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.
I get it, too much freedom can be a bad thing. Some people are talented and some are not.
Some people are talented and lucky. Is that what you mean by the leftist term "income inequality"?
Life's a crap shoot and the less interference by government the better.
My wife and I played by the rules and did very well. You would likely consider me rich, and that's OK.
I recently retired so can now do whatever I want and no longer have to abide by the PC crap recently adopted by the corporate world.
In other words, I'm your worst nightmare!
You have to choose. Democracy or extreme inequality. You can brag about being rich, but you are not truly rich unless you buy politicians to get favorable laws passed. And the worse inequality gets, the less power you get as well, unless you are a billionaire (which I doubt).
This is question to libertarians and market fundamentalists: We know that income and wealth inequality will skyrocket by design under these type of policies. This is embraced as "fair" and "great" because the market is just super great. But who will write the patent laws, trade deals, anti-trust legislation and so much more in an economy where the ultra rich have so much wealth and power? Your answer is that if we just shrink the government everything will be fine, but who will write the patent laws, trade deals and anti-trust legislation? The ultra wealthy would basically have full control over this process and will steamroll over 99.99% of the population. What is so great about that?
What new patent laws do we need? Why can't a seller and a buyer determine their own deal? Why do we need more anti-trust legislation?
Patent laws and trade deals are two forms of regulation that "small government conservatives" have historically supported. They also happen to be two forms of regulation that benefit the wealthy. I'm sure that's just a coincidence.
How do patent laws specifically benefit the wealthy any more then the garage inventor? I'm really interested to see this because as far as I know patents are universal.
I get it, too much freedom can be a bad thing. Some people are talented and some are not.
Some people are talented and lucky. Is that what you mean by the leftist term "income inequality"?
Life's a crap shoot and the less interference by government the better.
My wife and I played by the rules and did very well. You would likely consider me rich, and that's OK.
I recently retired so can now do whatever I want and no longer have to abide by the PC crap recently adopted by the corporate world.
In other words, I'm your worst nightmare!
That was quick... I thought you didn't get.
So, here's a question: why do only the very rich have tax 'loopholes.' I put quotes around loophole because that word implies it's their by accident. It's not. But why? Why do only those people, who are often seen to be the ones buying politicians who make tax code, have this little benefit? Why don't the politicians who all seem to just love the **** out of the middle class not give these same magic tricks to those who's income in only about 60k?
Why are people like Donald Trump, who's most recent (and possibly only?) public record for his tax returns show he paid nothing in federal income tax (while he also says the super rich abuse tax loopholes to appease to his working class voters who don't like the current tax system, but whatever; Trump voters won't respond to that point so I won't bother spending time on it), while people like most Americans seem to have to pay all of their taxes? Rather or not you think wealth inequality is a problem, what about that seems just? You know, from the standpoint of freedom or whatever.
You have to choose. Democracy or extreme inequality. You can brag about being rich, but you are not truly rich unless you buy politicians to get favorable laws passed. And the worse inequality gets, the less power you get as well, unless you are a billionaire (which I doubt).
Democracy is mob rule. We are a Constitutional Republic where the Constitution protects the rights of the minority.
But in this case I choose freedom even if there is inequality in the outcome. In a society where everyone is equal, everyone is equally miserable.
And, this isn't a left/right thing. Both sides play this game and frame it so that the left/right populace divide grows, helping them retain power.
Do you deny that market fundamentalism leads to skyrocketing income and wealth inequality? Do you deny that wealth = power? Why would you support policies that leads to skyrocketing inequality and transfer of power into the hands of a tiny elite to steamroll over anyone else? Or do you think we dont need laws? Just saying "government is evil, everything will be fine if we shrink government" is a bad argument.
So, here's a question: why do only the very rich have tax 'loopholes.' I put quotes around loophole because that word implies it's their by accident. It's not. But why? Why do only those people, who are often seen to be the ones buying politicians who make tax code, have this little benefit? Why don't the politicians who all seem to just love the **** out of the middle class not give these same magic tricks to those who's income in only about 60k?
Why are people like Donald Trump, who's most recent (and possibly only?) public record for his tax returns show he paid nothing in federal income tax (while he also says the super rich abuse tax loopholes to appease to his working class voters who don't like the current tax system, but whatever; Trump voters won't respond to that point so I won't bother spending time on it), while people like most Americans seem to have to pay all of their taxes? Rather or not you think wealth inequality is a problem, what about that seems just? You know, from the standpoint of freedom or whatever.
I'd contend every property owner, parent, student loan debtor, etc... Has loopholes.
How do patent laws specifically benefit the wealthy any more then the garage inventor? I'm really interested to see this because as far as I know patents are universal.
Patents grant monopolies, which raise prices, and are thus anti-consumer.
This is how a drug in America will cost $25,000 while the same thing in India will cost $200
So, here's a question: why do only the very rich have tax 'loopholes.' I put quotes around loophole because that word implies it's their by accident. It's not. But why? Why do only those people, who are often seen to be the ones buying politicians who make tax code, have this little benefit? Why don't the politicians who all seem to just love the **** out of the middle class not give these same magic tricks to those who's income in only about 60k?
Why are people like Donald Trump, who's most recent (and possibly only?) public record for his tax returns show he paid nothing in federal income tax (while he also says the super rich abuse tax loopholes to appease to his working class voters who don't like the current tax system, but whatever; Trump voters won't respond to that point so I won't bother spending time on it), while people like most Americans seem to have to pay all of their taxes? Rather or not you think wealth inequality is a problem, what about that seems just? You know, from the standpoint of freedom or whatever.
Which side has consistently voted or pushed for a flat tax, which side is vehemently opposed to such a law? Why do people get a home tax credit, an EITC, and a child credit but single renters who make money will pay significantly more in taxes. It's not just a rich/poor thing. It's a tax code that was made with all sorts of carveouts to buy the VOTERS, rich and poor, because people in power want to remain in power. Any change to this is met with "taxing the poor" "regressive" and "wants poor single moms to pay the same rate as rich people".
Democracy is mob rule. We are a Constitutional Republic where the Constitution protects the rights of the minority.
But in this case I choose freedom even if there is inequality in the outcome. In a society where everyone is equal, everyone is equally miserable.
OK, so this is the "we are not a democracy, we are a republic" talking point I see from libertarians all over. Great. So I ask you, WHO will write the laws in your paradise where ultra rich is a protected aristocracy? Do you DENY that wealth=power?
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.
