreeding the productive class. In many parts of the country, the welfare class already has more births than the working taxpaying class.

I live in a border town and it's amazing how in some grocery stores, they almost don't know how to deal with non-food stamp and WIC food purchases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 01:53 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,469,142 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Nah.

One's income comes from their value to the market.

Hmmm...I had a job where two dozen employees were paid within 25 cents of minimum wage. Total payroll under $400K (my estimate, can't be significantly higher given wages noted above).

Our employer spent 1/4 of the year (2-4 weeks at a time) globetrotting and netted $3M per year.

So the value to the market of two dozen people was chump change, whiule our employer's value to the market was $3M?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 02:03 PM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,446 posts, read 16,190,050 times
Reputation: 6963
Military contranctors are in the recipient group...and they're doing great!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:40 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top