Your tax money at work
You can have both, dignity and embrace the free market economy. One does not have to give up either, to attain the other. You envision capitalism as necessarily evil, granted there are those that flaunt their excess, but the majority are far from the "evil empire" stereotype.
Get on board with the realities of your situation, participate in the markets, and enjoy yourself. Pining for attributes beyond what the market assigns (or bears) is the kind of lost pseudo-romanticism that makes one smoke a lot of weed, drive a Volvo, and listen to bad jam bands.
No, really. FFS. . . there's not a
to be found around here?
Originally Posted by NuncoStr8' timestamp='1312834807' post='20858518
[quote name='ChefJ' timestamp='1312822848' post='20857792'][quote name='WarrenW' timestamp='1312815063' post='20857367']I'm not saying that guy is right for what he did but how is what he did any different than the oil companies getting billions in taxpayer money from the fed. gov't and at the same time charging the American consumer through the nose for gas all the while raking in record profits?
[/quote]
It's not nonsense, maybe you need to slowly re-read the excerpt again. And if you wish to read more, here is where you can find the whole work.
Dr. Rogers' 1996 work Ten Secrets for a Successful Family (ISBN 978-0891078838).
[/quote]
It is nonsense, it was copied and pasted, and my point was that a poster criticized another for "copying and pasting", whereas your post was a copy and paste but he responded favorably with emoticons. So clearly the poster in question has no problems with blind acceptance of nonsense but responds negatively towards rational examination of the issues.
It is interesting how negatively conservatives respond when one asks a question that requires abstract thought.
And the four points you copy/pasted *are* nonsense. They are a response to an argument that doesn't exist. By pasting them you are implying someone made assertions that needed refuting. I re-read the thread and nobody had made any suggestion that legislation can or should make poor people rich. And everybody has to pay taxes, it's both the law and mandatory if you want the services provided by the state. You know, things like fire and police. To argue that the gov't "takes" your money is simplistic and ignorant. You owe the gov't money because collectively we have a gov't that creates an economic environment where you can get an education and earn a living. The higher your income the more you benefit from the environment. Pissing and whining about the bill after receiving the benefits is crass and uncouth. If you don't think you should have to pay taxes, move someplace where they don't. Or stop making and spending money. Pretty simple. And remember that nobody gets to choose how their taxes are spent. I'd rather not have mine go towards killing people, and I think it's a simple request that shouldn't cause that much uproar, but it isn't up to me, is it?
I'm not saying that guy is right for what he did but how is what he did any different than the oil companies getting billions in taxpayer money from the fed. gov't and at the same time charging the American consumer through the nose for gas all the while raking in record profits?
You do make a very valid point but the sad side is that people are so hardcore programmed for what the govt wants them to see and think, that reasoning or sheading light on truth will never work with sheeple.
That's what I thought. Not a god-damned thing to say. It's all well and good when everyone agrees with you or backs down when you accuse them of being a "liberal," but when you are faced with hard truths it gets all quiet.
Why am I not surprised?
Why am I not surprised?
"Henry, last fall every time your boss got on the stump and said it's time for the rich to pay their fair share - I hid under a couch and changed my name. I left Gage Whitney making 400,000$ a year, which means I paid 27 times the national avarege in income tax. I paid my fair share and the fair share of 26 other people. And I'm happy to, cause that's the only way it's gonna work, and it is in my best interest the everybody be able to go to school and drive on roads - but I don't get 27 votes on election day, the fire department doesn't come to my house 27 times faster and the water doesn't come out of my faucet 27 times hotter. the top percent of wage earners in this country pay for 22 percent of this country. Let's not call them names while they're doing it is all I'm saying!"
Took you five days to find something to copy and paste? What, you find that in "The Online Republican's Playbook"?
If you cannot form a coherent and logical defense of your position, I'm not sure why you would insist you are right. Or why you would think anyone would agree, since you cannot even defend your position.
FWIW, the reason a guy who makes $400,000 might pay "27 times the national avarege in income tax" is because they are benefitting that much over their fellow citizens. Why should the guy making $40,000 pay the same tax rate or the same tax as the guy making ten times that amount? Suppose they both pay the same 25% rate. One guy takes home $30K and the other guy takes home $300K. Guess who is going to have little tolerance for the whining?
The idea that everyone should work their ass off so the rich can get richer is ludicrous. On the other hand, if we all work to ensure the success and prosperity of the middle and lower classes, the upper classes will benefit. History has shown that the benefit of the upper class has very little benefit to the middle and lower classes. Quite the opposite.
In fact, there is quite a bit of scholarly economic theory that refutes "trickle-down" economics. Backed by financial events of history. There is plenty of evidence that shows granting economic preference to the top income earners only widens the gap between the middle and upper classes and wreaks havoc on economies. I don't know what kind of brainwashing is necessary to convince someone to fight for tax breaks for people who make much more than you.
If you cannot form a coherent and logical defense of your position, I'm not sure why you would insist you are right. Or why you would think anyone would agree, since you cannot even defend your position.
FWIW, the reason a guy who makes $400,000 might pay "27 times the national avarege in income tax" is because they are benefitting that much over their fellow citizens. Why should the guy making $40,000 pay the same tax rate or the same tax as the guy making ten times that amount? Suppose they both pay the same 25% rate. One guy takes home $30K and the other guy takes home $300K. Guess who is going to have little tolerance for the whining?
The idea that everyone should work their ass off so the rich can get richer is ludicrous. On the other hand, if we all work to ensure the success and prosperity of the middle and lower classes, the upper classes will benefit. History has shown that the benefit of the upper class has very little benefit to the middle and lower classes. Quite the opposite.
In fact, there is quite a bit of scholarly economic theory that refutes "trickle-down" economics. Backed by financial events of history. There is plenty of evidence that shows granting economic preference to the top income earners only widens the gap between the middle and upper classes and wreaks havoc on economies. I don't know what kind of brainwashing is necessary to convince someone to fight for tax breaks for people who make much more than you.
Took you five days to find something to copy and paste? What, you find that in "The Online Republican's Playbook"?
If you cannot form a coherent and logical defense of your position, I'm not sure why you would insist you are right. Or why you would think anyone would agree, since you cannot even defend your position.
FWIW, the reason a guy who makes $400,000 might pay "27 times the national avarege in income tax" is because they are benefitting that much over their fellow citizens. Why should the guy making $40,000 pay the same tax rate or the same tax as the guy making ten times that amount? SAuppose they both pay the same 25% rate. One guy takes home $30K and the other guy takes home $300K. Guess who is going to have little tolerance for the whining? Wasn't that answered in my post?????
The idea that everyone should work their ass off so the rich can get richer is ludicrous. On the other hand, if we all work to ensure the success and prosperity of the middle and lower classes, the upper classes will benefit. History has shown that the benefit of the upper class has very little benefit to the middle and lower classes. Quite the opposite.
In fact, there is quite a bit of scholarly economic theory that refutes "trickle-down" economics. Backed by financial events of history. There is plenty of evidence that shows granting economic preference to the top income earners only widens the gap between the middle and upper classes and wreaks havoc on economies. I don't know what kind of brainwashing is necesary to convince someone to fight for tax breaks for people who make much more than you.
If you cannot form a coherent and logical defense of your position, I'm not sure why you would insist you are right. Or why you would think anyone would agree, since you cannot even defend your position.
FWIW, the reason a guy who makes $400,000 might pay "27 times the national avarege in income tax" is because they are benefitting that much over their fellow citizens. Why should the guy making $40,000 pay the same tax rate or the same tax as the guy making ten times that amount? SAuppose they both pay the same 25% rate. One guy takes home $30K and the other guy takes home $300K. Guess who is going to have little tolerance for the whining? Wasn't that answered in my post?????
The idea that everyone should work their ass off so the rich can get richer is ludicrous. On the other hand, if we all work to ensure the success and prosperity of the middle and lower classes, the upper classes will benefit. History has shown that the benefit of the upper class has very little benefit to the middle and lower classes. Quite the opposite.
In fact, there is quite a bit of scholarly economic theory that refutes "trickle-down" economics. Backed by financial events of history. There is plenty of evidence that shows granting economic preference to the top income earners only widens the gap between the middle and upper classes and wreaks havoc on economies. I don't know what kind of brainwashing is necesary to convince someone to fight for tax breaks for people who make much more than you.
I'm in the process of outfitting my new restaurant down in Buckhead. discussing other peoples issues in a car forum has been on the back burner.
p.s. I'll clear well over 400k this year.
You could clear $1 million and it wouldn't buy you class.

BTW how much are your illegal laborers clearing?
For a better way to spend tax money, seek Rick Perry's advice:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...leTabs=article
Socialism works in the secession state!
Gov. Rick Perry's presidential pitch goes something like this: During one of the worst recessions in American history, he's kept his state "open for business." In the last two years, Texas created over a quarter of a million jobs, meaning that the state's 8% unemployment rate is substantially lower than the rest of the nation's. The governor credits this exceptional growth to things like low taxes and tort reform.
It's a strong message. But one of the governor's signature economic development initiatives—the Texas Emerging Technology Fund—has lately raised serious questions among some conservatives.
The Emerging Technology Fund was created at Mr. Perry's behest in 2005 to act as a kind of public-sector venture capital firm, largely to provide funding for tech start-ups in Texas. Since then, the fund has committed nearly $200 million of taxpayer money to fund 133 companies. Mr. Perry told a group of CEOs in May that the fund's "strategic investments are what's helping us keep groundbreaking innovations in the state." The governor, together with the lieutenant governor and the speaker of the Texas House, enjoys ultimate decision-making power over the fund's investments.
It's a strong message. But one of the governor's signature economic development initiatives—the Texas Emerging Technology Fund—has lately raised serious questions among some conservatives.
The Emerging Technology Fund was created at Mr. Perry's behest in 2005 to act as a kind of public-sector venture capital firm, largely to provide funding for tech start-ups in Texas. Since then, the fund has committed nearly $200 million of taxpayer money to fund 133 companies. Mr. Perry told a group of CEOs in May that the fund's "strategic investments are what's helping us keep groundbreaking innovations in the state." The governor, together with the lieutenant governor and the speaker of the Texas House, enjoys ultimate decision-making power over the fund's investments.
Socialism works in the secession state!








