redistibution of wealth.....

[manu1959]

http://www.leaderu.com/offices/cleveland/docs/justice.html

Why does government tend to stray from its proper role in society? There are two reasons. As Bastiat pointed out, government is diverted from its true course as a result of greed and false philanthropy.{5} The first of these is self-evident. Tyrants always have an interest in gaining political control over people to wield the sword of the state for their own selfish ends. How better to steal than to gain control of government and use it to carry out one's own evil schemes with impunity!

As a college professor, I have taught long enough to expect a grade distribution among my students. Some students work harder, others are more naturally gifted, some students are better prepared to take the course, and still others are more conscientious about classroom attendance. Thus, even though they all complete the same assignments, inevitably they do not all receive the same grade.

Suppose for a moment that I decided that this inequality of grades was unacceptable and that I determined to eliminate this situation by redistributing test scores. Imagine how the better students would feel upon learning that their scores had been reduced as a result of my grade redistribution plan. There is no doubt that they would not think highly of it. In addition, it would not make them feel better about the situation if I offered to put the plan up for a vote among their classmates because their side would lose. A democracy alone cannot guarantee justice.

I once posed this analogy to a colleague. He immediately took exception to it by arguing that grade redistribution and income redistribution are not the same thing. So I asked him to explain the substantive difference between the two. Immediately, he proclaimed that one involved the transfer of points while the other involved the transfer of money. To his response, I asked him again to explain the substantive difference. After pondering the issue more deeply, he finally admitted there was none. If grade redistribution is wrong, how then can anyone argue for forced income redistribution?

[midcan5]

I just posted quote below in another thread and it fits this piece as well. His thinking is formulaic and does not fit wages, as wage arguments are not based on redistribution of money but are based on opportunity and a living wage. Given his analogy, is it Ok then that some have nothing and starve? That is how third world nations operate and their slums show the outcome too well. Our own depression did too.


"LAMB: What's the difference between a liberal and a conservative, in your opinion?

GALBRAITH: Well, I would say that most conservatives bend inward to think of their own interest and accommodate the state to their own interest and are, on the whole, more governed by ideology than I would think wise. As I say, I want to adjust to the practical situation. When I hear some of my conservative friends speak of the evils of government, I think they're being controlled by a formula rather than by specific thought. ' From Booknotes

[Joe Steel]

If grade redistribution is wrong, how then can anyone argue for forced income redistribution?

No one dies from bad grades.

Poverty kills.

[red states rule]

No one dies from bad grades.

Poverty kills.

and liberals and liberalism have kept people in poverty with their handouts and cradle to grave goodies

[Joe Steel]

and liberals and liberalism have kept people in poverty with their handouts and cradle to grave goodies

Utter nonsense.

We need look no further than Social Security and Medicare to prove the point. SS and MC have saved millions of seniors from the destiturion seniors suffered in the '30s and earlier.

[red states rule]

Utter nonsense.

We need look no further than Social Security and Medicare to prove the point. SS and MC have saved millions of seniors from the destiturion seniors suffered in the '30s and earlier.

Libs think handouts will end poverty. The real answer to lifting people out of poverty is broad economic growth

BTW, those great liberal programs you are so proud of - are going to bankrupt America due to the huge amount of money needed to fund them

People would better off if they took the responsibility, and had the freedom, to invest their own SS money in private acounts. They would make more moeny and be able to retire with more cash in their retirement account

[LOki]

No one dies from bad grades.

Poverty kills.

Poverty kills the stupid and/or lazy.

[red states rule]

Poverty kills the stupid and/or lazy.

and those shackled to a never ending cycle of dependency - thanks to liberals and their handouts

[LOki]

Utter nonsense.

We need look no further than Social Security and Medicare to prove the point. SS and MC have saved millions of seniors from the destiturion seniors suffered in the '30s and earlier.


"We need look no further than Social Security and Medicare to prove the point. SS and MC have saved millions of the stupid and/or lazy from the destitution the stupid and/or lazy suffered in the '30s and earlier."

Fixed.

[Joe Steel]

Libs think handouts will end poverty. The real answer to lifting people out of poverty is broad economic growth

Nonsense.

That's classical economics but it doesn't hold in the era of conservative politics. During the Bush ordeal, for instance, productivity has increased but median real income has decreased (or may have increased a bit; well-below the rate of productivity growth.) That's because conservatives have rigged the economy to favor the rich and affluent (as owners of capital) and they've been able to keep the gains from productivity growth for themselves.


BTW, those great liberal programs you are so proud of - are going to bankrupt America due to the huge amount of money needed to fund them

Nonsense.

SS is not in trouble. A small adjustment fixes it forever. MC faces some serious challenges but they're manageable.


People would better off if they took the responsibility, and had the freedom, to invest their own SS money in private acounts. They would make more moeny and be able to retire with more cash in their retirement account

Utter nonsense.

The vast, vast majority of working Americans are not able to make prudent decisions about retirement funding. They'd fall prey to the kind of schemes which have devastated the housing industry.

[jimnyc]

Poverty kills.

Tough shit on them. Tell the "poor" to work harder.

[Dilloduck]

No one dies from bad grades.

Poverty kills.

Poverty is a consequence. Not some damn genetic condition.

[mundame]

Poverty is a consequence. Not some damn genetic condition.


I think that's exactly what it is: a genetic condition. That's the whole theme of the famous book "The Bell Curve," that poverty conditions like crime, prostitution, illegitimacy, leaving school, welfare, are all simply low IQ behaviors. Stupid people are poor because they do low IQ things, quite regardless of race, but unfortunately there are far more low IQ blacks because their mean IQ is so much lower than whites.

And IQ is strongly heritable genetically, so yes --------------- people in THIS country are poor because they have a genetic condition, low intelligence.

Other countries that have no governments or awful governments have other issues to consider, but the possibility that they are genetically stupid as a group is always there when you see a lot of poverty.

In a rich country with lots of opportunity like this one, it's a sure thing.

[Pale Rider]

I think that's exactly what it is: a genetic condition. That's the whole theme of the famous book "The Bell Curve," that poverty conditions like crime, prostitution, illegitimacy, leaving school, welfare, are all simply low IQ behaviors. Stupid people are poor because they do low IQ things, quite regardless of race, but unfortunately there are far more low IQ blacks because their mean IQ is so much lower than whites.

And IQ is strongly heritable genetically, so yes --------------- people in THIS country are poor because they have a genetic condition, low intelligence.

Other countries that have no governments or awful governments have other issues to consider, but the possibility that they are genetically stupid as a group is always there when you see a lot of poverty.

In a rich country with lots of opportunity like this one, it's a sure thing.

Oooooohhh maaaaaaann... have you opened YOURSELF up to the IRE of the LEFT saying BLACKS are DUMBER than OTHERS...... :terror:

That's been tried here before, and the board liberals had a fucking COW!

[red states rule]

Nonsense.

That's classical economics but it doesn't hold in the era of conservative politics. During the Bush ordeal, for instance, productivity has increased but median real income has decreased (or may have increased a bit; well-below the rate of productivity growth.) That's because conservatives have rigged the economy to favor the rich and affluent (as owners of capital) and they've been able to keep the gains from productivity growth for themselves.



Nonsense.

SS is not in trouble. A small adjustment fixes it forever. MC faces some serious challenges but they're manageable.



Utter nonsense.

The vast, vast majority of working Americans are not able to make prudent decisions about retirement funding. They'd fall prey to the kind of schemes which have devastated the housing industry.

So more of the basis liberal bullshit. people are to stupid to take care of their own lives, and only government can

As far as your prize programs, here are the huge numbers needed to fix them. The taxes needed wil cripple the economy and the workers


Entitlements in the outyears
THE WASHINGTON TIMES EDITORIAL
March 28, 2008
In order to meet the promises made to Medicare and Social Security beneficiaries through 2082, the government would have to deposit $42.9 trillion in an interest-bearing account today and then draw down the cumulating funds as needed over the next 75 years. That is the essential conclusion from the latest reports by the Medicare and Social Security trustees.

The $42.9 trillion is the "net present value" of Social Security and Medicare obligations above and beyond the premiums that will be paid during the next 75 years by Medicare beneficiaries (for doctors' fees, outpatient services and prescription drugs) and the payroll taxes that will be collected from workers and their employers between now and 2082 to fund Social Security and Medicare's hospital-insurance program. When you hear talk about "unfunded liabilities" or "unfunded obligations" for Medicare and Social Security, the bottom-line cost in today's dollars is $42.9 trillion, which is more than three times last year's gross domestic product (GDP) of $13.8 trillion.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20080328/EDITORIAL/671899092/1013

[mundame]

Oooooohhh maaaaaaann... have you opened YOURSELF up to the IRE of the LEFT saying BLACKS are DUMBER than OTHERS...... :terror:

That's been tried here before, and the board liberals had a fucking COW!

On average, it's been proven over and over again; it's a standard psychological test result. Which doesn't mean there can't be very smart blacks: of course there are, and we know the names of many. Spike Lee, Condi Rice, etc.

The bell curve of black IQ is simply set to the left of ours, that's all.

In fact, it's a kinder analysis. If people really can't help going to jail all the time because they're 15 points average lower on the IQ scale -- black mean is 85 here, and 70 in Africa -- then there is no use criticizing them for it. They can't help it; they need something different than us blaming them.

[avatar4321]

No one dies from bad grades.

Poverty kills.

That doesn't follow. Poverty is consequential of bad grades. If someone fails to get an education, they will be impoverished and thus bad grades do kill people.

However, I am not sure i agree with the premise that poverty kills.

[avatar4321]

Utter nonsense.

We need look no further than Social Security and Medicare to prove the point. SS and MC have saved millions of seniors from the destiturion seniors suffered in the '30s and earlier.

I think you're begging the question here. Are you saying that you have proof that without these programs they would have been killed? I find it difficult to believe you can prove it.

[mundame]

Poverty is consequential of bad grades. If someone fails to get an education, they will be impoverished and thus bad grades do kill people.



Failing to get an education is a consequence of poor intelligence. FULLY HALF of the inner city kids do not graduate high school now, for example in Detroit. They aren't actually educable beyond maybe basic reading and a little arithmetic. You know, if you aren't smart enough to finish high school -------- that's really not the person's fault that they don't finish high school, then.

We pretend that they could if they just would, and they are just being bad on purpose, but I think these kids can't learn much; they are just warehoused in schools to keep them off the streets as much as possible.

[Dilloduck]

That doesn't follow. Poverty is consequential of bad grades. If someone fails to get an education, they will be impoverished and thus bad grades do kill people.

However, I am not sure i agree with the premise that poverty kills.

no----there are PHDs walking all over Austin who don't have a pot to piss in. Good grades don't automatically make you rich and bad grades don't automatically mean you will be poor. Capitalism is much more complicated than that when it comes to wages.
How about the demand for your particular skill set? Who you know ? Do you have a high maintanence life style? Are you knockers good enough to get you into Playboy ?
( It's a myth parents use to keep their kids at school instead of hanging around the house all day.) :laugh2:

[avatar4321]

Poverty is a consequence. Not some damn genetic condition.

dont you know? poverty, sexual preference, anything else that causes liberals to take responsibility for their own actions is all genetic. that way they dont have to deal with it.

[avatar4321]

Failing to get an education is a consequence of poor intelligence. FULLY HALF of the inner city kids do not graduate high school now, for example in Detroit. They aren't actually educable beyond maybe basic reading and a little arithmetic. You know, if you aren't smart enough to finish high school -------- that's really not the person's fault that they don't finish high school, then.

We pretend that they could if they just would, and they are just being bad on purpose, but I think these kids can't learn much; they are just warehoused in schools to keep them off the streets as much as possible.

i dont for one second believe that somehow all the stupid people live in the inner city.

[manu1959]

No one dies from bad grades.

Poverty kills.

not true i knew people that killed themselves because of bad grades......

evolution and darwinisim kills the poor.....

[manu1959]

Nonsense.

That's classical economics but it doesn't hold in the era of conservative politics. During the Bush ordeal, for instance, productivity has increased but median real income has decreased (or may have increased a bit; well-below the rate of productivity growth.) That's because conservatives have rigged the economy to favor the rich and affluent (as owners of capital) and they've been able to keep the gains from productivity growth for themselves.

Nonsense.

SS is not in trouble. A small adjustment fixes it forever. MC faces some serious challenges but they're manageable.

Utter nonsense.

The vast, vast majority of working Americans are not able to make prudent decisions about retirement funding. They'd fall prey to the kind of schemes which have devastated the housing industry.

so what you are saying is the pubs system makes you rich and the dem system doesn't work.....

but the vast majority of americans are too stupid to take care of themselves and become rich so the dems need to take from the capable and give to the incompetent.....

pretty much the same as grade redistribution…..

[manu1959]

Poverty is a consequence. Not some damn genetic condition.

come on no one would choose to be poor.....they were born that way.....and or it is someone elses fault....

[mundame]

i dont for one second believe that somehow all the stupid people live in the inner city.


No, indeed. But most of the people in the inner city are stupid, which is not quite the same thing.

[glockmail]

Utter nonsense.

We need look no further than Social Security and Medicare to prove the point. SS and MC have saved millions of seniors from the destiturion seniors suffered in the '30s and earlier.Bullshit. I have proven that if individuals could invest their SS taxes throughout their working lives then they could retire at 65 with incomes 3 times their working income.

[mundame]

Bullshit. I have proven that if individuals could invest their SS taxes throughout their working lives then they could retire at 65 with incomes 3 times their working income.


They won't, though.



They'll spend it.

[Yurt]

No one dies from bad grades.

Poverty kills.


Nonsense.

That's classical economics but it doesn't hold in the era of conservative politics. During the Bush ordeal, for instance, productivity has increased but median real income has decreased (or may have increased a bit; well-below the rate of productivity growth.) That's because conservatives have rigged the economy to favor the rich and affluent (as owners of capital) and they've been able to keep the gains from productivity growth for themselves.





the poor shall be with you always...

proof that conservatives have "rigged" the economy to favor the rich and affluent? have you ever heard of rags to riches? i know quite a few people who had squat in life and now have a pretty good chunck of money because they saved and worked hard.

bill gates has the largest foundation in the world to help the poor. no one forced him to undertake his cause. why do you support the forceful conversion of assets? let's say you and i were neighbors, your car is nicer than my ford tempo, would you appreciate it if I forced you to take the leather seats out of your car so that my car would be more equal to yours?

[glockmail]

They won't, though.



They'll spend it.
Simple enough problem to solve:
1. They can't touch it until they retire (just like now).
2. Require them to leave in enough to generate at least their pre-retirement income.

[mundame]

Simple enough problem to solve:
1. They can't touch it until they retire (just like now).
2. Require them to leave in enough to generate at least their pre-retirement income.


Good ideas, I like.

[Joe Steel]

Poverty is a consequence. Not some damn genetic condition.

What's your point?

[Joe Steel]

So more of the basis liberal bullshit. people are to stupid to take care of their own lives, and only government can

As far as your prize programs, here are the huge numbers needed to fix them. The taxes needed wil cripple the economy and the workers


Entitlements in the outyears
THE WASHINGTON TIMES EDITORIAL
March 28, 2008
In order to meet the promises made to Medicare and Social Security beneficiaries through 2082, the government would have to deposit $42.9 trillion in an interest-bearing account today and then draw down the cumulating funds as needed over the next 75 years.

Flawed premise.

Social Security is not an investment. Rates of returns are an inappropriate measure of performance.

[diuretic]

Economics is a human invention. Whoever is in charge gets to ensure the economic system suits them. That works until the have-nots have had a gutsful and wake up from the con job perpetrated on them or the prevailing invented system fails. Check your history.

[red states rule]

Flawed premise.

Social Security is not an investment. Rates of returns are an inappropriate measure of performance.

You left out the last sentence in the paragraph

"That is the essential conclusion from the latest reports by the Medicare and Social Security trustees."



So YOU know more about SS then the trustees?

You pride and joy of liberal programs is going broke - and it will take insane tax increases to fix it. Tax increases that will cripple business and workers

Yet libs refuse to allow folks to plan and fund their own retirements

[Joe Steel]

That doesn't follow. Poverty is consequential of bad grades. If someone fails to get an education, they will be impoverished and thus bad grades do kill people.

That's just not so. Quite a few college graduates are poor. In fact, the notion of some degrees being useless as qualifiers for employment is part of culture. A person could be quite successful in pursuit of a degree but might not be able to find employment in that field.


However, I am not sure i agree with the premise that poverty kills.

Why should that be controversial? Someone who can't afford food or medical care is susceptible to starvation and a number diseases.

[Joe Steel]

I think you're begging the question here. Are you saying that you have proof that without these programs they would have been killed? I find it difficult to believe you can prove it.

No. I'm saying statistically elders are more affluent now and have a higher standard of living than in the time before SS and MC. At the margin, that has saved some of them from death.

[red states rule]

That's just not so. Quite a few college graduates are poor. In fact, the notion of some degrees being useless as qualifiers for employment is part of culture. A person could be quite successful in pursuit of a degree but might not be able to find employment in that field.



Why should that be controversial? Someone who can't afford food or medical care is susceptible to starvation and a number diseases.

Do you actually beleive your bullshit, or do you have a huge desire for attention?

[JohnDoe]

the poor shall be with you always...

proof that conservatives have "rigged" the economy to favor the rich and affluent? have you ever heard of rags to riches? i know quite a few people who had squat in life and now have a pretty good chunck of money because they saved and worked hard.

bill gates has the largest foundation in the world to help the poor. no one forced him to undertake his cause. why do you support the forceful conversion of assets? let's say you and i were neighbors, your car is nicer than my ford tempo, would you appreciate it if I forced you to take the leather seats out of your car so that my car would be more equal to yours? yurt, there is something that is influencing Gates and Buffet in to donating to charities....

1. the income tax incentives for them to do such
2. the estate tax when they pass on

Buffet has insisted these taxes on them STAY on them...the billionaires in the world, because it does encourage them as individuals to get involved in philanthrapy, and WHO better than them was his thoughts, thus the 30 billion he pledged to the bill and melinda gates foundation....last year.

So, according to Buffet, our government influences them to be charitable....


at least according to Gates and Buffet.... and maybe they were trying to "humble" themselves and not give credit to themselves for doing some good charitable work...i'll give it that possibility, that maybe they would do this without the gvt, but that is not what these two billionaires are saying, they both support higher taxes on themselves, including the death tax....

jd

[Joe Steel]

the poor shall be with you always...

proof that conservatives have "rigged" the economy to favor the rich and affluent? have you ever heard of rags to riches? i know quite a few people who had squat in life and now have a pretty good chunck of money because they saved and worked hard.

The widening income gap between the middle-class and the rich is proof the Bush regime has rigged the system.


bill gates has the largest foundation in the world to help the poor. no one forced him to undertake his cause. why do you support the forceful conversion of assets?

Many rich persons give-away money when they realize they have more than they can spend. Gates is not unusual in that respect.


let's say you and i were neighbors, your car is nicer than my ford tempo, would you appreciate it if I forced you to take the leather seats out of your car so that my car would be more equal to yours?

Redistribution should be subject to community standards of equity. If the community approved seat-swapping, I wouldn't have any problem with it.

[red states rule]

yurt, there is something that is influencing Gates and Buffet in to donating to charities....

1. the income tax incentives for them to do such
2. the estate tax when they pass on

Buffet has insisted these taxes on them STAY on them...the billionaires in the world, because it does encourage them as individuals to get involved in philanthrapy, and WHO better than them was his thoughts, thus the 30 billion he pledged to the bill and melinda gates foundation....last year.

So, according to Buffet, our government influences them to be charitable....


at least according to Gates and Buffet.... and maybe they were trying to "humble" themselves and not give credit to themselves for doing some good charitable work...i'll give it that possibility, that maybe they would do this without the gvt, but that is not what these two billionaires are saying, they both support higher taxes on themselves, including the death tax....

jd

Why are libs so obsessed with how much money other people have, and what they decide to do with their money?

Who cares why people give to chairty - they give

If Mr Buffet thinks he is undertaxes let him send in an aditional donation JD, and leave the rest of our tax rates alone

Once again you leave out how the "rich" are paying more in taxes after the tax cuts due to increased economic growth. For some reason libs ignore this fact,a nd whine the percentage of what they pay is to low. Despite the fact the governemnt is taking more of their money from them, libs are still not happy

If libs can ever be happy that is

[Joe Steel]

You left out the last sentence in the paragraph

"That is the essential conclusion from the latest reports by the Medicare and Social Security trustees."

So YOU know more about SS then the trustees?

You pride and joy of liberal programs is going broke - and it will take insane tax increases to fix it. Tax increases that will cripple business and workers

Yet libs refuse to allow folks to plan and fund their own retirements

The Trustees are mostly Bush regime stooges. They'll say what they're told to say.

[Joe Steel]

Do you actually beleive your bullshit, or do you have a huge desire for attention?

Is this too difficult for you?

[red states rule]

The Trustees are mostly Bush regime stooges. They'll say what they're told to say.

You really are a fucking idiot. Like typo when confronted with facts yiou have no answer for, you fall back on bullshit talking points

Grow up son, and join the rest of us in the real world

[JohnDoe]

Why are libs so obsessed with how much money other people have, and what they decide to do with their money?

Who cares why people give to chairty - they give

If Mr Buffet thinks he is undertaxes let him send in an aditional donation JD, and leave the rest of our tax rates alone

Once again you leave out how the "rich" are paying more in taxes after the tax cuts due to increased economic growth. For some reason libs ignore this fact,a nd whine the percentage of what they pay is to low. Despite the fact the governemnt is taking more of their money from them, libs are still not happy

If libs can ever be happy that is


Hey! Good Morning RSR, was just trying to download a pic of my kitty to send you!

The reason I mentioned this to Yurt, was because he mentioned Gates and his donations to charity, to help the needy...and indicated they were of his own free will without gvt influence that they are generous.....and it reminded me of the several television appearances that Buffet and other billionaires gave a while back when discussing the estate tax elimination that was being proposed in congress...

Buffet sending in more to the gvt, doesn't REDUCE his secretary's total tax burden, which WAS HIGHER than Warren Buffet's on percentage of gross income spent in taxes.... He, as a Billionaire, wants to reduce taxes on people in the middle or even upper middle class and is willing to keep the estate tax in tact to allow for something like reducing our taxes or his secretary's class group's taxes....

It is NOT ME that is delving in to this inequality, it is the billionaire that YOU THINK you are defending....that IS saying this rsr....I am just repeating it! :D

care

[red states rule]

Hey! Good Morning RSR, was just trying to download a pic of my kitty to send you!

The reason I mentioned this to Yurt, was because he mentioned Gates and his donations to charity, to help the needy...and indicated they were of his own free will without gvt influence that they are generous.....and it reminded me of the several television appearances that Buffet and other billionaires gave a while back when discussing the estate tax elimination that was being proposed in congress...

Buffet sending in more to the gvt, doesn't REDUCE his secretary's total tax burden, which WAS HIGHER than Warren Buffet's on percentage of gross income spent in taxes.... He, as a Billionaire, wants to reduce taxes on people in the middle or even upper middle class and is willing to keep the estate tax in tact to allow for something like reducing our taxes or his secretary's class group's taxes....

It is NOT ME that is delving in to this inequality, it is the billionaire that YOU THINK you are defending....that IS saying this rsr....I am just repeating it! :D

care


Good Morning JD - looking forward to the cat pic

As far as Buffet, if he feels he is under taxed let him send in extra. Idiots like Buffet keep ignoring the numbers that prove people are paying more in taxes then they ever have

Why the government gets 50% of your estates becuase you died is insane. You spend your life accumlating wealth to pass on to tyour family, and you get a tax bill that steals half

The only inequality in taxes JD is the fact the top 50% of earners are paying 97% of all Federal Income taxes; while the nonproducers are getting a free riide by paying only 3%

[Joe Steel]

You really are a fucking idiot. Like typo when confronted with facts yiou have no answer for, you fall back on bullshit talking points

Grow up son, and join the rest of us in the real world

You're naive or just foolish.

[red states rule]

You're naive or just foolish.

I am educated on the facts while you are stoned on the liberal kool aid

[Yurt]

yurt, there is something that is influencing Gates and Buffet in to donating to charities....

1. the income tax incentives for them to do such
2. the estate tax when they pass on

Buffet has insisted these taxes on them STAY on them...the billionaires in the world, because it does encourage them as individuals to get involved in philanthrapy, and WHO better than them was his thoughts, thus the 30 billion he pledged to the bill and melinda gates foundation....last year.

So, according to Buffet, our government influences them to be charitable....


at least according to Gates and Buffet.... and maybe they were trying to "humble" themselves and not give credit to themselves for doing some good charitable work...i'll give it that possibility, that maybe they would do this without the gvt, but that is not what these two billionaires are saying, they both support higher taxes on themselves, including the death tax....

jd

i was not aware that gates said what you claim. buffet, but not gates. and you are right to say you don't know for sure gate's reasoning...nor buffets. if buffet supports the taxes, then what is his motive for giving gates a few billion dollars - to avoid the taxes?

makes no sense.

[JohnDoe]

Good Morning JD - looking forward to the cat pic

As far as Buffet, if he feels he is under taxed let him send in extra. Idiots like Buffet keep ignoring the numbers that prove people are paying more in taxes then they ever have

Why the government gets 50% of your estates becuase you died is insane. You spend your life accumlating wealth to pass on to tyour family, and you get a tax bill that steals half

The only inequality in taxes JD is the fact the top 50% of earners are paying 97% of all Federal Income taxes; while the nonproducers are getting a free riide by paying only 3%

RSR,

I know that you are somehow "invested" in your response to taxes on the wealthiest....obviously from some things you have read that made an impression on you....like how much in dollars the wealthiest pay of our income taxes....and things like that which you just can't seem to knock.

Here is a link that has several charts and graphs that explains the true picture of what has been happening with our TOTAL TAX BURDEN, and what percentages each income level tends to pay of it at a percentage of their income, which HONESTLY is the ONLY way to compare a person's share of taxes.

here is just a small glimpse of the article, if I knew how to post graphs on site I would, but I don't ....:(

Please, everyone, go to this link. http://www.askquestions.org/articles/taxes/


Fifteen years ago, socialite Leona Helmsley bragged, “only the little people pay taxes,” but then she went to jail for tax fraud. Unfortunately, Helmsley's statement is even more accurate today than it was at the time.

Tax fraud is estimated at $311 billion this year, more than the entire budget for Medicare, and more than last year's revenues at Walmart or General Electric. Most cheaters go unpunished. What’s worse, the legal tax system is rigged to favor rich people and large corporations at the expense of ordinary citizens and small businesses. Even when everybody abides by the law, middle-income households pay more taxes than rich ones. And politicians keep handing out tax favors to their campaign contributors – at our expense.

A chorus of academics, journalists, and private citizens are warning that a tax system favoring the rich fuels the growing concentration of wealth in America – and therefore threatens our economic growth and even our democracy.

Middle class spending is the growth engine in a free market economy, and when taxes rob the middle class in favor of the rich, the economy shuts down. Huge fortunes also produce political power that is hard to control. That’s why all modern democracies use their tax laws to prevent excessive concentration of wealth. And that’s why we need a fair taxes campaign in America.

In this election year, both candidates are certain to say a lot of things about taxes. But neither of them is likely to talk about fraud, favoritism and abuse of power – unless voters raise these issues and ask for reforms.




jd

[JohnDoe]

i was not aware that gates said what you claim. buffet, but not gates. and you are right to say you don't know for sure gate's reasoning...nor buffets. if buffet supports the taxes, then what is his motive for giving gates a few billion dollars - to avoid the taxes?

makes no sense.

yes to avoid taxes....and to avoid a plutocracy forming in the USA, which is not good for a democracy.


Analysts across the political spectrum recommend keeping the estate tax. And dozens of wealthy individuals are actively working to reform but retain the estate tax, including Bill Gates Senior who is father to the world's richest man, and Warren Buffett, who owns the world's second-largest private fortune. Gates has recommended earmarking the proceeds for public investments, like education, that create broad-based economic opportunities.
http://www.askquestions.org/articles/taxes/



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Billionaire Warren Buffett on Wednesday endorsed the estate tax as a check on wealth accumulation, while two senior U.S. senators said they want the tax repealed.

Revisiting a long-standing debate over the controversial tax, the Senate Finance Committee held a hearing where Chairman Max Baucus said he supports ending the estate tax, although he said he did not expect this to happen any time soon.

"I think everyone in this room knows we're not going to repeal the estate tax. It's not going to happen in the foreseeable future," he said.

The Montana Democrat was joined by Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley, the panel's top Republican, who said, "The estate tax is unjust. ... Death should not be a taxable event."

But Buffett, the second-richest man in America after Bill Gates, according to Forbes magazine, said recent tax law changes have tended to benefit people like him.

"Dynastic wealth, the enemy of a meritocracy, is on the rise. Equality of opportunity has been on the decline," Buffett said. "A progressive and meaningful estate tax is needed to curb the movement of a democracy toward plutocracy."

Buffett, the chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKa.N: Quote, Profile, Research) questioned any effort to further cut taxes for the wealthy.

"Further shifting of this burden away from the super-rich is not the way to go," he said. Continued...
http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN1442383020071114

[manu1959]

The Trustees are mostly Bush regime stooges. They'll say what they're told to say.

you sure that bush appointed them all.....

[Yurt]

yes to avoid taxes....and to avoid a plutocracy forming in the USA, which is not good for a democracy.

your links do not support gates saying what you claimed he said...


Bill Gates Senior who is father to the world's richest man

have any more?

[JohnDoe]

your links do not support gates saying what you claimed he said...



have any more?

no, don't have any more, other than memory when watching the two give press conferences regarding not eliminating the estate tax...Bill Gates Sr was representing the Gates....including his son.

But if you google it yourself, you can probably find something yourself if you are that interested in it yurt...

Sadly, I am back on dial up again and it is too slow for me to do an accurate search in a reasonable amount of time.

If memory serves, Gates and Buffet's press conference was covered by c-span, their archives might have something..... it'll be video and I won't be able to play it on STUPID Dial up AOL.... I'm sorry that i can't do the leg work for you....

Just think of it this way, do you seriously believe that Bill Gates sr would be out there with Buffet if Bill Gates jr was against what his father was saying with his partner in philanthropy Buffet?

jd

[JohnDoe]

you sure that bush appointed them all.....

I don't think he did? I think SS is one of those independent type depts isn't it? kinda like the GAO, where the position is filled for 10 years at a time transcending presidents?

[red states rule]

JD, the bottom line more revenue is flowing into the US Treasury then ever before. Why are you obsessed with the percentage rather then the actual dollar amount in taxes people pay?

It is the dollars that count, not this fairness bullshit libs keep talking about

[Joe Steel]

you sure that bush appointed them all.....

Yes.

"The Board of Trustees currently consists of 6 members, 4 of whom automatically serve by virtue of their positions in the Federal Government. These 4 are the

* Secretary of the Treasury (the Managing Trustee),
* Secretary of Labor,
* Secretary of Health and Human Services, and
* Commissioner of Social Security

The other 2 members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. These 2 members serve 4-year terms.

Signatories to the Trustees Reports (http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TR/trustees.html)

[red states rule]

Yes.

"The Board of Trustees currently consists of 6 members, 4 of whom automatically serve by virtue of their positions in the Federal Government. These 4 are the

* Secretary of the Treasury (the Managing Trustee),
* Secretary of Labor,
* Secretary of Health and Human Services, and
* Commissioner of Social Security

The other 2 members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. These 2 members serve 4-year terms.

Signatories to the Trustees Reports (http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TR/trustees.html)


SS is going under. Do the math dipshit. It will take about 3 or 4 workers to pay the benefits of one SS recipient in about 10 years or so

The system will need huge tax increase to meet the demand.

[JohnDoe]

JD, the bottom line more revenue is flowing into the US Treasury then ever before. Why are you obsessed with the percentage rather then the actual dollar amount in taxes people pay?

It is the dollars that count, not this fairness bullshit libs keep talking about


rsr,

it is not the dollars flowing in that counts, it is the percentage of ones income that the government is taking, is what counts...

The wealthiest have more money to send in...

if the gvt taxed the middle class man 90% of everything that he makes as income, it will still not be 1% of what the one billionaire might send in of his income in dollars.....while it may only be 18% of the billionaire's income and 90% of the middle class guy...you can't do that to the middle class person, they will NOT have money to eat or to pay their rent??????

There is NO WAYYYYYYYYYY, one could ever use dollar amounts as a means of being fair and JUST????

can't you see this?

[red states rule]

rsr,

it is not the dollars flowing in that counts, it is the percentage of ones income that the government is taking, is what counts...

The wealthiest have more money to send in...

if the gvt taxed the middle class man 90% of everything that he makes as income, it will still not be 1% of what the one billionaire might send in of his income in dollars.....while it may only be 18% of the billionaire's income and 90% of the middle class guy...you can't do that to the middle class person, they will NOT have money to eat or to pay their rent??????

There is NO WAYYYYYYYYYY, one could ever use dollar amounts as a means of being fair and JUST????

can't you see this?

JD, you don't pay the bills with the percentage - you pat it with the money. The top 1% (who the libs love to hate) are paying 38% of the Federal income taxes. That is up from 36% - after the tax cuts

So nonce again libs want to screw over the producers, and redistrubute wealth thinking that will help people

JD, I have heard this bullshit my thoroughout my entire life. If we would pay a little more in taxes we can end poverty. We can end hunger.

Well for 40 years you guys have taken nearly $9 trillion - given it to others - and now you whine how things are worse then ever

I don't know about you JD but I have never gotten a job from a poor man, and employees need employers. Taxc cuts grow the economy, and everyone earns more, and pays more in taxes

[Joe Steel]

SS is going under. Do the math dipshit. It will take about 3 or 4 workers to pay the benefits of one SS recipient in about 10 years or so

The system will need huge tax increase to meet the demand.

Try again, dumbass.

Social Security has a small imbalance over the 75 year projection period. A small adjustment will fix it forever.

[red states rule]

Try again, dumbass.

Social Security has a small imbalance over the 75 year projection period. A small adjustment will fix it forever.

Trying to talk to you Joe is like trying to talk to a child with Attention Deficit Disorder

[Joe Steel]

Trying to talk to you Joe is like trying to talk to a child with Attention Deficit Disorder

It just seems that way to a crazy uncle who just knows he's always right and everyone else is always wrong.

[red states rule]

It just seems that way to a crazy uncle who just knows he's always right and everyone else is always wrong.

I know I am right. It usually happens when one has the facts on his side

All you have is the uusal failed liberal talking points, and failed socialist economic models

[midcan5]

Try again, dumbass.

Social Security has a small imbalance over the 75 year projection period. A small adjustment will fix it forever.

True, but few here study these things they just know these things through a sort of wingnut osmosis.


One man's retirement math: Social Security wins

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1227/p01s03-cogn.html

[red states rule]

True, but few here study these things they just know these things through a sort of wingnut osmosis.


One man's retirement math: Social Security wins

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1227/p01s03-cogn.html

To Joe, a small adjustment is coming up with $43 trillon to save the libs most beloved social programs

Entitlements in the outyears
THE WASHINGTON TIMES EDITORIAL
March 28, 2008
In order to meet the promises made to Medicare and Social Security beneficiaries through 2082, the government would have to deposit $42.9 trillion in an interest-bearing account today and then draw down the cumulating funds as needed over the next 75 years. That is the essential conclusion from the latest reports by the Medicare and Social Security trustees.

The $42.9 trillion is the "net present value" of Social Security and Medicare obligations above and beyond the premiums that will be paid during the next 75 years by Medicare beneficiaries (for doctors' fees, outpatient services and prescription drugs) and the payroll taxes that will be collected from workers and their employers between now and 2082 to fund Social Security and Medicare's hospital-insurance program. When you hear talk about "unfunded liabilities" or "unfunded obligations" for Medicare and Social Security, the bottom-line cost in today's dollars is $42.9 trillion, which is more than three times last year's gross domestic product (GDP) of $13.8 trillion.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/artic...671899092/1013

[manu1959]

Yes.

"The Board of Trustees currently consists of 6 members, 4 of whom automatically serve by virtue of their positions in the Federal Government. These 4 are the

* Secretary of the Treasury (the Managing Trustee),
* Secretary of Labor,
* Secretary of Health and Human Services, and
* Commissioner of Social Security

The other 2 members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. These 2 members serve 4-year terms.

Signatories to the Trustees Reports (http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TR/trustees.html)

seems you were wrong.....bush did not soley appoint all these as you claimed....

[red states rule]

seems you were wrong.....bush did not soley appoint all these as you claimed....

Manu, more to the point - when is Joe right?

[Joe Steel]

seems you were wrong.....bush did not soley appoint all these as you claimed....

Try again, dumbass.

Bush nominated them and the Senate rubber-stamped them.

[red states rule]

Try again, dumbass.

Bush nominated the cabinet members and the Republican Senate rubber-stampted them. He appointed the other three.

Still sticking your lie about the $43 trillion being a small adjustment?

[manu1959]

Try again, dumbass.

Bush nominated them and the Senate rubber-stamped them.

so you admit you are wrong.......good....next topic....

[midcan5]

Still sticking your lie about the $43 trillion being a small adjustment?

For social security it is a small adjustment, Medicare is another issue altogether and one that requires bipartisan review and some tough decisions, including regulations that stop the runaway costs.

[red states rule]

For social security it is a small adjustment, Medicare is another issue altogether and one that requires bipartisan review and some tough decisions, including regulations that stop the runaway costs.

So a number more then three times the GDP of the US is a small adjustment?