|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Another example of right wing evil | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9196 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
Did you buy Beck's gold?
The fact is that anyone who has bought gold over the last decade has made money big time and the end is not in sight.
Really? Really? Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9196 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
he rich are already paying about 90% of America's taxes with the poor paying zero.
This statement means nothing. Define "rich". Show facts and figures. Define "poor". Do you really think the poor pay no taxes? Ever hear of sales taxes, excise taxes, property taxes, to name a few? Instead of just mouthing propaganda how about researching the subject.
Who would hire the factory worker if it weren't for the rich who invest in factories which hire people? Funny how the US gave billions to the rich and corporations over the last few years and no one seems to be hiring. Have you looked at the latest jobs figures? How much do they need before they will hire people? I cannot understand the love the people in this country have for the rich and corporations. Our country is being raped by the rich and corporations and people still want to lower the taxes on them. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 827 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Where are the jobs Buz? (hint: they don't speak English)
Who saw a 23% income growth? (hint: it's not the middle class) Who destroyed the economy? (hint: they invest in banks) Do some research (away from Glen-I-raped-and-murdered-a-little-girl-Beck) and tell me that all the "rich people" are helping you and I. They help themselves and say fuck you to people like you and I. "Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 827 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
I cannot understand the love the people in this country have for the rich and corporations. Our country is being raped by the rich and corporations and people still want to lower the taxes on them. They hold on to the pipe dream (you know, the one piped through every TV show in America) that they, too, will be rich one day if they just work hard enough. "Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2518 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
No. One of Beck's sponsors was a gold company. The fact is that anyone who has bought gold over the last decade has made money big time and the end is not in sight. Glenn Beck REGULARLY led people who watched his show to believe that the dollar was going to be worthless, that gold was the only safe place to place their money, and that this one particular gold vendor was the best place to buy gold. That gold vendor was selling gold to Beck's viewers at a huge mark up. Fools Gold: Inside the Glenn Beck Goldline Scheme - The Big PicturePage Not Found: 404 Not Found - CBS News For Glenn Beck's Gold Plated Sponsor, Fresh Scrutiny - ABC News http://mediamatters.org/research/201106300019
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2518 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
Who would hire the factory worker if it weren't for the rich who invest in factories which hire people? Most factories are not owned by wealthy individuals. They are owned by companies. Most of those companies are traded publicly. In other words, the ultra-rich are not the ones hire those people, the stock holders are.
The rich are already paying about 90% of America's taxes with the poor paying zero. Making up numbers doesn't make you right, it just shows that you're ignorant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2131 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Paris Hilton makes $6,500,000 a year. Does Paris Hilton work 65x harder than you? Is she 65x smarter than you? Producing 65x as much material goods as you? There are people who make a ridiculous amount of money, often because they were related to someone who made a bunch of money and left it to them. The idea that these people should pay LESS in taxes than a factor worker who gets up every morning and trudges to work for a fraction of a fraction of what they make is ridiculous. What in all of this gives someone the right to take at the point of a gun what someone else earns, no matter how it is earned? What I take from your post is that progressives are champions at class envy. This probably goes back to Marx. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 309 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
What in all of this gives someone the right to take at the point of a gun what someone else earns, no matter how it is earned? (1) In Paris Hilton's case, surely it is questionable whether she has in fact earned it. By doing what? (2) That would be an argument to abolish all taxation, not just taxation for purposes you disapprove of. The government takes your money, at the point of this imaginary gun, to fund (for example) the Army. Should this practice be abolished?
What I take from your post is that progressives are champions at class envy. Do you yourself think that Paris Hilton should pay the same amount of tax that you do? If your answer is "no", is that a form of "class envy"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2518 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
What in all of this gives someone the right to take at the point of a gun what someone else earns, no matter how it is earned? What I take from your post is that progressives are champions at class envy. This probably goes back to Marx. First off, who has a gun here? Second, you don't have to live in America and pay taxes. You can move to some other country. However, if you want to live here and be protected by our armies, drive on our roads, breath our air, use our energy, etc etc etc, you are expected to pay taxes. Third, I'm sorry that you think that Paris Hilton is classier than you. My point was more about the amount of work and the reward for that work. We do not live in a society that rewards people based on work, or skill, and the rewards our society give out are disproportionate. Paris Hilton makes more money attending a party than you make in a year. Asking her to pay SLIGHTLY MORE in taxes than, let's say a COAL MINER who spends the better part of his life underground pays, is not unreasonable.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2131 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Dr Adequate and Nuggin--
You two seem to be promoting the policy that the state has the right to take anything it wants from the individual based on it's presumed "need." It is a short distance from "anything" to "everything" ala "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs)." Who decides? At the point where a society ends up with more takers than makers, what is to keep the makers from leaving? And if the makers leave, who then will support the takers in the style in which they would like to become accustomed? (Recall the parable of the goose?) What we are seeing is Bread and Circuses (q.v.). The downward spiral we see promoted by many to "tax the rich" is viable only as long as we have "the rich." When you destroy "the rich" or drive them away, who then will support your failed policies? In a broader sense: Why should I work to support you? ps. John Galt was right.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 309 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
You two seem to be promoting the policy that the state has the right to take anything it wants from the individual based on it's presumed "need." It is a short distance from "anything" to "everything" ala "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs)." Who decides? I had thought it was the voters. And yes, sometimes the US government has indeed taken everything. For example, conscripts who died in war. Everything was taken from them except honor, which they could not actively enjoy, being dead.
At the point where a society ends up with more takers than makers, what is to keep the makers from leaving? And if the makers leave, who then will support the takers in the style in which they would like to become accustomed? (Recall the parable of the goose?) What we are seeing is Bread and Circuses (q.v.). The downward spiral we see promoted by many to "tax the rich" is viable only as long as we have "the rich." When you destroy "the rich" or drive them away, who then will support your failed policies? OMG, what will happen when we end up at the bottom of the slippery slope? It hardly seems imminent. Even Paris Hilton has not yet fled these shores into tax exile, thus depriving us of ... er ... those things that she does. Y'know, those things. The things. We are in no danger of "destroying the rich". Some figures found with a cursory Google search:
Mr. Greenstein’s organization will release a report today showing that for Americans in the middle, the share of income taken by federal taxes has been essentially unchanged across four decades. By comparison, it has fallen by half for those at the very top of the income ladder. [...] The top 1 percent received 21.8 percent of all reported income in 2005, up significantly from 19.8 percent the year before and more than double their share of income in 1980. The peak was in 1928, when the top 1 percent reported 23.9 percent of all income. The top tenth of a percent and top one-hundredth of a percent recorded even bigger gains in 2005 over the previous year. Their incomes soared by about a fifth in one year, largely because of the rising stock market and increased business profits. The top tenth of a percent reported an average income of $5.6 million, up $908,000, while the top one-hundredth of a percent had an average income of $25.7 million, up nearly $4.4 million in one year. If I expressed a desire that I should be "destroyed" like that, would that count as "class envy"? Heck, I'd settle for a modest $1 million increase in my annual income. I'll find some more recent figures if you want to make an issue out of it. But I think you'll find that the rich have still not been "destroyed", what with the renewal of the Bush tax breaks and all.
In a broader sense: Why should I work to support you? As far as I know, you don't. Incidentally, you are an archeologist, aren't you? I hope all of your work is funded by private individuals who have freely decided that your work is worth spending their money on.
ps. John Galt was right. You are free to withdraw your labor; though I think that the effect would be more marked if you were not an archeologist. --- Now, I've answered your questions, how about you answer mine? Do you think that Paris Hilton should pay the same in tax that you do? If your answer is "no", do you count that as "class envy"? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2131 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Do you think that Paris Hilton should pay the same in tax that you do? If your answer is "no", do you count that as "class envy"? Can you think of any reason why some people should pay a higher rate than others that does not involve class envy or Bread and Circuses? And do you not agree that Marx and his "From each according to his ability" nonsense is totally discredited? Or is that what you are pushing?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 309 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Can you think of any reason why some people should pay a higher rate than others that does not involve class envy or Bread and Circuses? Marginal utility.
And do you not agree that Marx and his "From each according to his ability" nonsense is totally discredited? Or is that what you are pushing? I am not a Marxist, if that's what you mean. --- Now, perhaps you could answer my question. Do you think that Paris Hilton should pay the same in tax that you do? If your answer is "no", do you count that as "class envy"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18332 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0
|
theodoric writes: I cannot understand the love the people in this country have for the rich and corporations. Our country is being raped by the rich and corporations and people still want to lower the taxes on them. hooah writes: They hold on to the pipe dream (you know, the one piped through every TV show in America) that they, too, will be rich one day if they just work hard enough. I agree with this. Why should the wealthy people resent paying more taxes? They will still be wealthy. The alternative is to hold the vanishing middle class hostage, take away and cut the social services and education, and force us to repay the debt with less than 20% of the countries income.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 91 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
This thread seems to have changed direction since I last looked. It was about laws pertaining to homosexuality in Tennessee. Now it seems to be about how much Paris Hilton's tax payments are subsidising Coyote's lifestyle.
AE writes: Straggler writes: The objection here is to the ban on it being mentioned where contextually relevant. It is this seeming determination to keep the issue out of sight that creates the impression of being taboo. I don’t think so. Here is the law as provided by CS earlier:
Law States writes: (2) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, no public elementary or middle school shall provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual orientation other than heterosexuality. To me that reads as any discussion of homosexuality regardless of how context appropriate it may be to be unlawful. How do you see the law being applied in practise?
AE writes: Straggler writes: Would you agree that lack of information where information is needed is not a good thing? Yes. I would think that the information is still coming from the home and the internet. If home and internet are all that is required why does there need to be any discussion of heterosexual relationships or orientation either? The internet is awash with information about that.
AE writes: Do you think that without this legislation anymore the information will be divulged? Is the proper information being divulged today, without this legislation? I would have expected every libertarian bone in your body to object to the idea that governing legislatures should go round needlessly making laws to solve problems that don't exist by imposing behaviour on schools and individuals regarding what they can and cannot do. If even acknowledging that gay relationships exist is banned from context appropriate class discussion then that seems rather Orwellian.
AE writes: If you are 16 and in 8th grade should the school provide driver’s education? Would it be discrimination to make legislation stating that driver’s education will not be taught in grades K-8? Nobody is suggesting that there should be grade school classes on how to be gay!! A better anology would be an environmental pressure group who manages to enshrine in law a ban any discussion of the fact that cars run on gasoline in grade school because they fear that the idea that oil drilling can be a legitimate activity might take hold in the minds of the young.
AE writes: other people’s liberties in the face of government is not always popular (especially around here). If this legislation came up here in Virginia I would be totally against it, but I am not going to sit here (1 state away), and tell people in another state how to live their lives, because I am a fan of liberties. So you are against government needlessly intervening and dictating in people's lives but you are advoacting that Tennessee local governemnt should do exactly that in the name of liberty? That makes absolutely no sense to me at all.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024