"America is falling out of love with billionaires, and it’s about time" -- LAT (free market, money)

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by Colorado^

This whole discussion could be avoided if we prevented simpletons from voting.

If your take more than you give to the federal government, you shouldn't have any right to vote.

I've held this viewpoint for a long time.

It doesn't make sense that anyone who is a negative contributor to the tax system then gets to vote how the tax money is spent.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by Colorado^

... If your take more than you give to the federal government, you shouldn't have any right to vote.

I am a US servicemember. I served 20 years on Active Duty. I am now in the 'Fleet Reserve', I get a monthly paycheck and I am obligated to respond if Congress ever orders us to war again.

My pay is low enough that I am not paying income taxes.

I certainly 'take' more from the government, than how much I 'pay' in taxes.

Should a career military member be allowed to vote?

Would it make any difference if I said I was disabled?

Would it make a difference if I was still on Active Duty?

[ringwise]

Originally Posted by Colorado^

This whole discussion could be avoided if we prevented simpletons from voting.

If your take more than you give to the federal government, you shouldn't have any right to vote.

America needs to make that change before the socialist turns us into Venezuela Mk II.

It's a "taxation without representation issue" really.

I have one vote. I pay taxes.

You have one vote. You do not pay taxes.

We both get one vote just for having a pulse.

That makes us equal in the "vote" department. But unequal in the "tax" department. Therefore I am taxed without representation.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by ShampooBanana

Spot on. A consumer driven economy only thrives as long as there are actual CONSUMERS. Crazy concept, isn't it? But erode enough of the wealth of the 90% leaving them with only enough money to cover the bare necessities, interest payments, and debt payoff, and that leaves little to be spent on produced goods outside of those few necessities. That's not helping the broader economy, really. It's also a big reason so many retailers have or are going out of business. All of the most vibrant economies in the world are that way because they have a strong and large middle class. You know a country that has sharp class distinctions with a few at the top and a lot of poor people at the bottom? South Africa. Not the safest country (almost all homes have barred windows and hardcore security) and it's economy isn't exactly setting the world on fire. That's where we've been heading and that's certainly not something to strive for.

Name some of the the countries that have both a larger middle class and a richer middle class.

Real incomes across all classes in The US are higher than just about anywhere save Norway, Switzerland etc. and those countries do not tolerate the kind of laziness and finger-pointing generated here. Restated many people in The US categorized as poor have higher real incomes than many middle class people in France, England, Italy, Australia and many others.

Anyone seriously complaining about the American economy needs to do two things. A). bone up on some economics/comparative analysis B). travel the world for a wake up call.

[Jobster]

Originally Posted by Submariner

I am a US servicemember. I served 20 years on Active Duty. I am now in the 'Fleet Reserve', I get a monthly paycheck and I am obligated to respond if Congress ever orders us to war again.

My pay is low enough that I am not paying income taxes.

I certainly 'take' more from the government, than how much I 'pay' in taxes.

Should a career military member be allowed to vote?

Would it make any difference if I said I was disabled?

Would it make a difference if I was still on Active Duty?

NO! You are banned!

Then when your children's labor is no longer necessary, we will take their right to vote as well!

Oh, unanticipated events left you without enough funds to pay your voting tax????

No right to vote for you!

[TaxPhd]

Originally Posted by Jobster

https://i.imgur.com/vHdrinZ.gif

Nice edit.

[Jobster]

Originally Posted by TaxPhd

Nice edit.

It's no less substantive than what was previously written. At least the edited response has a cartoon figure attached to it, so it's fun.

[Winterfall8324]

Originally Posted by TaxPhd

No one is "losing their soul" as a result of having a McMansion.

Strange that you don't want to apply the same silly metric to those who would kill the owner of the McMansion in order to take it.

Lol, the case is true for both. Money is the only thing of value in this country and everyone wants more.

That is the deepest pits of immorality, but it is mostly because the system requires people making money to operate (tax revenue, etc.)

[TaxPhd]

Originally Posted by Winterfall8324

Lol, the case is true for both. Money is the only thing of value in this country and everyone wants more.

I wondered how long it would take for you to show up and pollute this thread with ridiculous (an false ) notions.

Your claim is demonstrably false. People in this country value a wide variety of things. Money is simply one of many things included in that list.

Have fun posting hundreds of times that I am wrong, and that money is the only thing valued in this country. I look forward to the hilarity.

That is the deepest pits of immorality, but it is mostly because the system requires people making money to operate (tax revenue, etc.)

There is nothing immoral about valuing money.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by Winterfall8324

Lol, the case is true for both. Money is the only thing of value in this country and everyone wants more.

That is the deepest pits of immorality, but it is mostly because the system requires people making money to operate (tax revenue, etc.)

The problem is since the caveman era various societies have attempted no money economies and economies that reward everyone equally. There are just too many freeloaders in every group for that kind of thing to work well for long.