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.
Because they didn't do anything to increase the value of their skills. They chose to have kids, party, no sense of the value of money, some thinking money came in the form of a government handout all because they breath.
??? Childless adults who are poor don't get much in the way of government handouts.
We hear endless complaining from all the "progressives" and Left-leaners here that some "one per cent" -- sommewhere - is getting a disproportionaate share of the "nation's" wealth, and that it should e "redistributed".
I would love to hear some to these delusionists tell us all exactly how you would accomplish this.
To begin with, the Constitution doesn't permit seizure of the lawful property of an honest citizen without "due process of law". "Rule bythe peple" can't be allowed to degenerate into rule by the mob.
So we'll just tax those high incomes -- right?
Except that those who are self-employed, or have a share in a growing buisness (partnership, S-corp, etc) often can formulate strategies to drive the incomes of those enterprises down when taxes go up.
On the other hand, the guys anfd gals with mortgages and growing families usually have no choice but to give it everything they've got -- which puts them in a higher tax bracket where they have no choice but to pay a disproportionate share of the freight.
But what about Bill Gates, or Sergei Brin, or Jeff Bezos .... or so many of those "villains" on the Forbwes 400?
The wealth of a lot of these individuals is usually represented by the high value of common stock in an enterprise they created.Until they sell and actually realize any gain (and the value of that stock would drop considerably if the Lefties rattle thir sabers too loudly).
I fully understand that the American econmy is stagnant; that is mostly due to the fact that our real heavy industry can't compete in many global markets -- and that is due to the burden of too much regulatiory, environmental, and egalitarian dreams. We can afford the basics everyone agress upon, but there are limits.
so go ahead, you guys and gals over there on the left side of the aisle; tellus how you woulld "right" what you perceive to be a "wrong" without a field day for the shiftless and irresponsible who take advantage of what was intnded tfor the truly disadvantaged
Because what we've got right now clearly is not working.
What I am upset about are families like the Waltons who own Walmart who come in an destroy all other competition and then only hire part time employees and tell them to apply for foodstamps and Medicaid.
Another problem billionaire is the Koch brothers. They are buying the Republican party so they can pollute the environment and to make more billions at the cost of the tax payers.
So my problem is with the 0.01% of the very wealthy who hoard their money and do not put it back into the economy, it's the working class who keep the economy going. The greed of the megarich is a sickness.
I didn't say they are related, I said they are functionally equivalent.
What sort of nonsense is that? Functional equivalence is not a relationship? You are really backed into a corner on this one. Best to just walk away and pretend it never happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX
I've read the entire Constitution dozens of times. If you are advocating that the federal government should do everything that the Constitution explicitly authorizes it to do, and nothing more, then I'm totally on board. But I suspect that you take a very broad, "living breathing" interpretation of the Constitution.
Hilarious! It has never in the history of the republic been the case that a power had to be explicitly enumerated in the Constitution for it to exist. What is implied exists equally with what is enumerated. It is YOU and some unlearned extremist whackjobs that you likely admire who are completely out of step and touch with the actual law of the land. This latter-day right-wing Bizarro Constitution that you all love to rely on has no force and makes no sense at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX
Not significant at all. It did little to eliminate the bloat, waste, fraud, and abuse that have become institutionalized in the federal bureaucracy, and government is still exercising authority in many areas where such is not Constitutionally authorized.
Bloat, waste, fraud, and abuse! Bloat, waste, fraud, and abuse! Bloat, waste, fraud, and abuse!
-- Trained Seal
So many dog-and-pony-show demagogues have gotten themselves elected by promising to go to Washington and stamp out all this bloat, waste, fraud, and abuse that there isn't any of it left. The likes of Coburn and CAGW are down to claiming that things people at large simply don't understand must be examples of government waste. Studying the sex lives of zebra mussels? Putting shrimp on tiny little treadmills? Can you imagine? No, of course you can't imagine because you don't know anything about the facts behind such studies, and the the likes of Coburn and CGAW are not about to explain any of them to you. If what they report helps keep you angry or afraid and voting as you do, then they've accomplished all that they set out to do. There should really be a Special Victims Unit for people who actually fall for all this manipulative utter nonsense.
There are success stories to be sure... it's just the odds of leaving assistance behind is slim and it takes a special kind of fortitude to pull your way to independance... I can count the successes on one hand...
How many millions of fingers did you say you had? It is typical for people on welfare to get off again. Some do indeed return, but a theory that recipients are somehow sucked into becoming lifelong dependents is nothing but a line of manufactured right-wing garbage.
Nobody is arguing that a person doesn't have to eat. The fact that one must eat doesn't mean that one is legally compelled to purchase food, either at a grocery store or at a restaurant (some people grow gardens & crops, hunt, trap, and fish to survive).
You are being deliberately and rather extremely obtuse for the obvious purpose of avoiding the very simple facts. There is MORE of your dreaded "extortion" to be found in a grocery store checkout line than there is in the tax code. Taxes are meanwhile your share of the bill for public goods and services that were produced on your behalf. Taxes are a debt that you owe. Pay up.
What I am upset about are families like the Waltons who own Walmart who come in an destroy all other competition and then only hire part time employees and tell them to apply for foodstamps and Medicaid.
Another problem billionaire is the Koch brothers. They are buying the Republican party so they can pollute the environment and to make more billions at the cost of the tax payers.
So my problem is with the 0.01% of the very wealthy who hoard their money and do not put it back into the economy, it's the working class who keep the economy going. The greed of the megarich is a sickness.
So support a president who goes after the working class, the 1%, claiming they are the 0.01% because it's easier to chant. That's moronic and Obama loved it.
A bit of a confused rant there, not quite sure exactly what you're getting at apart from guessing based on your previous comment that you are asking about income and wealth inequality. I do think that there needs to be a shift away from Reaganomics, but it will need to be gradual, not sudden. A sudden tax increase will cause a lot of people to default on their debts (all kinds, credit card, student loan, auto loan, mortgage) and thus harm the economy.
Which is another reason to not change from the progressive income tax to a flat tax or consumption tax (national retail sales tax or Fair Tax.) We forget the working poor and middle class have effective tax rates below 17% right now (some would have an effective 10% tax increase) and have issues getting along as is. Add in that 10% and you will see them contribute less economically which shifts the economic burden on to the richer people. Think this isn't true, think for a second if your taxes went up in a similar effective rate, wouldn't you too have to cut spending (if only a little bit) if you had a higher tax burden?
You are being deliberately and rather extremely obtuse for the obvious purpose of avoiding the very simple facts. There is MORE of your dreaded "extortion" to be found in a grocery store checkout line than there is in the tax code. Taxes are meanwhile your share of the bill for public goods and services that were produced on your behalf. Taxes are a debt that you owe. Pay up.
Yea, as Barb thinks, we can't expect much from the poor for they are incapable, they can't even support themselves. Imagine that, grown human beings that can not do any more than a child who looks to mommy to feed him or her.
That would be true only if every individual/family/household consistently made wise financial choices.
Oh gee, it's another pointless platitude. To some, if it's not some lack of "personal responsibility", then it must be an example of "poor decision-making". So many questions, so few answers.
Poor people are poor not because they don't work, but because they are paid so little when they do. Those ultra-low wages serve to underwrite high corporate profits through a relationship known as "exploitation".
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.
