Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Libor...WTF?
- Thread starter EnderJE
- Start date
digimon7068
New member
he died back in february...i doubt he's gonna lose much sleep over it.
He had to scream at you...you were an under-achieving, low-life, fuck!!!
If he hadn't screamed at you and whipped your ass into shape just think of where you'd be.
You'd be going down that milled road to the beer distributor, laughing at the one-armed man doing the shoveling!
(it was a one-armed man that killed my wife!)
digimon7068
New member
this is ABSolutely true ^^^^^^^^
my pop's was a prick...right up till the day he died...but, if he left me with nothing else, it was the work ethic of an army mule...he worked like a dog for most of his life and, when times were tough he never said "why me"...he just packed up his shit and worked out of town...sometimes for months at a time...that's the way his generation did things...he was a construction worker that lived in northcentral pa and he was never on unemployment...ever...he probably could have been laid off almost every winter, but the day he died he still had no idea how to sign up for unemployment...and i don't know how to either...don't even know where the office is at.
uamaverick
New member
Funny, I have no idea how to apply for unemployment either, and I was out of a job for 5 months after I graduated high school. I had $30 in my checking account when I finally got hired. I have TOO much pride sometimes, it fucks me over. I refuse to rely on anybody else for my sustenance. I never asked my parents for money in college, even when I had to go without meals sometimes.
digimon7068
New member
ditto...and i've never felt like i was fucking myself over...you gotta draw a line somewhere...and, as judgemental as i may portray myself to be, i'm really not irl...i have plenty of flaws of my own...some that i'm aware of and some that i'm probably not very aware of...one of them is spending too damn much time here when i have work literally coming out of my ears.
Headholio
New member
Imagine 2 piles of money. One is a stack of quarters 3 inches tall and the other is a pile of hundred dollar bills a mile high. The tea party philosophy is that it's not fair to pull one more bill off the stack to the one guy who owns those hundred dollar bills, but we need to pull more of those quarters off the small stack, which is the combined stack for 99 people.
The rich have to pay more because they have all the money. Simple. As more of the total wealth goes to the very few, taxes need to go along with that. The only other choice is that America gets poorer so a few people can get richer.
Redistribution has already happened. The money has been taken from the middle class and redistributed to the super rich.
The redistribution word is a dog whistle. Every tax is a redistribution. And I don't see any Republicans against all tax. They just have their priorities screwed up. They are worshiping the guy with the pile of hundreds and ignoring the people sharing the stack of quarters.
Rich people benefit more than the masses from all this country has to offer. They got rich, many times, off the backs of the middle class, the resources of the country, and government programs that helped them succeed (as well as hard work and initiative and all that). They can pay back to society.
The redistribution word is supposed to evoke fear among those who think the black guy is a socialist. Taxes are historically low, and taxes have always been progressive in this country. For most of modern history, the rich have paid much more than they do now. If Obama is a socialist, then Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Bush Sr, were super socialists. All I'm talking about is bringing back a taxation system that has worked in the past.
Indeed. Add Reagan in there as well.
Was watching BBC the other week and one of the commentators put it the best way I've heard: Second to Clinton and a step above Reagan, Obama is shaping up to be one of the best Republican presidents the country has had in the past 50 years.
Exactly. You nailed it. They pay more because they have more. That's how it was set up. You want them to pay a larger % and that isn't fair. And you're correct. If the 99 people didn't earn those dollar bills then they don't get to take it simply on the belief that they don't deserve it as much because everyone hates rich people. All taxes are not wealth redistribution. Taxes are collected equally from all legal citizens to pay for things we all benefit from as a whole country. Wealth redistribution just for the sake of it and taking from someone who warned more and putting it straight into the hands of someone who has Not earned it. That's an incredibly in accurate statement. "free" health care for example: trying to force those who have their own prvt health care they pay for themselves to pay for everyone else's healthcare who can't afford to pay for it or just don't manage their money well enough to pay for it. It's not for the whole country it's robin hood BS. If you aren't smart enough to make a million dollars, you aren't smart enough to make a million dollars... That's life. No one said it was fair.
Headholio
New member
Are you saying that having the rich pay tax is fair, and having them pay more than the poor is fair, but having them pay a larger % than they currently do isn't fair? Well, then we agree on basic principle, and simply disagree on where to set the tax rate.
Why is the current 35% the limit? When Republicans used reconciliation to pass the Bush tax cuts, they set a 10 year limit on it, knowing that depending on the state of the economy and the state of the deficit, the tax cuts may no longer be appropriate.
And they were right, and todays Republicans are a whole different breed who can't see the practicality of that expiration under the current circumstances. 35% is really really low. Raising it to 39% Obama wants to set it back to is still really low, historically speaking.
A whole different problem is the capital gains rate at 15%. the richest people make most of their money in capital gains anyway, and are paying closer to 15% instead of the 35% for ordinary income. That's just wrong.
It depends on how you look at it. We all use the same roads, but some paid more in taxes than others to fund those roads. The same could be said of defense, etc. Sounds like redistribution to me. As for Entitlement programs, they are designed not just to give people free money, but to benefit society as a whole. Republicans tend to only look at the abuse of those programs, and democrats tend to only see the positives of them. The truth lies in between, but overall, I think the richest country on earth without welfare, social security, or unemployment insurance would be immoral, and I think overall it works, despite some abuse.
People with private healthcare already pay for those who don't have it! The AHA (Obamacare)would actually help to fix that, by making people pay for what they will sooner or later need to have.
No one redistributes wealth like private healthcare insurance. And the first cut, right off the top, goes into the yachts and mansions of the executives. In some countries that is illegal and immoral.
But the best thing about social healthcare is that countries that have it have lower costs and better outcomes than we do. So it fits perfectly with what taxes should be used for, like you said: To pay for something that will benefit us all.
Similar threads
- Sticky
