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.
Please produce at least one link where a self proclaimed liberal(s) proclaim they live to take from others. Otherwise how about you shut your generalizing mouth because obviously you are blinded by your own bias.
More amusingly, you are no different than the liberals you bash. You generalize them, they do the same with you. No better than them.
Taking from the productive, and giving it to the non-productive trough-sloppers, in exchange, of course, for the support of the trough-sloppers, is the heart and much of the soul of the Progressive Movement.
And, BTW, I'll never shut my mouth just because somebody with a vested interest in trough-slopping says so.
The top 1% pays 36.73% of the federal income tax revenue. Show me which 1% within the middle class pays 36.73% of the federal income tax revenue. They don't. Plain and simple.
You're kind of missing the point.... The top 1% pay more taxes because they can. Taxes disproportionately hurt the lower and middle class more since they earn less. It is simple math. We could tax the poor more, but then they would require a greater safety net.... So it just doesn't make sense.
The way you throw around the phrase "capital gains and stock options" as if they are similar things suggests you don't actually understand what they are or how they work. Do you know what capital gains actually are? These are gains from invested money. People put their money at risk when they buy stock in a company. The company exists and operates with the money provided by investors. If the company does well, the value of the stock goes up and the investors profit. If the company doesn't do so well, those investors lose their money. You complain here that the rich benefited because of record earnings by corporations. But a few post ago you pointed out that Wall St. collapsed. Who lost the most in that collapse? I'll give you a hint; it's the same people who benefit the most in a bull market. Decide which side of the equation you want to complain about.
People like him complain that there is an equation, with money attached that they don't work hard enough to get much of, in the first place. They have no concept of risk-taking with the fruits of one's labors in an attempt to make more money, to build prosperity and security in old age.
All they know is that some people are better off than hey are, and they can't stand it, and by "some", I mean "most".
Is that a joke? This ENTIRE thread is LOADED with liberals INSISTING they have the right to TAKE from others.
Thats not what i asked nor what you said. You said they lived for it, now they are just insistent. Its alright, you are engaging in silly, ignorant hyperbole and got caught... Unless you can provide that link about them living for it.
Taking from the productive, and giving it to the non-productive trough-sloppers, in exchange, of course, for the support of the trough-sloppers, is the heart and much of the soul of the Progressive Movement.
And, BTW, I'll never shut my mouth just because somebody with a vested interest in trough-slopping says so.
So you can't provide a link either eh? Not too surprising. Oh and love the new termed you coined, "non productive trough sloppers". At least your consistent with the level of woeful ignorance and hate.
You're kind of missing the point.... The top 1% pay more taxes because they can. Taxes disproportionately hurt the lower and middle class more since they earn less. It is simple math. We could tax the poor more, but then they would require a greater safety net.... So it just doesn't make sense.
What does "can" have to do with it? Answer, nothing, or it shouldn't in a moral world. Should YOU have to pay more for your next 12-pack of Old English just because you CAN pay more, or pay more than someone else?
You act if there should be no sting to being poor. Well there should be a sting to it - it should hurt like hell, because that is just about the only thing that will motivate them to better themselves, and their lot-in-life. Take out the pain, and what's the point of trying harder? You aren't, in the main, dealing with the cream-of-the-crop, self-starters, self-motivated people when you deal with the poor. They need a boot in the ass to get them in gear so that they too contribute not only to their own existence and future, but to the nation as well. I'd rather put $100K as risk for a venture somebody has to make a new product, or service etc., that will or might make America better, than give a poor person, in effect,, his next pack of smokes, or fotty of Malt Liquor.
So you can't provide a link either eh? Not too surprising. Oh and love the new termed you coined, "non productive trough sloppers". At least your consistent with the level of woeful ignorance and hate.
Provide your own damn link. I don't owe you a link.
The facts are what they are, without your approval, satisfaction, agreement or whatever. Your ignorance of those facts, real or feigned, makes zero difference.
What does "can" have to do with it? Answer, nothing, or it shouldn't in a moral world. Should YOU have to pay more for your next 12-pack of Old English just because you CAN pay more, or pay more than someone else?
I'll let you try again. Hopefully, you'll come up with a better analogy to taxing income than old english... but maybe thats the best you can do.
Quote:
You act if there should be no sting to being poor. Well there should be a sting to it - it should hurt like hell, because that is just about the only thing that will motivate them to better themselves, and their lot-in-life. Take out the pain, and what's the point of trying harder? You aren't, in the main, dealing with the cream-of-the-crop, self-starters, self-motivated people when you deal with the poor. They need a boot in the ass to get them in gear so that they too contribute not only to their own existence and future, but to the nation as well. I'd rather put $100K as risk for a venture somebody has to make a new product, or service etc., that will or might make America better, than give a poor person, in effect,, his next pack of smokes, or fotty of Malt Liquor.
First of all, there will always be poor people no matter how many boots you apply to their ass.
Secondly, you ignorantly assume all poor people are that way because they are lazy and trough sloppers.
Thirdly, you and any like minded person are free to give me enough of your income to get you eligible for all this awesome governmental assistance. Because being poor is awesome and makes all your problems go away!
Provide your own damn link. I don't owe you a link.
The facts are what they are, without your approval, satisfaction, agreement or whatever. Your ignorance of those facts, real or feigned, makes zero difference.
So what are the chances that you are wrong about these facts?
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.
