Old 11-12-2017, 10:57 AM   #76
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
 
Boxlicker101's Avatar
 
Boxlicker101 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: With my face buried in her pussy
Posts: 29,985
Every time I hear about "soaking the rich," I think about the fable of the goose that laid the golden eggs.
__________________
100% smut or stroke, and proud of it.

The Rest of My Smut

Dirty old man.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-12-2017, 11:15 AM   #77
coachdb18
Literotica Guru
 
coachdb18's Avatar
 
coachdb18 is online now
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by tabt View Post
As much as I agree with many of your posts, your go to argument "You people are envious" for those who express concern about the bizarre ongoing proliferation on billionaires and trillionaires is starting to annoy me.

None of us are the type who would put rat poison in our neighbors' gardens, just because they have it better than us.
I'll have to disagree with you there. There have been riots in the name of 'the poor' taking on 'the rich', and millions of people have been affected by the looting, whether by death, personal injury or ongoing intimidation, the burning of businesses, and the envy that shows itself as economic bigotry against those who exert themselves and become successful. Putting rat poison in their gardens is just a matter of time. Could it be that putting poison I the Tylenol was actually a hate crime against the successful?
__________________
Please, no religious or political discussion. That's not to say I'll simply tolerate dumb shit, and will engage as necessary. If you would like to discuss flying, welcome...I LOVE discussing flying... and then there's ALWAYS the subject we all love....



My Stories
https://www.literotica.com/s/the-bavaria-trip The Bavaria trip
(Exhibitionist/voyeur category - 2 pages)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-12-2017, 09:59 PM   #78
PrincepsCyberius
Insert Witty Moniker Here
 
PrincepsCyberius's Avatar
 
PrincepsCyberius is offline
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: America's Dairyland
Posts: 3,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hypoxia View Post
Do you have evidence that any Clintons illegally withdrew money from the foundation for their personal use?
In fact, yes, thanks to WikiLeaks:
NY Post: Chelsea Clinton used foundation to help pay for wedding. Following the release of Posesta's emails, several other media, both left and right leaning, reported this. The Clintons have simply refused to comment on the matter, or offer any explanation as to what else the emails might refer except what they plainly indicate.
Wouldn't someone notice that the money went to Chelsea, and not charity? Well, according to the one Clinton Foundation IRS filing I found, of the $91.28 million spent by the Clinton Foundation, only $5.16 million went to charitable grants. Meanwhile, $34.84 million went to pay employees and, here's the kicker, the greater than $50,000,000 balance went to "other expenses." Of that amount, only $6.7 million could be characterized as "fundraising expenses."

In other words of the over $91 million the Foundation spent that year, less than $12 million went to the charitable functions of raising money for, and distributing money to, charitable causes. Of course, some fraction of the almost thrice that amount that it paid in salaries also supported that work, but I hope it didn't take the whole $35 million in salaries just to distribute about $5 million. What, pray tell, do you think was done with over $50 million in other expenses, if not fancy junkets, parties, and other neat stuff for the Clintons and their cronies? (You can discern some of this if you study the vague, general categories of where that money went as reported in the document.)

Was any of those tens of millions of Foundation dollars that served no charitable purpose used or distributed illegally? This document, naturally, would not show it. What it shows beyond a doubt, however, is that despite its supposed purpose, the primary function of the Foundation is not charity.

As far as whether "evidence that any Clintons [besides Chelsea for her wedding] illegally withdrew money from the foundation for their personal use," this is less direct, but also suspicious:
USA Today: Memo shows Bill Clinton's wealth was tied to Clinton Foundation
More disturbing than these examples is the pay-for-play component of the donations made to the Clinton foundation (or paid to Bill directly).
Washington Examiner: Nine times Clinton Foundation donors got special access at State; and, more generally,

Washinton Times: The Clintonsí top 10 pay-to-play scandals.
Regardless of your politics, if you have not figured out that the Clintons are just bad people, only interested in their own power, then you have not been paying attention.
__________________



"In this world, you must be oh so smart, or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant."


--- "Elwood P. Dowd" in Harvey by Mary Chase.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2017, 04:54 AM   #79
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
 
DawnODay's Avatar
 
DawnODay is offline
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: In the East
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hypoxia View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by coachdb18 View Post
Is personal envy really enough to justify 'revolution'?
Read up on the French Revolution and answer that.
Read up on the French Revolution and see what happens when a revolution is based on class envy.
E.g., The Reign of Terror; Napoleonic Wars; etc.
Is that what you favor, Hypoxia?

Last edited by DawnODay : 11-13-2017 at 04:57 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2017, 05:10 AM   #80
jaF0
Worthless Toad
 
jaF0's Avatar
 
jaF0 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Unpleasantville
Posts: 5,598
Skipping a bunch of stuff ......

I'm not sure taxing the rich is teh answer. There are simply too many loophoes to begin with. The entire tax code as it relates to individuals shouldn't be more than a few dozen pages at the most. Corporate and business taxes another few dozen pages. Not the current well into the thousands of pages mess.


I'm more interested in fairness in wages and compensation. I don't believe a few people should be able to claim millions in bonuses and options for cutting costs by putting thousands out of work. I think executive pay should be based on worker pay somehow. Not sure how the formula should be set though. I believe all cuts in costs should come from the top down. No layoffs allowed until executive packages are cut significantly for example.


We recently had a situation where the electric utilities lost a few very large customers that went out of business. Instead of cutting costs and executive pay, they went to the PUc and sought a rate increase for everyone else to make up the difference. That hurt everyone including smaller businesses, seniors and low income -- those who were least able to take the hit.

There has to be some more accountability in areas like that.

College tuitions for example .... they hike rates for low income students to pay higher salaries to administration who already make more than many of the students ever will.

I personally don't believe ANY human is worth over a million dollars a year in pay and benefits, let alone several million.
__________________
Why is a carrot oranger than an orange?

< ~~~: Silently Enraged :~~~ >
No, I'm not OK.


  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2017, 05:21 AM   #81
jaF0
Worthless Toad
 
jaF0's Avatar
 
jaF0 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Unpleasantville
Posts: 5,598
The current US Poverty level figure for a family of three is $20,420

At the much discussed minimum wage of $15/hr a full time employee would gross $31,200/yr. Take out 30% in taxes and other normal deductions and you're down to around $21,840 or just above that poverty level. Most workers don't get anywhere near that $15/hour either, so you have people who work full time jobs trying to support their family with poverty level income. And that doesn't even begin to cover medical or school expenses.



.
__________________
Why is a carrot oranger than an orange?

< ~~~: Silently Enraged :~~~ >
No, I'm not OK.


  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2017, 10:36 AM   #82
Rightguide
Literotica Guru
 
Rightguide's Avatar
 
Rightguide is offline
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 11,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaF0 View Post
The current US Poverty level figure for a family of three is $20,420

At the much discussed minimum wage of $15/hr a full time employee would gross $31,200/yr. Take out 30% in taxes and other normal deductions and you're down to around $21,840 or just above that poverty level. Most workers don't get anywhere near that $15/hour either, so you have people who work full time jobs trying to support their family with poverty level income. And that doesn't even begin to cover medical or school expenses.



.
YAWN!

80 percent of poor households have air conditioning.

In 1970, only 36 percent
of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

92 percent of poor households have a microwave.
Nearly three-fourths have a car or truck, and 31 percent have two or more cars or trucks.

Nearly two-thirds have cable or satellite TV.

Two-thirds have at least one DVD player, and 70 percent have a VCR.

Half have a personal computer, and one in seven have two or more computers.

More than half of poor families with children have a video game system, such as an Xbox or PlayStation.

43 percent have Internet access.

One-third have a wide-screen plasma or LCD TV.

One-fourth have a digital video recorder system, such as a TiVo.

96 percent of poor parents stated that their children were never hungry at any time during the year because they could not afford food.

83 percent of poor families reported having enough food to eat.

82 percent of poor adults reported never being hungry at any time in the prior year due to lack of money for food.

http://www.heritage.org/poverty-and-...ng-facts-about
__________________
Then out spake brave Horatius, The Captain of the Gate:
"To every man upon this earth Death cometh soon or late.
And how can man die better Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers, And the temples of his Gods."
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2017, 10:45 AM   #83
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
 
dan_c00000 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,600
After completely ruining the right wingers in this thread I thought I'd do a little more dancing on their sorry asses.

Now if you remember the Orange one declared he saved a bazillion jobs at Carrier. All it took was a lot of lying and a few million dollars from Mike "Women Scare Me" Pence.

Well it turns out the Orange Nazi couldn't save any jobs as Carrier has laid off a whole bunch of workers. I know I'm as shocked as you are that a company bilked these two right wing bozos for millions of dollars and then moved the plant to Mexico anyway.

If the world's greatest negotiator, Trump, can get duped what possible chance does a loser like Walker have? If you don't think Trump got duped well don't take my word for it. How about the Washington Examiner? They're pretty conservative.

Finally, and this is the real kicker. It's looking like the jobs will pay $30k. In other words: minimum wage. Plus, I'm sure these jobs will be non-union so Foxconn will be able to do exactly what Carrier has done: con right wing morons.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2017, 10:59 AM   #84
coachdb18
Literotica Guru
 
coachdb18's Avatar
 
coachdb18 is online now
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_c00000 View Post
After completely ruining the right wingers in this thread I thought I'd do a little more dancing on their sorry asses.

Now if you remember the Orange one declared he saved a bazillion jobs at Carrier. All it took was a lot of lying and a few million dollars from Mike "Women Scare Me" Pence.

Well it turns out the Orange Nazi couldn't save any jobs as Carrier has laid off a whole bunch of workers. I know I'm as shocked as you are that a company bilked these two right wing bozos for millions of dollars and then moved the plant to Mexico anyway.

If the world's greatest negotiator, Trump, can get duped what possible chance does a loser like Walker have? If you don't think Trump got duped well don't take my word for it. How about the Washington Examiner? They're pretty conservative.

Finally, and this is the real kicker. It's looking like the jobs will pay $30k. In other words: minimum wage. Plus, I'm sure these jobs will be non-union so Foxconn will be able to do exactly what Carrier has done: con right wing morons.
Well, we knew there was no intelligent life in NYC beforehand, so it's a good thing our expectations weren't very high for this one anyway!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_c00000 View Post
I thought I'd do a little more dancing on their sorry asses.
__________________
Please, no religious or political discussion. That's not to say I'll simply tolerate dumb shit, and will engage as necessary. If you would like to discuss flying, welcome...I LOVE discussing flying... and then there's ALWAYS the subject we all love....



My Stories
https://www.literotica.com/s/the-bavaria-trip The Bavaria trip
(Exhibitionist/voyeur category - 2 pages)

Last edited by coachdb18 : 11-13-2017 at 11:03 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2017, 11:15 AM   #85
Owwee
Literotica Guru
 
Owwee's Avatar
 
Owwee is offline
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: drifter
Posts: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rightguide View Post
So tell the 3.6 to get their asses in gear and either evolve or get educated and motivated.
You do know Oxfam is well a commie group that hates anything America stands for or has?

I am considered poor by the rich, evil by the left wing and taxed to pay for slackers and alternative lifestyle types who think the Government owes them stuff or has stuff to give.

The sad joke here is the Baby boomers, the guys who have been paying for everything are about to retire, die or just stop giving and start demanding the government give back what its taken.

And hey America the best place to be poor that will be on signs in all DNC controlled area soon!
__________________
How do I unregister
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2017, 05:22 AM   #86
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
 
DawnODay's Avatar
 
DawnODay is offline
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: In the East
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by coachdb18 View Post
Well, we knew there was no intelligent life in NYC beforehand, so it's a good thing our expectations weren't very high for this one anyway!
Have you noticed how dan_c00000 will either simply spout some irrelevancy like above and declare victory or, having been proved either a fool or a liar, simply flee the field? What a pathetic phony. I've come to pity him more than anything else.

Meanwhile, I'd like to get this thread back to it's original point by reiterating something the Left, teaching dan_c00000 his tactics, tries to either obfuscate or ignore:

Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnODay View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnODay
Quote:
Originally Posted by XXXXXXXX

.... Taxes on the wealthy should be higher....
....

Take, for instance, your belief that "[t]axes on the wealthy should be higher." There are two basic arguments against this. I'll start with the weaker of the two, which is fairness.

In 2014, the most recent year for which there is full data:
The top 1 percent [of taxpayers] paid a greater share of individual income taxes (39.5 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (29.1 percent).

The share of income earned by the top 1 percent of taxpayers rose to 20.6 percent in 2014. Their share of federal individual income taxes also rose, to 39.5 percent.

[T]he top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97.3 percent of all individual income taxes while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.7 percent.
S. Greenberg, Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2016 Update, Tax Foundation (Feb. 1, 2017). These numbers are confirmed by CNBC, which I'm sure you admit has no right-wing bias. With the "one-percenters" paying 40% of all income taxes, and the top 50% paying almost all of income taxes, I assume you are not arguing "fairness" as a basis for why the "rich" should pay more....

[Emphasis added.]



Comments?

Last edited by DawnODay : 11-14-2017 at 05:26 AM. Reason: to confirm citation links.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2017, 11:51 AM   #87
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
 
dan_c00000 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,600
Well, I've pretty much ruined everyone in this thread. Let's close it down. Another right wing myth destroyed.

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2017, 12:48 PM   #88
BoyNextDoor
I'm so yuge!
 
BoyNextDoor's Avatar
 
BoyNextDoor is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnODay View Post


Comments?
The reason to tax the wealthy is because they are the ones benefitting from the system. That is where the value of productivity produced by the workers of the US labor force is being concentrated and therefore that is where the distribution of the surplus value created should come from.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017, 12:36 AM   #89
JackLuis
Literotica Guru
 
JackLuis's Avatar
 
JackLuis is online now
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: La La Calif
Posts: 13,487
__________________
JackLuis-

Here My Stories

Creative Copulation - Gods do it too!

My New Best Friend, for our VE's


Spreading Seeds Sagas- Can a young man find happiness in a world where there ten women for every man?

"Fiction writers are just liars with typing skills."
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017, 02:00 AM   #90
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
 
Boxlicker101's Avatar
 
Boxlicker101 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: With my face buried in her pussy
Posts: 29,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackLuis View Post
I strongly doubt those figures. Can you support them?
__________________
100% smut or stroke, and proud of it.

The Rest of My Smut

Dirty old man.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017, 04:10 AM   #91
Hypoxia
doesn't watch television
 
Hypoxia's Avatar
 
Hypoxia is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Llareggub, just around the corner
Posts: 20,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101 View Post
I strongly doubt those figures. Can you support them?
The images look like Russian meme-mill propaganda pix, a typical how-to-lie-with-statistics gag. Bigger non-media companies pay less tax than the above. Oh, those figures probably show up online somewhere. They needn't be false, merely misleading.

How about a picture chart of all Tromp's cabinet members and their paid taxes?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017, 06:56 AM   #92
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
 
DawnODay's Avatar
 
DawnODay is offline
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: In the East
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_c00000 View Post
Well, I've pretty much ruined everyone in this thread. Let's close it down. Another right wing myth destroyed.
...
[/IMG]
Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnODay View Post
Have you noticed how dan_c00000 will either simply spout some irrelevancy like above and declare victory or, having been proved either a fool or a liar, simply flee the field? What a pathetic phony. I've come to pity him more than anything else.
....

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoyNextDoor View Post
The reason to tax the wealthy is because they are the ones benefitting from the system. That is where the value of productivity produced by the workers of the US labor force is being concentrated and therefore that is where the distribution of the surplus value created should come from.
The value produced by the workers goes into their paychecks, subject to federal deductions and withholding. By the time the lower 50% of earners receive their tax refunds, however, they effectively pay no federal income tax. Yet even these poorer workers, and even people living on welfare, receive plenty of benefits "from the system." Besides the benefits they earn mentioned in the preceding link, everyone in the USA benefits from federal services ranging from military protection to the interstate highway system and dozens of other things. Should not these workers also contribute to funding them?

Meanwhile, the "wealthy," the top 50% of earners, pay essentially all federal income taxes and the top 1% pay 39.5% of them. The original issue of this thread was the claim: "Taxes on the wealthy should be higher." Don't they already pay enough, and should not the lower 50% pay a share?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackLuis View Post
I strongly doubt those figures. Can you support them?
To the extent that these figures may be true (and note this is in 2014, well into the Obama presidency), here is the reason, e.g.,
C.E. Emery Jr., Hillary Clinton: Barack Obama Set New Wall Street Fundraising Record When He First Ran for President, Politifact (Mar. 7, 2016);

D. Greenfield, How Obama and Senate Democrats Freed GE from Paying Corporate Taxes, Frontpage (Jan 7, 2013).

P. Nicholas & D. Lippman, Wall Street Is Still Giving to President, WSJ (Jul. 3, 2012).
Indeed, the top contributors to Obama's 2008 campaign include Time Warner and a number of Wall Street "hedge fund" firms.

This is another reason why we need lower, simpler, and more fair taxes. Right now, the government can use the tax code to pick winners and losers. A simpler system with less impact on profits would decrease that. Get government out of the affairs of business, and you'll get business out of the affairs of government.

Last edited by DawnODay : 11-15-2017 at 07:00 AM. Reason: to fix a typo.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017, 10:42 AM   #93
Rightguide
Literotica Guru
 
Rightguide's Avatar
 
Rightguide is offline
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 11,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_c00000 View Post
After completely ruining the right wingers in this thread I thought I'd do a little more dancing on their sorry asses.
Except using bullshit for dance wax kills your routine.
__________________
Then out spake brave Horatius, The Captain of the Gate:
"To every man upon this earth Death cometh soon or late.
And how can man die better Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers, And the temples of his Gods."
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017, 01:59 PM   #94
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 35,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoyNextDoor View Post
The reason to tax the wealthy is because they are the ones benefitting from the system.
As it's been pointed out they aren't the only ones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoyNextDoor View Post
That is where the value of productivity produced by the workers of the US labor force is being concentrated and therefore that is where the distribution of the surplus value created should come from.
Why should there be a distribution of the surplus?

Why not just stop concentrating it (open markets up) and let the chips fall where they may?

Why not let people make their own livings, or not, of their own accord?

Everyone pays XX% to cover the F22's, infrastructure and emergency services....let the states deal with the rest.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017, 04:07 PM   #95
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
 
dan_c00000 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,600
After humilting the right wing it appears they came on here to piss and moan some more. I guess they really enjoy the butt hurt. I feel obliged to give it them.

Why should we tax the rich? Simple: it's a way to redistribute political power. The rich and powerful can donate to their political candidate and have infinitely more say than the average person can in politics. Just look at the likes of the Koch brothers, the Mercers (covered above), and Peter Thiel. It's through the rich's money they're able to affect public policy.

They can disenfranchise voters or put in place absurd voting restrictions. Take away health care. And, to give a recent example, close down a business because the workers wanted to unionize.

We know that cutting taxes on the rich is complete bullshit. No less a right winger than Bruce Bartlett said as much.

The goal of tax cuts for the rich, which is what the GOP is, basically amounts to keep the masses poor and the rich their lords. This is pretty clear in the way public policy is titled more and more to the wealthy.

Teahadists always claims that tax cuts for the rich will trickle down but they're unable to explain how if that wealth is trickling down the gap between rich and poor continues to grow or how the rich own an ever-increasing share of the wealth. There also unable to explain how Trump's "self-financed" campaign included donations from a whole bunch of rich folks included Wall Street types.

Only a moron would say that the tax code can be used to pick and choose winners. They have no grasp of reality or history. When the highest tax rate was significantly higher, up until the 1970s, the U.S. was a much more equal country in terms of wealth distribution. They are especially dumb because most Americans believe the rich should pay MORE not less and that the current distribution of wealth is unfair.

Taxing the rich ultimately has a two-fold benefits: it provides for services everyone can use (health care, infrastructure, national security, etc.) AND it prevents a democracy turning into an oligarchy where politicians exist to do the wealthy's bidding at the expense of the 99%.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2017, 06:28 AM   #96
Hypoxia
doesn't watch television
 
Hypoxia's Avatar
 
Hypoxia is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Llareggub, just around the corner
Posts: 20,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_c00000 View Post
The goal of tax cuts for the rich, which is what the GOP is, basically amounts to keep the masses poor and the rich their lords.
Gup congresscritters' immediate goal is more prosaic. If they can't deliver humongous tax cuts, donations will dry up and they'll have to find honest jobs. The long-term goal is to continue receiving donations. And blowjobs. If such requires destroying our democratic republic and enslaving the populace, so be it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2017, 07:18 AM   #97
DawnODay
Literotica Guru
 
DawnODay's Avatar
 
DawnODay is offline
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: In the East
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_c00000 View Post
Why should we tax the rich? Simple: it's a way to redistribute political power....
OMG! dan_c00000!!!! You did it! You actually made a coherent argument!

It's misguided, unsupported by facts (you again use opinion pieces from ultra-biased sources and cite them as if they are actual evidence), and easily refutable (rhetorically, it's actually easier to refute a coherent argument than your usual emotional-based rants), but at least it's an actual argument presenting mostly self-consistent, albeit mistaken, ideas.

Wow. I really doubted you had it in you. You're growing, sir, you're growing. I'm so proud of you!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_c00000 View Post
The goal of tax cuts for the rich, which is what the GOP is, basically amounts to keep the masses poor and the rich their lords.
The goal for cutting taxes is to spur economic growth, which the historical record shows it will do. See, generally, B. Domitrovic & L. Kudlow, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan Proved Tax Cuts Work, Time (Sep. 29, 2016); M. Geewax, JFK's Lasting Economic Legacy: Lower Tax Rates, NPR (Nov. 14, 2013); D. Mitchell, The Historical Lessons of Lower Tax Rates, (Aug. 13, 2003).

As far as I have seen, the only people who appear to want to keep people poor are the power elite (not the rank and file) of the Democrat party. Just look at the results of their policies of the past 50 years. By keeping a large group of Americans poor and dependent on government, then promising them meager improvements in the free stuff government will give them (from food assistance to free phones to the broken promise of affordable health care), the Democrat power elite try to maintain a dependable voting block to help them win elections, at least in the densely populated urban areas. That is the true conspiracy against the poor and even the middle class.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_c00000 View Post
[T]hey're unable to explain how if that wealth is trickling down the gap between rich and poor continues to grow.
I can explain it. (Actually, this is explained all the time by a lot of people; your argument is fallacious.) It's called "mathematics." Let's say the economy improves and every investor and worker sees a 10% growth in income. The janitor making $20,000 per year goes to $22,000, gaining $2,000; the manager making $100,000 per year goes to $110,000, gaining $10,000; and the factory owner making $1,000,000 per year goes to $1,100,000, gaining $100,000. While they have all benefited proportionately, the gap has still grown.

Of course, it usually doesn't work of quite like that. The real numbers may be more like a $2,000 raise for the janitor; a $15,000 raise for the manager, and a $250,000 increase in income for the owner. This is only fair. No matter how well he does his job, the janitor has little effect on increasing profits. The manager, however, probably played a significant role in doing so, while it is the owner risking his or her capital that created the factory, backed whatever improvements increased profits, and gave the janitor and the manager their jobs.

The point is, as conditions improve and the economy grows, everybody (except those kept in perpetual poverty by Democrat social policies) gains something. As has been said: "A rising tide lifts all boats." -- John F. Kennedy (1963).

Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_c00000 View Post
Only a moron would say that the tax code can be used to pick and choose winners....
This is the one place your argument breaks down and becomes not just inconsistent, but self-contradicting. If your goal is "to redistribute political power," then that is, by definition, picking winners. Both parties have been using tax policy and regulatory power for nearly a century "to pick and choose winners." The example of GE has already been cited. I would also point you to the Solyndra scandal.

But, dan_c00000, sincerely, that was a good first try at presenting a logical argument. Except in that last point, your logic worked, only your premises were flawed. Now, start looking at some real, relatively unbiased news sources (I recommend NPR, the BBC, and the WSJ), and, applying your new-found logic, you might just come to see how misguided you have been.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2017, 10:56 AM   #98
dan_c00000
Literotica Guru
 
dan_c00000 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,600
Dawn got fucking destroyed again. Does anyone else find it odd that "she" is replying to shit at 7am? Who's up that early trolling for evil rich people and corporations to have more money? I mean besides Orange Nazi supporters.

Anyway, you can tell Dawn didn't actually read anything I wrote because "she" is a fucking moron because there's a BBC link in my post! Specifically, this one! So we now know that Dawn can't read and lies about having read what "she" claims to have read. Where I come from we call that

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2017, 12:04 PM   #99
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 35,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnODay View Post



The goal for cutting taxes is to spur economic growth, which the historical record shows it will do.

As far as I have seen, the only people who appear to want to keep people poor are the power elite (not the rank and file) of the Democrat party.


Of course, it usually doesn't work of quite like that. The real numbers may be more like a $2,000 raise for the janitor; a $15,000 raise for the manager, and a $250,000 increase in income for the owner.
It only spurs economic growth for the upper cream that is getting the break. Especially if you donít open up markets so that up and commers can take a shot.

No it doesnít work anything like that. Janitors donít get shit lower management gets an itunes/ Outback Steakhouse gift cards, upper management gets 1500 dollar bonus and the owner gets 2.8 BILLION that they wonít spend.

And Demz arenít the only market mongering shits who want to keep others poor to protect their market control like the socialist shits over in the gop.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2017, 01:16 PM   #100
BoyNextDoor
I'm so yuge!
 
BoyNextDoor's Avatar
 
BoyNextDoor is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnODay View Post
The value produced by the workers goes into their paychecks, subject to federal deductions and withholding.
This is a false statement or at best, very incomplete statement. Some of the value created by the worker goes to their pay. The remainder, the surplus value they created, is appropriated by the corporation, owner, employer.

That surplus is where the wealth concentration is. That surplus is what should be taxed for the purpose of maintaining all of the infrastructure necessary for that corporation to keep taking the surplus.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:59 PM.

Copyright 1998-2013 Literotica Online. Literotica is a registered trademark.