There ain't gonna be any middle anymore...

BrinkofForever

know1 wrote:

But is taxing the rich unfairly the answer to that gap?

So you take from the rich, but how much does it really help the poor? Are their lives better, or is it just that the rich now have less money with which to buy things, start companies, employ people, etc. - all of which redistributes wealth.

From what I've seen, taxing just gives more money to the government to spend.

(and please do not kid yourself that everyone is being taxed similarly. The rich are taxed at much higher rates which is unfair, in my opinion)

I have no problem with reducing the rich's tax burden as long as mine is either not effected or goes down as well. And... you can guarantee me that there will not be a shortfall in tax reciepts to cover the nation's budget. Decreasing military spending would be a wonderful start, as that comprises nearly half the budget..along with interest payments on previous U.S. wars.

keeponrockin

The extremists are running this country because the moderates have shit to do.

ryan198

know1 wrote:

But is taxing the rich unfairly the answer to that gap?

So you take from the rich, but how much does it really help the poor? Are their lives better, or is it just that the rich now have less money with which to buy things, start companies, employ people, etc. - all of which redistributes wealth.

From what I've seen, taxing just gives more money to the government to spend.

(and please do not kid yourself that everyone is being taxed similarly. The rich are taxed at much higher rates which is unfair, in my opinion)

Actually, your argument is what this country and many others have operated under for the last 40 years...during that time the gap between the rich and the poor has widened! Say what you want about the government being corrupt or something, but at least they gave some money back. To leave it to individual philanthropy has NOT EVER worked.

know1

ryan198 wrote:

Actually, your argument is what this country and many others have operated under for the last 40 years...during that time the gap between the rich and the poor has widened! Say what you want about the government being corrupt or something, but at least they gave some money back. To leave it to individual philanthropy has NOT EVER worked.

I'm saying that the problem is not the GAP itself. It's the fact that people are poor. It doesn't have anything to do with rich people or the gap.

If the problem is that there are people living in poverty, the answer should be to help them rise out of it. The answer should not be to make the rich less wealthy.

thankyougrandma

know1 wrote:

I'm saying that the problem is not the GAP itself. It's the fact that people are poor. It doesn't have anything to do with rich people or the gap.

If the problem is that there are people living in poverty, the answer should be to help them rise out of it. The answer should not be to make the rich less wealthy.

There's that much money available, when some take more, some others have less.

In fact you might be right, the problem is not the gap itself, but the poverty problem, but then what cause poverty, why some people are working all their life and have nothing to hand to their children while others hand 12 houses, 23 cars and 2 Bombardier jets to their decendents, that's where the gap hurts i think...

ryan198

know1 wrote:

I'm saying that the problem is not the GAP itself. It's the fact that people are poor. It doesn't have anything to do with rich people or the gap.

If the problem is that there are people living in poverty, the answer should be to help them rise out of it. The answer should not be to make the rich less wealthy.

there are other methods of doing this like raising min wage, etc. but that's only caused companies to look overseas for cheap labor. the only way it has worked is to tax the fuck out of the rich.

know1

ryan198 wrote:

there are other methods of doing this like raising min wage, etc. but that's only caused companies to look overseas for cheap labor. the only way it has worked is to tax the fuck out of the rich.

But why? Is that fair? Why is it the problem of the rich that there are poor people? Shouldn't we raise the tax equally on all people above the poverty level (assuming raising taxes is the answer, which I disagree with)

What percentage of our tax dollars actually go toward helping the poor? I'll bet it's very small. So you have to raise the tax on the rich a gigantic amount to even make a dent in the poverty problem.

The answer is not taking money from people. The answer is finding effective ways to help people rise out of poverty.

ryan198

what if it's actually the rich who are taking from the poor in the first place? given the fact that min wage hasn't risen in years while CEO pay has gone up to 431:1 or something like that is not cool. also part of getting out of poverty in a capitalist system is to have the resources (capital) to be able to afford those things that the very rich have (food/housing/clothing/school/etc.). It's not as if the poor aren't working 67% of all families on welfare have at least one parent working full time.

jamestr1

keeponrockin wrote:

The extremists are running this country because the moderates have shit to do.

exactly right, for fuck's sake!

SoonForgotten2

Here's the thing- the "far left" in the US is actually typical left for the rest of the western world. The US has slid so far to the right that the middle now seems likes the left and the actual left seems like extreme liberalism. Comaped to my friends and family in the States I'm a pretty radical liberal. In Europe I'm just normal. The US makes the UK look incredibly progressive.

know1

ryan198 wrote:

what if it's actually the rich who are taking from the poor in the first place? given the fact that min wage hasn't risen in years while CEO pay has gone up to 431:1 or something like that is not cool. also part of getting out of poverty in a capitalist system is to have the resources (capital) to be able to afford those things that the very rich have (food/housing/clothing/school/etc.). It's not as if the poor aren't working 67% of all families on welfare have at least one parent working full time.

What if it's the rich who are already keeping more people from being poor by providing jobs and buying products?

El_Kabong

know1 wrote:

What if it's the rich who are already keeping more people from being poor by providing jobs and buying products?

what if the poverty gap is spreading like wildfire...oh...it is!!

sure, some do...but overall they become rich by exploiting their labor.

SundaySilence

I would suggest that if you graph the disparity of wealth vs income per capita, the trend both contemporary and throughout all of history would find the less disparate the wealth the wealthier the national entity.

ryan198

El_Kabong wrote:

what if the poverty gap is spreading like wildfire...oh...it is!!

sure, some do...but overall they become rich by exploiting their labor.

i think he ignored the fact that 67% of families on welfare (nearly all of which are under the poverty line) have at least one person working full time at one of those jobs your rich people provide. I believe that number comes from a study cited in:
Grossberg, L. (2005). Caught in the Crossfire.

ryan198

SundaySilence wrote:

I would suggest that if you graph the disparity of wealth vs income per capita, the trend both contemporary and throughout all of history would find the less disparate the wealth the wealthier the national entity.

and? are you saying it's a good thing to have more and more poor people for a richer country? maybe it speaks to the greed of those in power and the power of the greedy.

El_Kabong

ryan198 wrote:

i think he ignored the fact that 67% of families on welfare (nearly all of which are under the poverty line) have at least one person working full time at one of those jobs your rich people provide. I believe that number comes from a study cited in:
Grossberg, L. (2005). Caught in the Crossfire.

i know, i've posted those numbers along w/ the number of children living in poverty before...they don't care...they'll give you some theoires that don't work across the board (in reality anyway)

sad how cold and callous some can be. personally, i'd sacrifice if it meant everyone would have what they need...not others, they'll hold onto it and cry about having to pay for public education!

SundaySilence

ryan198 wrote:

and? are you saying it's a good thing to have more and more poor people for a richer country? maybe it speaks to the greed of those in power and the power of the greedy.

Not at all.

Economies with a more disparate distribution (wider income gap) are poorer overall (per capita) The Latin American countries have large disparities of income. The liberal Western democracies do have large disparities but not so large. Authoritarian countries and Communist ones effectively have higher disparity of incomes than do nonauthoritarian countries because a smaller segment is in control of all wealth.

ryan198

gotcha ... i misunderstood, blame pot.

know1

El_Kabong wrote:

i know, i've posted those numbers along w/ the number of children living in poverty before...they don't care...they'll give you some theoires that don't work across the board (in reality anyway)

sad how cold and callous some can be. personally, i'd sacrifice if it meant everyone would have what they need...not others, they'll hold onto it and cry about having to pay for public education!

So how much time or money do you give to the poor? Before you start criticising some people, you might be surprised to find out they give and do more than you.

know1

El_Kabong wrote:

what if the poverty gap is spreading like wildfire...oh...it is!!

sure, some do...but overall they become rich by exploiting their labor.

The gap is not the problem. The number of people living in poverty is the problem. We need to focus on that and not on the other end.