That was a comment in the letters to the editor section of our daily paper this morning.
There was no rhyme or reason to the letter, just a statement that the wealthy use the same roads as the rest of us and their wealth should be redistributed for the common good.
This seemingly ties into the thread about who is rich.
Among a number of other fallacies in the idea, it should be pointed out that you can’t “redistribute” something that wasn’t “distributed” in the first place. Except for those wealthy who got their funds by government subsidies taken from taxpayers by force or similar special favors from the state, they created the wealth themselves. If they hadn’t, there wouldn’t be anything even to talk about “distributing.”
From my understanding, the top 20% of earners and corporations provide 70+% of the government’s tax revenue. How is that not a fair share? I understand that they want to pay off the US debt but gouging your top contributors for more money doesn’t exactly seem fair at all.
And now we see how Marxism is alive and well here in the US of A
.
It’s kind of the same argument you get when cofronted by an irrate car driver (cager) on the road while riding a bicyle. They yell that “I pay taxes to drive on the road”. Really? You f’n think I don’t pay taxes for the road I’m driving on because I’m on a bicycle? There’s not much logic there.
I posted this before, but didn’t get much response. If you just take “ALL” the $$ of the rich…
That was a comment in the letters to the editor section of our daily paper this morning.
There was no rhyme or reason to the letter, just a statement that the wealthy use the same roads as the rest of us and their wealth should be redistributed for the common good.
This seemingly ties into the thread about who is rich.
Marxists come from the weakest layer of the gene pool.
These people could never survive in this world if they had to rely on their own intelligence, drive, and hard work.
They want the easy way out in life, which is to take, take, take, that for which they have not earned.
And now we see how Marxism is alive and well here in the US of A
There’s a fine line between taxation and full blown Marxism apparently.
And who do we trust to do this redistribution? Our wonderful government who’s approval rating along with it credit rating has hit pathetic low.
Yes, good plan. Get rid of free market capitalism, and let Washington pick the winners and the losers (I’m sure there will be no favoritism).
From my understanding, the top 20% of earners and corporations provide 70+%
At the federal level the top 20% paid 86.3% of all income tax in 2006.
I’ve not seen state and local numbers for this but I’d guess they are significantly lower as you are looking at a lot of sales tax.
~Matt
“According to IRS tax data, anybody earning $380,354 or more qualifies for membership in the top 1 percent. IRS data shows, too, that the top 1 percent holds 35.6 percent of the nation’s wealth, not the 50 percent claimed by Occupiers”.
Under 400K and you are in the top 1%? That says quite a bit about all those at the bottom, doesn’t it?
Yes, good plan. Get rid of free market capitalism, and let Washington pick the winners and the losers (I’m sure there will be no favoritism).
We have a free market??? When did that happen?
Clearly, but what the line from the OP is saying is far from taxation.
the counterpoint of course is thatwe can see many examples of people getting rich due to corruption, lying, cheating the system, and government assistance.
I say its perfectly valid for instance to complain about any of “the 1 %” who work for financial companies that got a bailout.
asking for some redistribution from them is actually UNDOING some marxism, in a way =)
: ) Ya you rich prick I want the money back you stole from my pension fund and 401K - - - You don’t even have to give it to me, just fix some bridges, schools and highways, and pay down the deficit. : )
the counterpoint of course is thatwe can see many examples of people getting rich due to corruption, lying, cheating the system, and government assistance.
I say its perfectly valid for instance to complain about any of “the 1 %” who work for financial companies that got a bailout.
asking for some redistribution from them is actually UNDOING some marxism, in a way =)
Well, indeed, if the OWS protesters had one main message–End Banker Bailouts and End the Fed–then I would agree, however, it seems that most don’t want Wall Street bailed out (A Tea Party demand), THEY WANT THE BAILOUT!!
So OWS is some fucked up frankenstein blend of a Marxist Tea Party movement sprinkled with a lot of useful idiot Obamabots that don’t shave, stink like ass, and don’t even understand the cognitive dissonance in their own message.
funny you should mention that because being opposed to the bailouts and ending the Fed are two of the more consistent chunks of OWS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hpbhRVKwvBA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUm8M_PG0XI
.
I think what he means is that the protesters want to be bailed out themselves.
And now we see how Marxism is alive and well here in the US of A
I prefer to call it neo-Bolshevism because we seem to be on a very similar path to that which the Russians followed in the early 1900’s. The productive class didn’t fair so well last time and I see no reason why we should be complacent this time.
More specifically, Obama is beginning to look a lot like Kerensky (the ultimate one-term leader).
funny you should mention that because being opposed to the bailouts and ending the Fed are two of the more consistent chunks of OWS:
http://www.youtube.com/...ed&v=hpbhRVKwvBA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUm8M_PG0XI]
So you are saying that OWS stole the Tea Parties’ platform, and that these people are really stealth tea party activists?