Wealth Distribution in the USA

I'm sorry but that is simply a lie, an out and out lie.Let me repeat, when you say "And you offer nothing but redistributionist socialist dogma that has failed worldwide." you are simply a liar nin at least two ways.First I have presented options in this very thread that are not in anyway related to redistribution and second the "socialist" policies I have suggested in this thread are simply traditional US Republican conservative position. It is sad and pitiful that the best you can offer as way of response is to lie. And why do you present a position that no one has even mentioned? Again, yopu are either showing your ignorance or lying yet again. I have offered no socialist system.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Fix 2nd quote box.

Actually that is a position that was suggested by both Ike and Nixon.

I believe that the US would be smart to have a minimum family income although I would not suggest any absolute value; rather I think it should be based on some percentage of the previous years basic cost of living figures and should most likely be regional in nature.BUT, before we should even think about something like that there are a few things we need to do.We need to eliminate the influence of business in legislation, elections, rule makings and assure that corporations are not considered individuals or allowed to fund or support candidates at any level. This is probably the single most important and absolutely key step. If we do not do that then we will continue to move towards destruction.Next we need to decide which area should NEVER be considered as "profit centers". I find the very idea of "for profit" health care, education, utilities as abhorrent, evil. We need to return to the concept of regulated limited monopolies for basic services like utilities.We need to revise inheritance (not estate) taxes to prevent the continued growth of a "monied" class.

Actually, that too is a long standing conservative position and even goes back to some of the very basic reasons the US exists.I don't hate a monied class; I simply acknowledge that history has shown that the growth of a "monied class" leads to oppression, exploitation and eventually revolution.

Well, no, I haven't said that. But I see no reason to "help the economy" and really don't give a rats ass about "helping the economy" I'm not eve sure that phrase has any meaning.Go back and read what I actually write.

I'm sorry but that is just you lying yet again.Tax is NOT taking by force at the barrel of a gun.

And so you continue to lie and misrepresent the truth.Taxes are a voluntary, mutually agreed upon commitment. We, the US citizens, have elected representatives and charged them to perform tasks and to fund those tasks by levying taxes which we agree to pay.It really is that simple.Taxes are not stealing.Taxes do not hurt the economy.Taxes are not imposed by force or taken at the point of a gun.

It is certainly not at the point of a gun, but that is irrelevant.When you break any contractual agreement you are subject to sanction and as I pointed out, paying taxes is a commitment we make as citizens. We elect representatives and charge them to preform tasks and to use taxes to fund those tasks.

What you understand is solely up to you. What I actually wrote though is there for all to read.No where will you find me saying that spending stimulates the economy and I would be shocked at anyone making such a sophomoric assertion.Nor did I say profits only siphon off money and direct it away from the economy.Go back again and actually read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote.

The problem with that proposal is that it specifies dollar amounts. If it is going to work it needs to be tied to some measurement of cost of living.