Take from the rich...

[cannon_fodder]

and give to everyone else.
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/NewsStory.aspx?cpath=20071024%5cACQDJON200710242253DOWJONESDJONLINE001107.htm&

The chairmen of Ways and Means committee has proposed essentially revoking income taxes altogether on the bottom half of Americans and paying them more money from the federal government in the EITC.  It will be funded by raising the income tax by 4% on the top 10% of wage earners.

Other details include reduction of business taxes for certain interests and of course tons of other provisions that no citizen nor congressmen will read in full.  But to summarize...

Raise taxes on the upper 10% and give that money to the bottom 50%.  With liberty and justice for all.  No wait, that's mob rule.  They have what we want, lets use the government to take it and then give it to us. Unbelievable.

What happens when they get this extra 4-5%?  Will everything be OK?  It wasnt fixed by a progressive income tax, when the bottom x% was removed from the tax rolls, or when the "earned income tax credit" started "refunded" tax money never paid in.  Just 5% more, come on.  Oh, and health care.  The rich should pay for our health care.  Oh yeah, and soon social security will be broke we'll need someone else to pay for that too.  Hey, I bought a house I can't afford, government subsidize my loan please.  No you can't cut farm subsidies, I need the government to give me cheap food.  No, don't raise taxes on gas to fix roads, use income taxes because I dont pay any. Did I mention I need prescription drugs, government!  My kid wants to go to college, give him money.  

Is there anything that is a citizens responsibility anymore or is everything up to the government?

This is the most overt wealth redistribution proposal I've ever seen from a ranking member of Congress.  Take it because they have it and give it because they don't.  Marx, Lenin, Mao, Hugo, Fidel, and Pol Pot would be so proud.  I'm rambling, this is infuriating.

[Conan71]

What the hell is Rangel smoking?

[Wingnut]

quote: What the hell is Rangel smoking?

It's genetic.

[Hometown]

This reminds me of a radical capitalist that proposed a maximum wage back in the '80s.  He proposed taking income in excess of the maximum wage and putting it into capital accounts for middle and lower class citizens.  He claims that to pursue the Constitutional guaranty of happiness in the U.S., one must have capital.

He also argued that because of the pyramiding effect of capitalism, more and more money becomes concentrated in fewer and fewer hands and that the money becomes unproductive and leads to obscenities like $30 Million paintings.

He said that when money is distributed to middle and lower class people through the proposed capital accounts, it becomes extremely productive and boosts the wealth effect across the board.

It's difficult to broach this subject with most people because outside of New Yorkers and money center professionals, most people have next to no idea how much money is in circulation and just how wealthy our upper class has become.

The gap between the "haves" and the "have nots" has become so extreme that it has made social mobility a thing of the past.  We are headed towards a permanent underclass and the middle class is going to end up in the same boat as their lower class counterparts.  Of course it was social mobility that was the glue that held our society together and allowed the rag picker to live beside the wealthy heir in relative peace.  The Republican policies of the last 30 years have only exacerbated the situation and have put us on a path to class war fare.

I have been waiting for a populist to arise on the left to rectify the situation.  One need only listen to the speeches of Huey Long to understand the power of a populist's message.

Moderating our course and moving towords financial equity and fairness in our system might help preserve the status quo as it did in the 30s with Roosevelt's "New Deal."  But I see no signs of moderating influences.

Meanwhile my once well-off hometown has lost is chubby advantage and has become home to hordes of toothless, lower-class Whites who would certainly see their reflection in a new and improved Huey Long.

[Conan71]

Hometown, economic policies of the last 30 years have allowed far more people to break the middle class glass ceiling than any other period in American history.  Why is there something wrong with that?  It sure as hell doesn't lend any proof to your claims of inhibited financial mobility.  I'm sure it also accounted for some modicum of your own prosperity which has allowed you to plough, by your own estimations, somewhere around $400K into the local economy since you moved back to Tulsa.

I never hear you rail against all the "dot bombs", bogus IPO's, and accounting fiascos which occured during the Clinton years which allowed many to profit off the backs of pension funds and smaller investors who lost their donkey due to other's greed.  

Reagan has been out of office for almost 19 years- get over it!  

It's narrow-minded wealthy liberals like Chuck Rangel, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Ted Kennedy who keep fanning the flames of class warfare.  The very people you keep ripping off talking points from are from your dreaded upper-class.

[tim huntzinger]

We are how many TRILLIONS of dollars in debt? And we think we are going expand our economy to pay for it in how many decades?  The 4% extra is on couples making more than $200K or individuals making +$150K, or like six times the median income for Tulsans, and we are supposed to feel bad for them?  Raising taxes is similar to butchering dissenters? Did you not forget LIFE in front of the other two guarentees?

This gloom and doom krap about taxes got it exactly wrong during the Clinton years, got it wrong with minimum wages, and is a bunch of mamby pamby whining.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

We are how many TRILLIONS of dollars in debt? And we think we are going expand our economy to pay for it in how many decades?  The 4% extra is on couples making more than $200K or individuals making +$150K, or like six times the median income for Tulsans, and we are supposed to feel bad for them?  Raising taxes is similar to butchering dissenters? Did you not forget LIFE in front of the other two guarentees?

This gloom and doom krap about taxes got it exactly wrong during the Clinton years, got it wrong with minimum wages, and is a bunch of mamby pamby whining.

Tim, you are missing the point.  It's shifting a higher tax burden to more wealthy and taking some off lower earners.  It doesn't do anything to trim the "trillions in debt".

[shadows]

Capitalism is no more that a freeholder system of a selfish installation of a republic monarchy created by class action whereas a small group takes on an identity of a single person.  Such groups, acting as a single person, using their compound knowledge, establish a ruling society which seeks to control those not of their class.   Under our system, government has become the capitalist as they control the barter of exchange in their struggle to retain authority.   Such capitalist systems that produce no product for exchange have derived on an old system of deflating the barter of exchange by over issuing paper certificates in order to maintain a very unstable economy.

Like the empires that in the past that have failed we are trying to extend our influence over other nations which by the float of our barter of exchange, it has caused the individuals of the lower class to indebt even our great grandchildren.   They will pay an extending price for our negligence to address the cost of wars fought for capitalism.

Gold,  held as a stable barter of exchanged in the world, has cost the devaluation of the dollar more than 50% in the last five years.

Those who suffer under the capitalism system the government's have taken are the pensioners and working poor.    Tomorrow it will have to be on the shoulders of the un-conceived children of today.

It all is going down the avenue travel by many empires before but this time again there is no one available to light the street lights that show the road ahead.

In other words government acting under the guise of capitalist just plain stinks.                      

[tim huntzinger]

My point would be that we are not going to stop spending so the only thing we can do is raise taxes.  Oklahoma has a surplus from its taxpayers, this could certainly happen at the Federal level and then we could - over a century - pay down the debt.  I do not want to see taxes raised on anyone, but what else can we do?

[Hometown]

Tim, Did you hear Greenspan talk recently about how freaked out they were in Clinton's second term because thanks to Clinton we faced the prospect of paying off the debt.

Anyway, Shadows, our government is as good as the people it represents.

Hey, Shadows, that post where you referred to the weight of a feather -- was beautifully written.  Was that your own metaphor?

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by shadows



Capitalism is no more that a freeholder system of a selfish installation of a republic monarchy created by class action whereas a small group takes on an identity of a single person.  Such groups, acting as a single person, using their compound knowledge, establish a ruling society which seeks to control those not of their class.   Under our system, government has become the capitalist as they control the barter of exchange in their struggle to retain authority.   Such capitalist systems that produce no product for exchange have derived on an old system of deflating the barter of exchange by over issuing paper certificates in order to maintain a very unstable economy.

Like the empires that in the past that have failed we are trying to extend our influence over other nations which by the float of our barter of exchange, it has caused the individuals of the lower class to indebt even our great grandchildren.   They will pay an extending price for our negligence to address the cost of wars fought for capitalism.

Gold,  held as a stable barter of exchanged in the world, has cost the devaluation of the dollar more than 50% in the last five years.

Those who suffer under the capitalism system the government's have taken are the pensioners and working poor.    Tomorrow it will have to be on the shoulders of the un-conceived children of today.

It all is going down the avenue travel by many empires before but this time again there is no one available to light the street lights that show the road ahead.

In other words government acting under the guise of capitalist just plain stinks.                      

Poetry.  Pure gold.  Doesn't make any sense, but pure genius.  This is why I come here.

[Conan71]

I Gizoogled his post for better clarification:

quote:
"Capitizzle is no more thizzay a freeholda system of a selfish installation of a republic monarchy created by class action whereas a S-M-to-tha-izzall group takes on an identity of a single person n ****. Such groups, blingin' as a single person, using they compound knowledge, establish a rul'n society which seeks ta control those not of they class . Bounce wit me. Unda our system, government has become tha capitizzles as they control tha playa of exchange in they struggle ta retain authority. Such capitizzles systems tizzle produce no product fo` exchange hizzy derived on an old system of deflat'n tha barta of exchange by over issu'n papa certificizzles in rappa ta maintain a very unstable economy.

Like tha empires that in tha past thizzat hizzle failed we is blingin' ta extend our influence over shot calla nations W-H-to-tha-izzich by tha float of our cracka of exchange, it has caused tha individuals of tha lowa class ta indebt even our bootylicious grandchildren. They will pay an extend'n price fo` our negligence ta address tha cizzost of wars fought fo` capitizzles yaba daba dizzle.

Gold, held as a stable playa of exchanged in tha world, has cost tha devalizzles of tha dollar mizzle tizzle 50% in tha last five years ta help you tap dat donkey.

Those who suffa killa tha capitizzle system tha government's have taken is tha rappa n work'n poor . Its just anotha homocide. Tomorrow it W-to-tha-izzill have ta be on tha shoulda of tha un-conceived children of today.

It all is going down tha avenue travel by many empires before but this tizzle again there is no one available ta light tha street lights that S-H-to-tha-izzow tha road aheezee.

In hustla words government blingin' unda tha guise of capitizzles just plain stinks. "

I totally got it now!

[USRufnex]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

and give to everyone else.
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/NewsStory.aspx?cpath=20071024%5cACQDJON200710242253DOWJONESDJONLINE001107.htm&

The chairmen of Ways and Means committee has proposed essentially revoking income taxes altogether on the bottom half of Americans and paying them more money from the federal government in the EITC.  It will be funded by raising the income tax by 4% on the top 10% of wage earners.

Other details include reduction of business taxes for certain interests and of course tons of other provisions that no citizen nor congressmen will read in full.  But to summarize...

Raise taxes on the upper 10% and give that money to the bottom 50%.  With liberty and justice for all.  No wait, that's mob rule.  They have what we want, lets use the government to take it and then give it to us. Unbelievable.

How dare you compare this proposal to Marx, Lenin, Mao, Hugo, Fidel, and Pol Pot???

"Mob rule" would take more than 4%, I bet...

It's very telling that a 4% higher tax on those who CAN afford it would raise incredibly huge sums of money... would very likely take us from huge fake-deficits to another Clinton era surplus.... acting like the rich have "earned" their money is pure folly...

The NY Times in 2005 reported that... "Other data shows that among major world economies, the United States in recent years has the third-greatest disparity in incomes between the very top and everyone else. Only Mexico and Russia, among major economies, have greater disparity."

So, why would the United States want to be MORE like Mexico and Russia... tell me this, capitalist...

And can you please share the percentage of people who earn over $200,000 per year who have family in the military who are fighting and dying for this country?  

Why should someone's money make more money than I do?  Is their money that much more hard working than I am?  You can make excuses in the traditions of run-of-the-mill economists...  

If you make over $200,000 per year, it's not about money anymore.  It's about control.  It's about power.  It's about prestige...

If you didn't notice, we're at war... why make the Bush tax cuts for the rich permanent???  Stupidity and incompetence should never be rewarded...

[Wilbur]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

We are how many TRILLIONS of dollars in debt? And we think we are going expand our economy to pay for it in how many decades?  The 4% extra is on couples making more than $200K or individuals making +$150K, or like six times the median income for Tulsans, and we are supposed to feel bad for them?  Raising taxes is similar to butchering dissenters? Did you not forget LIFE in front of the other two guarentees?

This gloom and doom krap about taxes got it exactly wrong during the Clinton years, got it wrong with minimum wages, and is a bunch of mamby pamby whining.

You mean an additional 4% more on top of the MORE they already pay.  Yea, that's fair.

[cannon_fodder]

I've posted the statistics here OVER and OVER and OVER about how the average American, MEDIAN, Mr. Middle class is far wealthier today than he historically has been in American history (forever, but for the irrational exuberance of the 1990's which led to our recession in early 2000's).  Inflation, cost of living, and everything else adjusted. He makes more.  Has a fancier car.  A bigger house.  Spends more on medicine (and lives longer).  I'm not going to waste my time digging them out again for people to ignore yet again.

And no, the rich are not richer than they ever have been.  The great wealthy men in the past control solid percentage points of our GDP:  Astor, Ford, Vanderbilt, Rockefeller.  The wealth of even the richest American's today pales in comparison to the old when viewed with regard to the rest of our wealth, let alone to the aristocrats of yesteryear.

Furthermore, who cares?  The average American is wealthier today than they used to be, why should it matter if someone else is more wealthier (actually used in the correct context, I do not think I've ever done that before)?  If I am granted a 25% raise and my coworker is granted a 100% raise I am no worse off.  Yeah I'm richer, but some are richer still!  Economics is NOT a zero sum game.

Speaking of economics... I've argued before that wealth serves no purpose without expenditure.  We should ENCOURAGE rich people to buy $30,000,000 paintings (isn't that right William!), ridiculously expensive cars, and eating at $500 restaurants.  The painter, paint supplier, art dealer, car salesmen, factory worker, mechanic, insurance companies, restaurant owner, property manager, maintenance workers, waiters, and valets appreciate it.  There are entire industries specialized in getting money away from those that have too much, who cares if it doesn't target you?

Finally, what justification is there to take away someone's earnings to give to someone else?  Did the MD do something wrong that we wish to discourage?  Did the lower middle class do something that deserves a reward?  Is there some reason that the doctor, college professor, or entrepreneur is expected to support not only the government but other people - while (under the proposal) most American's should not have to?  The only reason is because they have money and you can take it.  I find that entire concept vile.

Now here is where you give your take care of poverty speech, and I laugh at you for calling someone with free housing, free food, free health care, a government check, a tax "refund," a car and a color TV as living in "poverty."  In most places a roof over year head, food, and running water puts you into the elite crowd.  Here, if you can't afford an iPhone you think the government should take someone else's money and give it to you.


Ruf:

Yes the noted despots and communists I listed would certainly be proud.  Of course they would WANT to take more, as I'm sure many socialists in this country do.  But they would surely be awful excited at the next great leap for more state control of wealth.  

To answer your question, I have no idea what percentage of people > $200K have family in the military... is that now a prerequisite for keeping your wealth?  No family in the military = government takes your money.  That's called militarism and most liberals at least pretend to hate it.  Encouraging the rich to control the economy, the government AND the military might be seen as a bad idea by some.

quote:Why should someone's money make more money than I do? Is their money that much more hard working than I am?

Thank you for summing up your entire argument for me:  "They have more than I have, I deserve it at least as much as they do, I'm going to take it. I know how much money they need, I know they don't work hard, I will get the government to do what I want and take what they have."  That entire train of thought is why I am against this and any other wealth redistribution scheme (hint: I make far, far less than the threshold so would not be effected negatively).  Its petty, contrary to the notion of freedom, and paramount to institutionalized theft.

And if someone proposed a war tax I would vote in favor of it.  This is not a war tax, this is taking money from some Americans and giving it to other Americans simply because we can.  We are not talking about minimum subsistence or health care, we are talking about taking working American's money who have done nothing wrong and giving it to other people so those people can buy more things.  And I have yet to see a defensible position in favor of this proposal.

quote:why make the Bush tax cuts for the rich permanent??? Stupidity and incompetence should never be rewarded../

You're right, the "rich" are all stupid and incompetent.  That's why the vast majority of them worked their way to the top of the ladder.  Buffet, Gates, Dell, the Google guys, John Edwards - stupid.  Honestly, if you take the attitude that anyone who has achieved anything is stupid and doesn't deserve it you have serious responsibility issues to overcome.  Most wealthy people have made it there on their own accord, most of your post just sounds bitter that you have not.  Why does it matter to you what OTHER people have so long as you have what you need and they did not obtain theirs to your detriment?

Worthless argument.  The "they have done well lets take it from them attitude" isn't exactly what we're founded on but I'm sure your set in your ways.