dreamdancer 0 #26 December 11, 2011 or, on the other hand i want everyone to be able to take care of their kids and grandkids - not just the 1%...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #27 December 11, 2011 it seems your preference is you'd prefer to ruin it for all rather than allow a single rich kid to get an inheritance clearly your posts advocate actions and policies that would hurt everybody deeply but just preferentially hurt the rich a bit more - and then consider that would be a net win ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #28 December 11, 2011 Quoteit seems your preference is you'd prefer to ruin it for all rather than allow a single rich kid to get an inheritance. there's more than one walton kid - and even a 99% inheritance tax would still leave them all with a decent unearned fortune. yet still they whine they want more - and you pander to their whinings...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #29 December 11, 2011 Quote...yet still they whine they want more... Irony score 5 stars!!!“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #30 December 11, 2011 panderer!stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
devildog 0 #31 December 12, 2011 Quote The planet will continue to evolve long after humans are gone. Regardless of what the "Climate Change" religious nut cases say, life on this planet will continue to evolve for many billions of years up until that big ball in the sky 93 million miles from us burns up. Reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEwYou stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #32 December 12, 2011 Quoteof course they earned every penny... QuoteIncome inequality in the U.S. is currently the highest its been since the 1920s, with the 400 richest Americans (who are all billionaires) having as much wealth as the bottom 50 percent of Americans combined. And as it turns out, just one wealthy family has managed to amass a fortune equal to that of the combined net worth of the bottom 30 percent of Americans — the Waltons, heirs to the WalMart fortune, as Sylvia Allegretto, a labor economist at the Center on Wage and Employment Dynamics, found: The triennial Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) is one of the best sources for data on wealth in the U.S. And, of course the Forbes 400 estimates the worth of the wealthiest amongst us—all 400 wouldn’t be captured in the SCF. If we look at both the SCF and the Forbes 400 we can glean some interesting insights. In 2007 (the most recent SCF) the cumulative wealth of the Forbes 400 was $1.54 trillion or roughly the same amount of wealth held by the entire bottom fifty percent of American families. This is a stunning statistic to be sure. Upon closer inspection, the Forbes list reveals that six Waltons—all children (one daughter-in-law) of Sam or James “Bud” Walton the founders of Wal-Mart—were on the list. The combined worth of the Walton six was $69.7 billion in 2007—which equated to the total wealth of the entire bottom thirty percent! http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/12/09-6 So what?HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #33 December 12, 2011 Quoteyou don't 'give' money to the government. it is 'taken' in taxation. the 1% will not give - so it has to be taken... Here's a good route. Since the 1% are the ones who hold so many Treasury notes, why not tax Treasury bond yields? That'd be a good way of stickign it to them. Right up until the time when the 1% quits loaning money to the government. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #34 December 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteit seems your preference is you'd prefer to ruin it for all rather than allow a single rich kid to get an inheritance. there's more than one walton kid - and even a 99% inheritance tax would still leave them all with a decent unearned fortune. yet still they whine they want more - and you pander to their whinings... So you don't think a person who has earned, aquired, and saved what was left of their income after the government took what they wanted has any right to say what becomes of that wealth after they die? You think it is ok for the government to tax the shit out of high income people and then take what's left of that already taxed wealth after the person dies? That's just fucked up, dude. Just plain fucked up. Might as well just put all industry under gov control, asign each person a job for life, then the gov can give each person what the gove thinks they need to live on.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #35 December 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteyou don't 'give' money to the government. it is 'taken' in taxation. the 1% will not give - so it has to be taken... Here's a good route. Since the 1% are the ones who hold so many Treasury notes, why not tax Treasury bond yields? That'd be a good way of stickign it to them. Right up until the time when the 1% quits loaning money to the government. why not just take the money in direct wealth taxation and then we don't have to pay any interest on it...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #36 December 12, 2011 you might prefer communism (though it seems to have worked for china) - i'd just prefer a decent inheritance tax...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #37 December 12, 2011 Quoteyou might prefer communism (though it seems to have worked for china) - i'd just prefer a decent inheritance tax... What makes you think I would prefer communism? Your ideals are much, much closer than mine.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #38 December 12, 2011 you're the one equating a decent inheritance tax with communism...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #39 December 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteit seems your preference is you'd prefer to ruin it for all rather than allow a single rich kid to get an inheritance. there's more than one walton kid - and even a 99% inheritance tax would still leave them all with a decent unearned fortune. yet still they whine they want more - and you pander to their whinings... So you don't think a person who has earned, aquired, and saved what was left of their income after the government took what they wanted has any right to say what becomes of that wealth after they die? You think it is ok for the government to tax the shit out of high income people and then take what's left of that already taxed wealth after the person dies? That's just fucked up, dude. Just plain fucked up. Might as well just put all industry under gov control, asign each person a job for life, then the gov can give each person what the gove thinks they need to live on. What I don't like about the inheritance tax is, it's so high, I'm seeing ranches sold-off by descendants to pay the tax. Instead of family ranches and farms staying in the family, they usually wind-up in the hands of land speculators and pasture land and farm land is suddenly 'housing developements'! Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #40 December 12, 2011 Quotewhy not just take the money in direct wealth taxation and then we don't have to pay any interest on it... Two things. First, it's taking. And I have a philosophical problem with taking. Second: because taking every cent will help for a year. Then what? You just like the idea of taxing the rich till there are none left. Sure, there are still the poor - much more of them, in fact. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #41 December 12, 2011 you seem to prefer communism too...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #42 December 12, 2011 QuoteWhat I don't like about the inheritance tax is, it's so high, I'm seeing ranches sold-off by descendants to pay the tax. Instead of family ranches and farms staying in the family, they usually wind-up in the hands of land speculators and pasture land and farm land is suddenly 'housing developements'! Corporations buy them up. The best possible way to transfer assets from individuals to corporations is a death tax. Corporations never have to pay them. People do. The estate tax is the corporatist dream. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #43 December 12, 2011 Naw. I myself actually prefer things like individual liberties unconstrained by the collective. What is your problem with freedom? Why do you have such a desire to take? I'm trying to think of any time you have mentioned any desire on your part to give. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #44 December 12, 2011 Quoteyou seem to prefer communism too... Keeping what's yours instead of giving it over to the State is the exact antithesis of communism.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #45 December 12, 2011 QuoteThey appear to be completely deviod of ethics. They have broken so many laws we know about that it is probably a safe bet they've broken many many more. Great for the owners of capital - sucks for most everybody. Playing the blame game are we? No responsibility for the consumer's individual actions? Because someone is holding all their customers hands to the flame, right? I mean a little self control and people wouldn't buy half the useless shit they do, eh?---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #46 December 12, 2011 Quote Naw. I myself actually prefer things like individual liberties unconstrained by the collective. What is your problem with freedom? Why do you have such a desire to take? I'm trying to think of any time you have mentioned any desire on your part to give. you equate a decent inheritance tax as communism - get used to the idea stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #47 December 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteThey appear to be completely deviod of ethics. They have broken so many laws we know about that it is probably a safe bet they've broken many many more. Great for the owners of capital - sucks for most everybody. Playing the blame game are we? No responsibility for the consumer's individual actions? Because someone is holding all their customers hands to the flame, right? I mean a little self control and people wouldn't buy half the useless shit they do, eh? a little bit of self control and the bankers wouldn't have sold us the crap they did. then they whined to the government and the taxpayer when the crap got returned to them...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #48 December 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteThey appear to be completely deviod of ethics. They have broken so many laws we know about that it is probably a safe bet they've broken many many more. Great for the owners of capital - sucks for most everybody. Playing the blame game are we? No responsibility for the consumer's individual actions? Because someone is holding all their customers hands to the flame, right? I mean a little self control and people wouldn't buy half the useless shit they do, eh? a little bit of self control and the bankers wouldn't have sold us the crap they did. then they whined to the government and the taxpayer when the crap got returned to them... Of course the gov bailed them out. They had too to try and cover the fact that the gov policy, is the biggest part of problem . Your beloved gov I should say BTW, what do you think of the lastest sentense of the person who talked poorly about your King and his family?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #49 December 12, 2011 (1) You need to learn the difference between income and wealth. (2) I'm surprised it's only the bottom 30%, considering how many people have a negative networth. If the bottom 15 cancel out the next 10, that means the Waltons equal what, the 25th through 30th percentile? (3) As lawrocket has already pointed out, if you took everything the 1% own, it'd run the government for a year. What then? Would you take everything from the top 2% the next year? (4) There never has been or will be a time when everyone is equal. Get used to it. (5) Your rants generally just convince people that you are jealous and greedy. Possibly lazy, too. Have realized that quoting alternet and commondreams is not going to accomplish much?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #50 December 12, 2011 Quotewhat's wrong with having that much money? That really is the right question to ask. What could possibly be so wrong with having that much money? And, maybe more importantly, what could be so wrong with incredible wealth being kept by very few, as is increasingly happening in the Western world, with the US seemingly in the lead. That question touches on why the likes of Warren Buffet feel there should be an estate tax, and the answer doesn't have anything to do with jealousy. The US is already, or at least well on its way, to being a plutocracy. You need wealth to attain any kind of power in the US. As an example, just look at the posts on Speaker's Corner lamenting the fact that politicians have to "sell their souls" in order to aquire enough wealth and resources to win an election. Note also the general disdain for an oligarchy in the US. The country is founded on the tought that government is of the people, by the people and for the people. Now, to get to your question, what is wrong with having that much money, or more importantly what is so wrong with very few holding incredible wealth? The risk is the culmination of the path we have already travelled down significantly, the effective creation of a plutocratic oligarchy. I think some have already coined the phrase plutarchy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
