Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
know1- You keep saying if we elect democrats, raise taxes, etc. that our liberties go out the window. Our current administration does the oppposite and yet we've seen a huge rescinding of our rights. It seems the democrats are the ones defending our actual day to day rights.
To those who have questioned that a tax on the elite ($7mm plus) can support a large portion of the population. Look at the current divide. The top 10% control an enormous amount of wealth. Even taxing the elite evenly (a 7mm estate taxed at the same rate as a 70mm, 700mm, etc.) would create very large sums for this program. Many of you are complaining that the government wants to take your money without your choice. If any of you are worth 7mm+, shut the hell up and help others out.
Peace
nice post, SS...don't let aggression of others keep you away...
I'm actually a fairly well off upper middle class white guy. I have a good job and make good money. I'm not so proud to think that I did it all on my own. I know that being a white male (ahem, pearl jam fans...) has afforded me great luxuries and a head start. I also believe that our current system necessarily creates large wealth disparities and that government needs to step in to shrink those (obviously this is a very difficult suggestion, especially with our government).
I'm not, I repeat, not trying to tell any of you how to live or split up your current wealth. If that wealth, however, is greater than the amount cited in this proposal, and this proposal becomes law, I would expect you to comply (and I would hope you wouldn't let a little more taxes take away from your already extravegant lifestyle).
Just because I'm new to the board means I'm not allowed to have views?
When Jesus said "Love your enemies" he probably didn't mean kill them...
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
Maybe after they close tax loopholes, fix medicare and social security and curb the bloated budget, then we can discuss retirement plans. But the last thing this country needs is yet another cumbersome, innefficient social program to go with all the other ones that aren't sustainable. And no way the super wealthy will pay for this. it will end up being middle class who take it up the ass. it happens every time. Bill ran on taxing the rich, but once he was in office admitted the middle class would have to pay more as well.
How much of the 7 Million do you think the government is going to take???
Its not like they are going to take half of your money and spread it out amongst others. It will most likely be a difference of a hundred or so dollars a year.
You probably make more then that on interest of your money in a savings acct.
If I had 7 million dollars and I knew that the excess money that I have was going to help people I would feel pretty good about myself.
When I hear things like I don't want my money going to people who don't work, it makes me sad because 1. you don't need all of that money, and 2. How the fuck do you know that these people aren't working there asses off but its for a company that has not retirement plan.
Why do so many people with money turn out to be so heartless???
*edit: I should add that I am not in favor of this plan because we have a ton of other issues that we should focus on right now. I just had to post after reading a bunch of poor me my money is all going to the poor posts. It made me sick.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
I'm actually a fairly well off upper middle class white guy. I have a good job and make good money. I'm not so proud to think that I did it all on my own. I know that being a white male (ahem, pearl jam fans...) has afforded me great luxuries and a head start. I also believe that our current system necessarily creates large wealth disparities and that government needs to step in to shrink those (obviously this is a very difficult suggestion, especially with our government).
I'm not, I repeat, not trying to tell any of you how to live or split up your current wealth. If that wealth, however, is greater than the amount cited in this proposal, and this proposal becomes law, I would expect you to comply (and I would hope you wouldn't let a little more taxes take away from your already extravegant lifestyle).
Just because I'm new to the board means I'm not allowed to have views?
How does "being a white male" "afford great luxuries and a head start?" That's news to me.
So if I'm one of the people who does have plenty to survive (and survival is very subjective - there are people who make more than me who are struggling to "survive:) why should I be FORCED to also give to those who don't? I may choose to give to help them out, but I oppose it being mandatory.
i agree with you 100%. and i also wonder about these recipiants. i won't pay $5.00 for a cup of coffee. i use 1 tele and i was given a dvd player as a gift years ago and i haven't used it yet. except for my meds; i'm mostly self sufficient. i generate my own power too. i haven't been to a movie theater since 1996 and before that; it has to be in the mid 80's.
the point here is that my lifestyle has allowed me to accumulate more money than the average person. why should i be forced to give the money i save to people who don't follow my lifestyle? for example; i know someone who drinks at least 3 cups of starbucks each day. that's $450 per month not including the gas to drive to starbucks. i can make 3 cups of coffee for under $1.00.
now we have to think about natural and unnatural disasters. you have enough to survive on now; but what about in a disaster? if you are forced to give money away now; you may not have enough to survive on after a disaster.
i too know a couple of people that make more than me and they struggle. most of their money goes to finance charges (i pay cash for everything) and they have teles and dvd players in every room; and can't start their day without a $5.00 cup of coffee; etc. in my eyes; they are trying to live a lifestyle they can't afford. people need to learn to live within their means.
instead of buying a $5.00 cup of coffee because everyone else in the office does; realize they are paying $5.00 for a cup of coffe worth 25 cents.
How does "being a white male" "afford great luxuries and a head start?" That's news to me.
What are you serious? Just a quick glance at those controlling the world should answer your question. White males are basically the minority but control a vast majority of power and wealth. That's called systematic preference.
When Jesus said "Love your enemies" he probably didn't mean kill them...
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
What are you serious? Just a quick glance at those controlling the world should answer your question. White males are basically the minority but control a vast majority of power and wealth. That's called systematic preference.
know1- You keep saying if we elect democrats, raise taxes, etc. that our liberties go out the window. Our current administration does the oppposite and yet we've seen a huge rescinding of our rights. It seems the democrats are the ones defending our actual day to day rights.
To those who have questioned that a tax on the elite ($7mm plus) can support a large portion of the population. Look at the current divide. The top 10% control an enormous amount of wealth. Even taxing the elite evenly (a 7mm estate taxed at the same rate as a 70mm, 700mm, etc.) would create very large sums for this program. Many of you are complaining that the government wants to take your money without your choice. If any of you are worth 7mm+, shut the hell up and help others out.
Peace
Our current administration is NOT fiscally conservative.
Here's my take on freedom and taxes. Every time taxes are raised to support another government program, people have less money to do what they want and also probably have to follow the rules of the government program if they are a part of it. That's less freedom.
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.
How much of the 7 Million do you think the government is going to take???
Its not like they are going to take half of your money and spread it out amongst others. It will most likely be a difference of a hundred or so dollars a year.
You probably make more then that on interest of your money in a savings acct.
If I had 7 million dollars and I knew that the excess money that I have was going to help people I would feel pretty good about myself.
When I hear things like I don't want my money going to people who don't work, it makes me sad because 1. you don't need all of that money, and 2. How the fuck do you know that these people aren't working there asses off but its for a company that has not retirement plan.
Why do so many people with money turn out to be so heartless???
*edit: I should add that I am not in favor of this plan because we have a ton of other issues that we should focus on right now. I just had to post after reading a bunch of poor me my money is all going to the poor posts. It made me sick.
If I had $7 million I would hope that I (and others) would help people voluntarily.
If I'm forced to give a percentage to this retirement plan, then it's probably going to come out of the excess that I would be willing to give to habitat for humanity, the humane society, the salvation army, etc.
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.
Our current administration is NOT fiscally conservative.
Here's my take on freedom and taxes. Every time taxes are raised to support another government program, people have less money to do what they want and also probably have to follow the rules of the government program if they are a part of it. That's less freedom.
That's a good point. Our current administration spends like no other. I guess we're looking at different points. I'm looking at overall legislation and would say we have less rights than with the previous administration (Patriot act, etc.).
As a blanket statement though, you are correct. More taxes = more government = less freedom for us. But if you look at it relative to the current administration, I would say in the long run a future democratic executive branch would result in more personal liberties. Even with more social programs and higher taxes.
When Jesus said "Love your enemies" he probably didn't mean kill them...
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
That's a good point. Our current administration spends like no other. I guess we're looking at different points. I'm looking at overall legislation and would say we have less rights than with the previous administration (Patriot act, etc.).
As a blanket statement though, you are correct. More taxes = more government = less freedom for us. But if you look at it relative to the current administration, I would say in the long run a future democratic executive branch would result in more personal liberties. Even with more social programs and higher taxes.
I'll agree with that to some extent, but what if it gets to the point where we have all these personal liberties (which I'm greatly in favor of) but have no money to participate in them and have to follow government regulations so strictly that they aren't freedoms anymore.
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.
Our current administration is NOT fiscally conservative.
Here's my take on freedom and taxes. Every time taxes are raised to support another government program, people have less money to do what they want and also probably have to follow the rules of the government program if they are a part of it. That's less freedom.
Who controls the market for Americans? Who makes our dollar stronger or weaker?
As a blanket statement though, you are correct. More taxes = more government = less freedom for us. But if you look at it relative to the current administration, I would say in the long run a future democratic executive branch would result in more personal liberties. Even with more social programs and higher taxes.
I'll agree with that to some extent, but what if it gets to the point where we have all these personal liberties (which I'm greatly in favor of) but have no money to participate in them and have to follow government regulations so strictly that they aren't freedoms anymore.
logically speaking, its hard to argue with a libertarian.
Who controls the market for Americans? Who makes our dollar stronger or weaker?
Osama Bin Laden?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I'm actually a fairly well off upper middle class white guy. I have a good job and make good money. I'm not so proud to think that I did it all on my own. I know that being a white male (ahem, pearl jam fans...) has afforded me great luxuries and a head start. I also believe that our current system necessarily creates large wealth disparities and that government needs to step in to shrink those (obviously this is a very difficult suggestion, especially with our government).
I'm not, I repeat, not trying to tell any of you how to live or split up your current wealth. If that wealth, however, is greater than the amount cited in this proposal, and this proposal becomes law, I would expect you to comply (and I would hope you wouldn't let a little more taxes take away from your already extravegant lifestyle).
Just because I'm new to the board means I'm not allowed to have views?
They are awesome views with which I heartfully agree.
... and the will to show I will always be better than before.
If I had $7 million I would hope that I (and others) would help people voluntarily.
If I'm forced to give a percentage to this retirement plan, then it's probably going to come out of the excess that I would be willing to give to habitat for humanity, the humane society, the salvation army, etc.
Well, I embrace a system where people have decent standards of living as a matter of right, not as a matter of charity.
... and the will to show I will always be better than before.
so if you were an american; you'd have no problem with the government taking away your family's money? mostly to give to layabouts who don't want to go out and work. i don't believe that.
It's called progressive taxation for the sake of providing some things some of us consider rights.
... and the will to show I will always be better than before.
I'm actually a fairly well off upper middle class white guy. I have a good job and make good money. I'm not so proud to think that I did it all on my own. I know that being a white male (ahem, pearl jam fans...) has afforded me great luxuries and a head start. I also believe that our current system necessarily creates large wealth disparities and that government needs to step in to shrink those (obviously this is a very difficult suggestion, especially with our government).
I'm not, I repeat, not trying to tell any of you how to live or split up your current wealth. If that wealth, however, is greater than the amount cited in this proposal, and this proposal becomes law, I would expect you to comply (and I would hope you wouldn't let a little more taxes take away from your already extravegant lifestyle).
Just because I'm new to the board means I'm not allowed to have views?
I posed this in another post:
What if forced contributions to this plan actually take away from other charitable endeavors that these "elites" were participating in?
Such as, by forcing them to contribute to this, they now are less willing to give to the United Way, Salvation Army, etc., etc., etc.
I never see anyone look at it from that standpoint.
I also expect that the prejudice against the rich will cause some people to say something to the effect of "they aren't giving to those charities anyway", but that's a load of bull. Some do, some don't, but the ones that do might be less inclined the more we force contributions on them.
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.
How much of the 7 Million do you think the government is going to take???
Its not like they are going to take half of your money and spread it out amongst others. It will most likely be a difference of a hundred or so dollars a year.
You probably make more then that on interest of your money in a savings acct.
If I had 7 million dollars and I knew that the excess money that I have was going to help people I would feel pretty good about myself.
When I hear things like I don't want my money going to people who don't work, it makes me sad because 1. you don't need all of that money, and 2. How the fuck do you know that these people aren't working there asses off but its for a company that has not retirement plan.
Why do so many people with money turn out to be so heartless???
*edit: I should add that I am not in favor of this plan because we have a ton of other issues that we should focus on right now. I just had to post after reading a bunch of poor me my money is all going to the poor posts. It made me sick.
first; it's my money. the government already taxed it and it's mine to do with what i please. i donate to causes i feel important. mostly solar and green communities.
who says i don't need all that money? what happens when global warming causes coastal areas to be evacuated? food cannot be trucked to flooded stores. businesses stop to relocate. water is mixed with sewage and oil (like new orleans) and not only isn't there any clean water; the cities are toxic waste areas. it may cost $10 mill to save my family. especially since we will be in economic collapse. i don't see wallstreet opening under water.
the reason we turn to be so heartless is because as soon as you get money; everyone tries to take it away. i was born poor and i remember having to eat only potatoes for a month. nobody came to help us when we needed it.
maybe these people are working their arses off; but are they also drinking $5.00 cups of coffee and need a tele in every room. LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS!
Comments
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
nice post, SS...don't let aggression of others keep you away...
if thats the case, better make sure you're a 'have'. Cuz its been this way since bacteria started multiplying.
I'm not, I repeat, not trying to tell any of you how to live or split up your current wealth. If that wealth, however, is greater than the amount cited in this proposal, and this proposal becomes law, I would expect you to comply (and I would hope you wouldn't let a little more taxes take away from your already extravegant lifestyle).
Just because I'm new to the board means I'm not allowed to have views?
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
Its not like they are going to take half of your money and spread it out amongst others. It will most likely be a difference of a hundred or so dollars a year.
You probably make more then that on interest of your money in a savings acct.
If I had 7 million dollars and I knew that the excess money that I have was going to help people I would feel pretty good about myself.
When I hear things like I don't want my money going to people who don't work, it makes me sad because 1. you don't need all of that money, and 2. How the fuck do you know that these people aren't working there asses off but its for a company that has not retirement plan.
Why do so many people with money turn out to be so heartless???
*edit: I should add that I am not in favor of this plan because we have a ton of other issues that we should focus on right now. I just had to post after reading a bunch of poor me my money is all going to the poor posts. It made me sick.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
How does "being a white male" "afford great luxuries and a head start?" That's news to me.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
you are 100% entitled to any opinion or view you want. this is a message board however, be prepared to be challenged on your views sometimes.
i agree with you 100%. and i also wonder about these recipiants. i won't pay $5.00 for a cup of coffee. i use 1 tele and i was given a dvd player as a gift years ago and i haven't used it yet. except for my meds; i'm mostly self sufficient. i generate my own power too. i haven't been to a movie theater since 1996 and before that; it has to be in the mid 80's.
the point here is that my lifestyle has allowed me to accumulate more money than the average person. why should i be forced to give the money i save to people who don't follow my lifestyle? for example; i know someone who drinks at least 3 cups of starbucks each day. that's $450 per month not including the gas to drive to starbucks. i can make 3 cups of coffee for under $1.00.
now we have to think about natural and unnatural disasters. you have enough to survive on now; but what about in a disaster? if you are forced to give money away now; you may not have enough to survive on after a disaster.
i too know a couple of people that make more than me and they struggle. most of their money goes to finance charges (i pay cash for everything) and they have teles and dvd players in every room; and can't start their day without a $5.00 cup of coffee; etc. in my eyes; they are trying to live a lifestyle they can't afford. people need to learn to live within their means.
instead of buying a $5.00 cup of coffee because everyone else in the office does; realize they are paying $5.00 for a cup of coffe worth 25 cents.
What are you serious? Just a quick glance at those controlling the world should answer your question. White males are basically the minority but control a vast majority of power and wealth. That's called systematic preference.
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
My bad, I didn't know questioning who I was was a challenge on my views...
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
I think it's called your willful racism.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Our current administration is NOT fiscally conservative.
Here's my take on freedom and taxes. Every time taxes are raised to support another government program, people have less money to do what they want and also probably have to follow the rules of the government program if they are a part of it. That's less freedom.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
If I had $7 million I would hope that I (and others) would help people voluntarily.
If I'm forced to give a percentage to this retirement plan, then it's probably going to come out of the excess that I would be willing to give to habitat for humanity, the humane society, the salvation army, etc.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
if you cant take the heat, get out of the kitchen. ya know what i'm sayin
That's a good point. Our current administration spends like no other. I guess we're looking at different points. I'm looking at overall legislation and would say we have less rights than with the previous administration (Patriot act, etc.).
As a blanket statement though, you are correct. More taxes = more government = less freedom for us. But if you look at it relative to the current administration, I would say in the long run a future democratic executive branch would result in more personal liberties. Even with more social programs and higher taxes.
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
I'll agree with that to some extent, but what if it gets to the point where we have all these personal liberties (which I'm greatly in favor of) but have no money to participate in them and have to follow government regulations so strictly that they aren't freedoms anymore.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Who controls the market for Americans? Who makes our dollar stronger or weaker?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
contradictory dont you think?
logically speaking, its hard to argue with a libertarian.
Osama Bin Laden?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Heheh.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
They are awesome views with which I heartfully agree.
Well, I embrace a system where people have decent standards of living as a matter of right, not as a matter of charity.
The fed, and generally they don't care about the relative strength of the dollar. What are you asking?
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
It's called progressive taxation for the sake of providing some things some of us consider rights.
I posed this in another post:
What if forced contributions to this plan actually take away from other charitable endeavors that these "elites" were participating in?
Such as, by forcing them to contribute to this, they now are less willing to give to the United Way, Salvation Army, etc., etc., etc.
I never see anyone look at it from that standpoint.
I also expect that the prejudice against the rich will cause some people to say something to the effect of "they aren't giving to those charities anyway", but that's a load of bull. Some do, some don't, but the ones that do might be less inclined the more we force contributions on them.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
first; it's my money. the government already taxed it and it's mine to do with what i please. i donate to causes i feel important. mostly solar and green communities.
who says i don't need all that money? what happens when global warming causes coastal areas to be evacuated? food cannot be trucked to flooded stores. businesses stop to relocate. water is mixed with sewage and oil (like new orleans) and not only isn't there any clean water; the cities are toxic waste areas. it may cost $10 mill to save my family. especially since we will be in economic collapse. i don't see wallstreet opening under water.
the reason we turn to be so heartless is because as soon as you get money; everyone tries to take it away. i was born poor and i remember having to eat only potatoes for a month. nobody came to help us when we needed it.
maybe these people are working their arses off; but are they also drinking $5.00 cups of coffee and need a tele in every room. LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS!
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.