One Definition of Capitalism

[Pink Floyd]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

If the wealthy have the tax laws rigged to their advantage, why do the top ten percent pay seventy percent of the income taxes? The lower fifty percent only pay two percent of the income taxes.

If the rich have paid lawyers to rig the tax laws, they should get their money back.

It seems to me, that the so called poor, make out like bandits, when it comes to paying, or not paying, taxes. This is particularly true, given the fact, the so called poor are the recipients of the entitlement programs that are bankrupting us.

You have to state all the facts. If the top 10% has 46% of the income should they still pay 10% of the taxes. There are basic poverty levels where it make no sense to tax because it just throws more people into welfare, and increases the taxes on the rest of us. The top 1% earns 57% more than the bottom 50% in total. Don't think like one of the talking heads. Republicans spin figures like that, and Democrats buy votes with Obamaphones.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by FlectiNonFrangi

You have to state all the facts. ...There are basic poverty levels where it make no sense to tax because it just throws more people into welfare, and increases the taxes on the rest of us.

And if "we" don't keep those folks dependent on our passing a budget that includes the continuation of benefits to them and increases the benefits to keep up with the cost of living increases, then they might not vote us back into office. Right?

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by WTF

giveitathought, just once.

One man's liberty is another man's tyranny.

Apparently you didn't give it a thought at all.

I posted up above that the quote posted by MILF was one dumb maxim.

But, honestly you just topped it.

You are not all that different than the Taliban or other Islamic fundamentalists who are upset that our freedom of speech includes protection for blasphemy. They think we are tyrants because we hurt their feelings whenever we don't kill people who say bad things about Islam.

You apparently believe that "freedom" means unrestricted access to the wealth of people who have more than you. And tyranny is any law or tax rate that prevents you from getting your hands on it.

Somebody made the false statement above that the top 10% get 47% of the income by pay only 10% of the taxes. That is total BS. The top 10% pay about 60% of the income taxes. In fact, I think the top 1% makes about 17% of all income, but pays about 32-34% of all income taxes.

That is about DOUBLE their share of the income. So I am confused when I hear the left say that the rich don't pay their fair share. If double their share of the income is not enough, what is? Triple?

The left won't ever answer that question with a definite number because they don't want there to be a stopping point to taking taxes. They will take 100% if they can.

Many people start out in the bottom 20% of the income and then transition to higher brackets during their lives. But many people never get out of the bottom brackets and the dirty secret is that they stay there because of a lifetime of bad decisions.

If you could somehow divide up all the wealth in this nation and give everybody an equal share, it won't accomplish anything in the long run. Because IN 5 YEARS, 90% of the people who were in the bottom 20% before will be back in the bottom 20% again and 90% of the people who were in the top 20% before will be back in the top 20% again. Because - in the long run - it all comes down to repeated good decision making and deferred gratification.

And that's the way we roll.

[LovingKayla]

I'm in love. Again. Exnyer your dick just became the hottest thing on the planet.... Right next to your brain.

[Pink Floyd]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

And if "we" don't keep those folks dependent on our passing a budget that includes the continuation of benefits to them and increases the benefits to keep up with the cost of living increases, then they might not vote us back into office. Right?

Exactly, vicious cycle isn't it. I thought I said that before. I don't speak from a partisan viewpoint, I just observe what is. You will find I don't have a need to protect Republicans or Democrats. Life is easier when you don't have defend everything one party says, only what you actually believe in. I don't walk in lockstep with anybody. I believe LBJs Great Society was one of the worst things to happen to America, and I believe religion has no place in government or our schools. Nobody should get welfare for sitting on their butt popping out babies, and Ws stance on stem cell research and abortion was totally wrong. Don't pigeonhole me it won't work.

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by WTF

And you quote us both, what does that make you?

I didn't quote you, you tedious dolt. I copied your lunacy so you could figure out to whom I was addressing my comment.

Your question above was as though i was referring to your posting as if in buttress of mine. that makes good humor, my little one.

If one's freedom and liberty creates some imposition on another then it is limited. Of course, conversely, attempts to take from another is an imposition. And most certainly having liberty in any
sense apart from imposition is or should be inalienable and should trouble none but tyrants and scoundrels and oh yeah liberals. Funny word that, liberal, it operates not in liberality but in control.

[LexusLover]

Capitalism in the sense of a free enterprise system is a bi-product of individual freedoms. With some restrictions for the protection of the consumers individuals have the freedom to begin their own businesses and "free" themselves of the restrictions of "a boss," but they have to make sacrifices along the way that create obligations for which they must take responsibilities.

Everyone has the same opportunity and today there are advantages given to the previously disadvantaged. Minority businesses get a break with most government opportunities and many corporations who are seeking services and products for their company.

The problem is that many people will not assume the responsibilities required to improve, and we are developing a large section of our society that want it handed to them .. by someone. They do not care who.

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

individuals have the freedom to begin their own businesses and "free" themselves of the restrictions of "a boss,"

.

When you are in business for yourself, your intended customers are your bosses. When you are successful it is because you have provided something needed and you have improved the world in some manner. And who should denounce you for your personal gain? No one, for you have served much more than you have received. And should you fail? Will these scoundrels who put upon the success of another provide you succor? Surely you jest.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by FlectiNonFrangi

You have to state all the facts. If the top 10% has 46% of the income should they still pay 10% of the taxes. There are basic poverty levels where it make no sense to tax because it just throws more people into welfare, and increases the taxes on the rest of us. The top 1% earns 57% more than the bottom 50% in total. Don't think like one of the talking heads. Republicans spin figures like that, and Democrats buy votes with Obamaphones.

The progressive income tax punishes work and rewards sloth. It's fundamentally a bad idea. We would be better off with a flat rate; or better yet, get rid of the income tax completely, and replace it with a national sales tax.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LovingKayla

I'm in love. Again. Exnyer your dick just became the hottest thing on the planet.... Right next to your brain.

If his dick is the size of you two's combined pea brains , than ExNYer is hung like a mouse.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

That is about DOUBLE their share of the income. So I am confused when I hear the left say that the rich don't pay their fair share. If double their share of the income is not enough, what is? Triple?

The left won't ever answer that question with a definite number because they don't want there to be a stopping point to taking taxes. They will take 100% if they can.


.

I will answer this with simple math, the rest of your dribble is not worth my time.

There are three huge drivers of spending in government. SS, Medicare and Defense.

Two of those have had a huge surplus. Are you to stupid to know which?

Now drum roll please....The answer is the rich should pay for the Defense spending in this country, not rob middle and poor America of their savings to pay for it. Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrr cut defense spending. That is the huge choice our politicians should pose to the average person. My guess is that they would choose to keep their savings and the rich would not be so high on Defense. The rich are the ones out spending others savings, not the other way around. Let the rich pay for wars if they want to send our kids off to die for resources to line their pockets.

We have two tax systems in this country, one is regressive and the Federal one is progressive, the poor and the middle class do not have the means to pay for Defense Spending. They are just getting by.

Learn how things actually work before spouting off and making a fool of yourself. Reality , check it out asshole, maybe then HatingKayla can find a new hero to worship, like Scrooge.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

The progressive income tax punishes work and rewards sloth. It's fundamentally a bad idea. We would be better off with a flat rate; or better yet, get rid of the income tax completely, and replace it with a national sales tax.

How convenient that you fail to mention that we have a regressive tax system also. Party hacks tend to do so.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

I didn't quote you, you tedious dolt. I copied your lunacy so you could figure out to whom I was addressing my comment.
.

If you haven't figured out by now that I could care less who you are addressing. I care about content , not direction. Carry on Mr.Pat Henry with your shrill. The educated are not buying. That shit is for the masses.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by FlectiNonFrangi

Exactly, vicious cycle isn't it. I thought I said that before. I don't speak from a partisan viewpoint, I just observe what is. You will find I don't have a need to protect Republicans or Democrats. Life is easier when you don't have defend everything one party says, only what you actually believe in. I don't walk in lockstep with anybody. I believe LBJs Great Society was one of the worst things to happen to America, and I believe religion has no place in government or our schools. Nobody should get welfare for sitting on their butt popping out babies, and Ws stance on stem cell research and abortion was totally wrong. Don't pigeonhole me it won't work.

You are talking to a room full of Carl Rove Parrots. Talking to them is like being stuck in the movie GroundHog Day. They say the same shit over and over again...

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by WTF

If you haven't figured out by now that I could care less who you are addressing. I care about content , not direction. Carry on Mr.Pat Henry with your shrill. The educated are not buying. That shit is for the masses.

It's quite curious that you state i quote you and ask me what that makes me ( is that akin to saying the old childrens retort sticks and stones?) and when I tell you I didn't you act as if you don't care. So which is it, a question to respond to or should I assume you don't want a response?


Are you keeping up?


Oh, and if it was content that interested you, you would address yourself to it or sit still and take notes.