Buffet/Gates

PonderingMyMakerPonderingMyMaker Posts: 22
edited June 2006 in A Moving Train
Isn't it ironic? In the end, these two capitalist pigs, perverse accumulators of wealth, enemies of the common people, will do more for poor people than every whiny liberal ever born.

I wonder, at this point, if Ed feels kind of silly for mocking Gates.
I'm not a hate monger.
I don't hate anyone.
I'm more of a hate...stylist.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • even flow?even flow? Posts: 8,066
    Isn't it ironic? In the end, these two capitalist pigs, perverse accumulators of wealth, enemies of the common people, will do more for poor people than every whiny liberal ever born.

    I wonder, at this point, if Ed feels kind of silly for mocking Gates.

    Funny that with all their money, New Orleans still looks like Iraq. Now that is ironic for all the capitalist pigs who enjoy the rewards their land offers them and do nothing to fix it when it needs repair.

    As for mocking Gates goes. It is a new year now, ain't it? And with that comes change. I still think if a tool wants the public to pay for a stadium with his/their corporate logo on it, they should get ripped. Probably one of many from that song.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • BinFrogBinFrog MAPosts: 7,290
    How the hell does a post about 2 billionaires donating billions of dollars to charity all of the sudden become a post against liberals? Good lord that's a reach. Jeeze.
    Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
    Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 16,573
    every whiny liberal ever born.


    cant people communicate like fucking adults around here?
  • floyd1975floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    They may not do more than every whiny liberal but they will do more than the government would have done had they confiscated all of that money like some say they should.
  • he still standshe still stands Posts: 2,835
    I think the general message that the original post was making is valid.... but the way that the message was written leaves a lot to be desired.

    If only other incredibly wealthy people would follow suit, instead of transferring their wealth to their inheritants. That is the biggest pitfall of capitalism, the people who accumulate wealth don't redistribute it equitably. If this problem was fixed then capitalism would work... maybe these two guys have taken the first step towards solving this problem.
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    my2hands wrote:
    cant people communicate like fucking adults around here?
    I seriously doubt it. Besides, you're only complaining because you need to get laid.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,831
    zstillings wrote:
    They may not do more than every whiny liberal but they will do more than the government would have done had they confiscated all of that money like some say they should.
    Like Bill Gates for example - advocate of the estate tax.
  • zstillings wrote:
    They may not do more than every whiny liberal but they will do more than the government would have done had they confiscated all of that money like some say they should.

    Come on Z. "whiny liberal." ??
    Casper, WY 06/16/95
    Park City, UT 06/21/98
    Mountain View, CA 06/01/03
    San Diego, CA 07/07/06
    San Francisco, CA 07/15/06
  • floyd1975floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    Come on Z. "whiny liberal." ??

    Sorry, I forgot to use the quotes. I was just trying to keep up with the first post. Definitely not my words.
  • Ok-Sorry Z. I didn't think I was reading that right coming from you. You would never post something like that.
    Casper, WY 06/16/95
    Park City, UT 06/21/98
    Mountain View, CA 06/01/03
    San Diego, CA 07/07/06
    San Francisco, CA 07/15/06
  • I wonder, at this point, if Ed feels kind of silly for mocking Gates.

    I wonder, at this point, if you feel kind of silly for mocking whatever invention in your head that keeps you up at night.

    It takes an interesting kind of person to turn a wonderful situation like this into anger and vitriol.
  • I wonder, at this point, if you feel kind of silly for mocking whatever invention in your head that keeps you up at night.

    It takes an interesting kind of person to turn a wonderful situation like this into anger and vitriol.


    on this, we can agree.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • I wonder, at this point, if you feel kind of silly for mocking whatever invention in your head that keeps you up at night.

    It takes an interesting kind of person to turn a wonderful situation like this into anger and vitriol.

    No anger here. Zip, zero, zilch.

    Ignore the whiny part, then, and attempt to address the point raised.
    I'm not a hate monger.
    I don't hate anyone.
    I'm more of a hate...stylist.
  • decides2dreamdecides2dream Posts: 14,928
    No anger here. Zip, zero, zilch.

    Ignore the whiny part, then, and attempt to address the point raised.


    what exactly is the point? that it's ironic? i don't think it's all that ironic. many a bizillionaire has given much back.
    btw - do you think one can't be a liberal and rich? do you know this for a fact? so perhaps not so bizarre? i mean hey...ed may not be any gates, but i am sure he's got plenty of $$$...and he seems rather liberal-minded...and who's to say gates isn't a liberal? i don't know his personal politics, just sayin'....

    in regards to ed, i highly doubt he gives it a second thought. we all make comments, and can change our opinions at any time. ed hardly strikes me as someone who worries about appearing 'silly.'
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 11,292
    RainDog wrote:
    Like Bill Gates for example - advocate of the estate tax.

    I don't understand why there is even a death tax. Someone earns a lot of income that they pay tax on when earned. Then they die and then it gets taxed again at a very high rate. Just doesn't make sense. I realize that death tax and inheritance tax sound different, but they are the same. Someone dies, and the government (fed and state) come in and take close to half of the estate. I've prepared a few inheritance tax returns and have seen the taxes come out to well over $100 million. It's crazy that the government swoops in and just takes it because the person died.

    That said, I would hope that folks would do something good with all that money and not stockpile it. I just don't trust the government with the money. They'll build some stupid museum about the history of socks or something stupid like that.
  • duffyduffy Posts: 74
    Isn't it ironic? In the end, these two capitalist pigs, perverse accumulators of wealth, enemies of the common people, will do more for poor people than every whiny liberal ever born.





    in any very wealthy person's situation, and good god these guys are megalozillionaires...luck has at least a tiny hand in it. and timing. and parents who thought they were god's gift to the universe. lol but i digress. that being said, being that they have more money than they can personally use...well woopie, give some away. hell, better than giving it to the IRS.

    but about your point, yeah...its like annoying black rapper dudes who say Oprah doesn't like them when she has probably done more to aid the black race than anyone else on the planet.

    btw, the most whiny asses on this earth are obnoxious conservatives. they can suck it.
  • InkdaubInkdaub Posts: 235
    I think it's great what both Gates and Buffet are doing with so much of their money. Don't be so quick to compare these two to other people...whiny liberals or anyone else. Not everyone can give 37 billion to charity. Fewer still can give 37 billion to charity and still remain a billionaire. At the same time, very few can give...I think it's around 85%(Buffet) of their worth to charity and still remain wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice.

    These guys can and do...good for them.
  • BinFrogBinFrog MAPosts: 7,290
    I read a quote from Warren from about 10 years ago which I thought was great. Mind you I'll never have billions of dollars lying around, but his outlook on giving money to his children tells you what kind of person he is:

    "Give your children enough to do anything, but not enough to do nothing."

    Yeah that's probably butchered, but you get the point.
    Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
    Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
  • drivingrldrivingrl Posts: 1,445
    will do more for poor people than every whiny liberal ever born.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060626/pl_nm/financial_buffett_taxes_dc
    drivingrl: "Will I ever get to meet Gwen Stefani?"
    kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.

    Next!"
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,831
    I don't understand why there is even a death tax. Someone earns a lot of income that they pay tax on when earned. Then they die and then it gets taxed again at a very high rate. Just doesn't make sense. I realize that death tax and inheritance tax sound different, but they are the same. Someone dies, and the government (fed and state) come in and take close to half of the estate. I've prepared a few inheritance tax returns and have seen the taxes come out to well over $100 million. It's crazy that the government swoops in and just takes it because the person died.

    That said, I would hope that folks would do something good with all that money and not stockpile it. I just don't trust the government with the money. They'll build some stupid museum about the history of socks or something stupid like that.
    It's not a death tax or an inheritance tax because not everyone who dies and not everyone who inherits something gets taxed. It's an estate tax.

    When a corporation makes a profit, i.e. earns money, it's taxed. When that corporation pays it's employee's, the employee's pay is taxed - even though it's the "same money." When a wealth individual earns money, it's taxed (provided they don't know how to avoid them) - when that person pays his or her heirs in inheritance, it gets taxed.

    And if you're preparing estate tax returns where the tax is in excess of $100 million, congratulations. A person would have to inherit approximately $300 million to have to pay that much. You must be making a killing in fees.
  • RainDog wrote:
    And if you're preparing estate tax returns where the tax is in excess of $100 million, congratulations. A person would have to inherit approximately $300 million to have to pay that much. You must be making a killing in fees.

    I think there are a whopping 7500 estates in the entire country that are effected by this tax...
    "Of course it hurts. You're getting fucked by an elephant."
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,554
    I think there are a whopping 7500 estates in the entire country that are effected by this tax...

    Even if that's true, is it fair to tax them? Why should they be singled out?
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • I think there are a whopping 7500 estates in the entire country that are effected by this tax...

    Then there's no reason to have it.
  • floyd1975floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    I think there are a whopping 7500 estates in the entire country that are effected by this tax...

    That makes it alright then. As long as it's only a small number of people getting stolen from then we should just turn a blind eye. Maybe cities should stop prosecuting murders if there are only a few.
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    know1 wrote:
    Even if that's true, is it fair to tax them? Why should they be singled out?
    Transfer of wealth is usually taxed. So having an estate tax fits in with that ideaology. The problem is that an estate's wealth is often tied up in assets that aren't easily exchangebale for cash to pay a tax bill.
    I'm okay with an estate tax as long as it is brought in slowly over a five or ten year period, allowing time for estate planning.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,831
    Then there's no reason to have it.
    Me, I can think of a few billion reasons to have it, but hey, you know?

    I'm still curious as to how a society can function without taxes. We can tax the poor instead of the rich, sure. Or we can tax the rich instead of the poor. We can tax both at a progressive rate (kinda like here). Or we could implement some sort of "fair tax" or "sales tax" in lieu of an income tax (which is really shifting the tax burden to the middle class and poor, but we could do it). But what we can't do is not have taxes. Very few Bill Gateses in the world, you see - in that there are few that ever reach his level (actually never happened before) and far far fewer are as charitable.
  • Pacomc79Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    Did the government introduce an easy to operate system for navigating on a computer?

    The irony here is that you're slamming a guy who invented the operating system that you are using now and you're begrudging his success while his invention is making your life easier in a multitude of ways, simply because he had a dream and a vision and an invention and put his blood sweat and tears in it, then convinced others to dot he same and it revolutionized business and made him a very very very rich man. Should he give all that to the goverment to piss away like they do with every other program or try and set up charities that actually do have a positive impact on peoples lives?

    Sure I have problems with Microsoft and their business practices, but you're hating a guy for simply being wealthy as if his decisions, efforts, and hard work did not put him in that position and he won some lottery.

    Of course we must have some government. Of course we must have taxes to protect commerce, property, the public good etc. But this current system is ridiculous. Why do we punish success, effort, and inititive?
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • zstillings wrote:
    That makes it alright then. As long as it's only a small number of people getting stolen from then we should just turn a blind eye. Maybe cities should stop prosecuting murders if there are only a few.

    Yeah, that's a perfect analogy...

    I was referring to the fact that Republican members of congress are harping on this like it's a huge issue that directly effects the entire country.
    "Of course it hurts. You're getting fucked by an elephant."
  • RainDog wrote:
    I'm still curious as to how a society can function without taxes.

    I'm still curious as to how a society can function with a sanctioned system of theft backed by professional brutes. Apparently we have different standards of "function".
    We can tax the poor instead of the rich, sure.

    That would still be a tax.
    Or we can tax the rich instead of the poor.

    Or? As if you have two options? How about taxing no one?
    We can tax both at a progressive rate (kinda like here). Or we could implement some sort of "fair tax" or "sales tax" in lieu of an income tax (which is really shifting the tax burden to the middle class and poor, but we could do it). But what we can't do is not have taxes. Very few Bill Gateses in the world, you see - in that there are few that ever reach his level (actually never happened before) and far far fewer are as charitable.

    Dude, you can pay whatever taxes you'd like. I really don't care. If you want to pay the government to do something, who am I to question why or how you should do it?
  • I was referring to the fact that Republican members of congress are harping on this like it's a huge issue that directly effects the entire country.

    And do you hold Democrats to that standard when they harp on issues that affect small minorities?
«134
Sign In or Register to comment.