The Must See Chart (This Is What Class War Looks Like)

[Bfgrn]

Stop peddling propaganda, Bfoon. No one is interested in your koolaid!

When you say stupidity like "New Guilded Age" and most intelligent people realize we have the highest corporate tax rate of any industrialized nation, and our wealthy pay the largest proportion of our overall tax burden, you come across as either being completely ignorant, or a political activist with an agenda. No, we don't live in the days of the Robber Barons! That is an exaggeration, again, designed to alarm people into supporting your call for more Socialist solutions. I don't think that is the way we are heading, but thanks for trying once again.

You are the buffoon Dixie. Here's what you can do, ignore the FACTS I just posted and continue to emote as usual.

Yes, we have socialism and welfare in America, for corporations. American corporations pay about 10 cents on the dollar and many mega-corporations pay NO taxes. The corporate rate is meaningless because there are so many loopholes that allow corporations like Exxon and GE to pay no taxes. That is why President Obama proposed lowering the corporate tax rate AND closing the loopholes.

GE, Exxon Paid No U.S. Income Taxes in '09

As you work on your taxes this month, here's something to raise your hackles: Some of the world's biggest, most profitable corporations enjoy a far lower tax rate than you do--that is, if they pay taxes at all.

A view of the Exxon Mobil refinery in Baytown, Texas
September 15, 2008. None of ExxonMobil's income taxes
were paid to the U.S. last year.

The most egregious example is General Electric. Last year the conglomerate generated $10.3 billion in pretax income, but ended up owing nothing to Uncle Sam. In fact, it recorded a tax benefit of $1.1 billion.

Avoiding taxes is nothing new for General Electric. In 2008 its effective tax rate was 5.3%; in 2007 it was 15%. The marginal U.S. corporate rate is 35%.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[apple0154]

You see, this is the classic method for converting people to Socialist systems. It is exactly how most of Europe became "socialized." You take this group over here, who have very little, and you get them angry at that group over there, who have great wealth. Socialism promises to fix all of that, and 'even the field' for everyone! So, someone who has very little, is intrigued by the prospects of having a better life, at the cost of those 'unethical' wealth people over there. The problem with Socialist systems is, the corruption is never addressed. What you end up with, is a "ruling class" who governs over the "working class" who still has very little by comparison. And once you've dismantled capitalism, there is no escaping poverty for the working class, any 'extra' you earn, goes to the 'ruling class' for re-disbursement to the others....except, it actually goes into the corrupt pockets of the 'ruling class' and no one goes anywhere.

Take a look at my thread "My, my, my..." it contains a very good example of Capitalism at work! Here's a guy, Antoine Dodson, living in the projects... dirt poor... and through a twist of fate, ends up becoming an internet phenomenon due to his embarrassingly passionate plea to the news camera. Now, in a Socialist society, any monetary compensation Antoine received for his notoriety, would be confiscated by the government to be redistributed to the collective. But... in a Capitalist society, Antoine was able to "capitalize" on his opportunity, and is now sitting pretty. It's just a great illustration of why our Capitalist system is superior to Socialism, and always will be.

Wrong! With proper social policies in place people like Antoine Dodson wouldn't be living in abject poverty in the first place. Sure, it's great to see him get out of there but how many are still there? Does one man getting out justify hundreds of others remaining there, in poverty, due to poor social programs?

Is your concern about one escaping poverty or one obtaining great wealth?

As for the money taken from people and going to the ruling class democracy, via voting, can change the "ruling class". Furthermore, like universal (single pay) medical everyone benefits.

If the average wage is $50,000/yr and a person makes $5,000,000.00/yr does that mean the individual making 5 million should be entitled to 100 homes while the individual making $50,000/yr can only afford one home and 99 other people go homeless? Should the person making $5,000,000/yr be entitled to 100 times the amount of food the average person can afford all the while 99 other people are going hungry?

Is that what you consider a superior system to be?

 

[Based Chad]

Ahh... So we should instead, force corporations to pay the few who want to work, a higher wage, so it can be confiscated by the government and given to the many who don't want to work? That sounds like a brilliant plan to me!

Your knowledge of economics is woefully inadequate.

 

[apple0154]

Let's take these one at a time... Social Entitlements... How does paying people to sit on their ass and draw Welfare, HELP the middle class? Honestly, weening them off welfare and requiring they work for a living, is what HELPS the middle class. First of all, it helps by creating more middle class and fewer welfare class. It also saves the middle class a few bucks in taxes. So, welfare reform actually helped the middle class.

The problem with welfare is by the time one is qualified for assistance they have lost everything so their spirit or enthusiasm is gone. The help is needed at the very beginning. Recall the lyrics: "Take this job and shove it. I ain't working here no more. Woman done left took all the reasons I was working for."

"All the reasons." The same applies to one who has lost everything. They no longer have a home and the incentive to work towards earning mortgage payments. They no longer have a car. In most cases people have given up.

The other problem is they've come from an environment where they haven't experienced a different way of life. The parents are welfare collectors and the government does little to enlighten the children. It's been shown children from a well-to-do home generally do better in life because of the situations to which they are exposed.

How is privatizing Social Security hurting the middle class? If I had invested the money I've paid into the system, I would be wealthy beyond belief right now, and what's more, my wealth could be passed on to my children, I own it! Seems to me that is BETTER for the middle class, than paying into a system our whole life, which isn't going to ever return the amounts we've paid in, much less a dividend!

Why is this continually brought up? For centuries the world functioned the way you propose and we saw the disaster during the Great Depression. People didn't save. They didn't invest. Social Security is here because what you propose was tried and failed. Failed miserably.

Education: You socialists want to keep the teachers unions strong, and keep dumping trillions of dollars into an education system that simply is FAILING to educate our kids. How does THIS help the middle class? Wouldn't the middle class be markedly better off, if they could get a voucher for their share of education funding, and teachers had to compete on the basis of merit, for those dollars? Wouldn't the education of our children IMPROVE? Who wants to keep the status quot? Who wants to make our education system BETTER?

Education would be much better if schools were permitted to each "everything" and a good start would be aggressive sex education which would lower teen pregnancy and school drop-out.

Vouchers are no good because ultimately some portion of the child's education has to be paid for by the parent so we end up with poor kids receiving poor education. Rather than make it easy to run away from "bad" schools the parents would have to insist their local school improve thereby all the children would benefit.

 

[cawacko]

many rich people have accumulated their millions by unfair, unethical and often illegal ways.

That's precisely the problem.

Some examples of the 'many' rich people?

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Wrong! With proper social policies in place people like Antoine Dodson wouldn't be living in abject poverty in the first place.

This is where you depart from reality, and we really can't have a serious conversation anymore, because you live in a delusional universe I am just not familiar with.

Since FDR's New Deal, we have spent over $10 trillion to fight the War on Poverty, and current poverty rates are virtually unchanged. Your premise is illogical, it presumes that increasing the amounts of money one is dependent upon, will somehow 'motivate' the individual to let go of their dependency. This doesn't happen with human beings living on this Earth in this universe, it only happens in your delusional world of illogical behavior. Logic tells me, after $10 trillion is spent, the problem isn't the money. You continue to want to insist it is, but there is no evidence to support your illogical viewpoint.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

You are right, 'one does not have to be "wealthy" to be corrupt or dishonest', but one does have to be wealthy to have the power to enact or influence corrupt or dishonest laws and policies.

So your solution is to get rid of all the wealthy people, and there will be no corruption? Do you really believe that will do it? If so, please join your brother Apple in his delusional universe, he must be getting lonely.

 

[Lowaicue]

Some examples of the 'many' rich people?

Rather difficult to do for legal reasons. However, here goes - on my own doorstep -

Li Ka Shing, worlds fifth richest person (was, dont know what the latest 'score' is).
It has been ALLEGED that Mr Li, or one of his many companies, henchmen, agents did a 'deal' with the Hong Kong Housing Authority, in which he purchased a huge swathe of land which was considered unfit for development in a place called Tin Shui Wai. Shortly after the land suitability was changed! but it doesn't stop there. It is ALLEGED that Mr Li or someone acting for him reached an agreement whereby the HK government would not commence building on an adjacent site until all Mr. Li's houses had been built and sold. Everyone connected has denied this despite the extremely coincidental times and events.

Stanley Ho, billionaire. Negotiated a monopoly on all gambling in he enclave of Macau. It is SAID that he also controlled the drug trade and the prostitution rackets. In the fifties a BBC journo went to investigate and secured an interview with Mr. Ho. When the journo, Alan Wicker (v. famous) asked questions about the disappearance of certain people the interview was brought to an end and Mr. Wicker was banned from visiting Macau despite the fact that Macau was under the Portugese government.

That's just two mega rich 'gentlemen' who have had certain allegations made against them.

There will be thousands more world wide, from Koch to Abramov, Bush to Buffet. Although the latter appears to have changed his spots recently (and I only chose him for alliterative worth).

Then look at the corporations that ride roughshod over the rights of man. Check out Cargill, Monsanto, B.P, too many to list. These people, their agents and companies represent wealth and power greater than many nations.

If you want to know how much power they have and how much of the law is written to protect them against YOU, try taking legal action against them.

 

[Bfgrn]

Dude, you lose all moral high ground by rooting for the Yankees. They are the rich evil capitalist that you usually dislike/hate but for some reason like in them. No one who is a fan of the evil empire can then claim to be all compassionate and caring about the poor.

The Greek definition of happiness is full use of ones powers along the lines of excellence.
President John F. Kennedy

DUDE, I don't hate capitalists, capitalism or have a problem with anyone getting rich. I have a problem with people who get rich by making other people poor. The Yankees are a shining example of a class organization who treats their players and everyone who works for the organization with respect and makes their lives better. George Steinbrenner could be an SOB, because he demanded excellence, but he did more for people who worked for him than anyone will ever know. His generosity and compassion are not widely known because that was the way he wanted it. He didn't do it for praise.

And the legacy of being a New York Yankee is one of never being forgotten, or cast aside after your playing days. Any ballplayer who ever wore a Yankee uniform is treated as royalty by the Yankees.

Steinbrenner got me to believe in myself

By RAY NEGRON

Last Updated: 9:33 AM, July 15, 2010


I first came to the Yankees as a confused kid. One foot was firmly planted in the world of baseball -- I loved playing it, watching it, talking about it -- but the other was on shaky ground, as an insecure Latino kid walking the streets of The Bronx.

A chance meeting with George Steinbrenner changed my life forever. He caught me painting graffiti outside the ballpark and put me in a holding cell. But 15 minutes later, he came back and told the cops, "Give me the kid."

He took me into the locker room and gave me a uniform, and that night I was the batboy for the Yankees.

Mr. Steinbrenner took that troubled kid and put him to work in the Yankee Clubhouse. The rules were simple: Go to school, stay out of trouble, keep up my grades, and in return he would put his signature on a regular paycheck.

One day in 1977, when the Yankees lost a tough game, Mr. Steinbrenner was in Billy Martin's office having one of their "conversations" -- loud and heated. Finally, he stormed out and ran straight into me.

"Let's go for a ride," he said, leading me into his limousine.

Finally, after circling the streets of The Bronx, he asked the driver to stop and approached a young Latino family. I listened while the owner of the New York Yankees stood on a street corner getting advice on how to run his team.

When he was done, he handed the man a $50 bill. "Take your family to dinner on me," he said.

"Do you see how lucky we are, Ray?" he later asked me.

With that word 'we,' I knew I was part of the Yankee Family.

Thank you, Boss. I miss you already.

Ray Negron started as a Yankee bat boy in 1973, working his way up to team consultant. He was a close adviser to George Steinbrenner for 35 years.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/...n_myself_P8kqrsS1od0248toMSzgBP#ixzz1GSh3ilDs

 

[Schadenfreude]

A cycle of boom and bust is great for the wealthy.

It creates great oportunities to make money IF you have money already.

If you are like most Americans and are not more than middle class or a little over you get raped in a boom and bust cycle.


There is very good reason many weathy people would like to see the boom and bust times return for good.

There are also quite a few wealthy who care more about our country than expanding their bank accounts into infinitum and perfer policies that keep our country strong and also make it a great place for all people to live in.

These people support real reform in our system that will cure this stupid mess and return us to the sanity of Glass Steagal which worked very well for decades before the right leaning world started to dismantle it.

boom and bust is required by the wealthy - buy low sell dear

 

[Schadenfreude]

The Greek definition of happiness is full use of ones powers along the lines of excellence.
President John F. Kennedy

DUDE, I don't hate capitalists, capitalism or have a problem with anyone getting rich. I have a problem with people who get rich by making other people poor. The Yankees are a shining example of a class organization who treats their players and everyone who works for the organization with respect and makes their lives better. George Steinbrenner could be an SOB, because he demanded excellence, but he did more for people who worked for him than anyone will ever know. His generosity and compassion are not widely known because that was the way he wanted it. He didn't do it for praise.

And the legacy of being a New York Yankee is one of never being forgotten, or cast aside after your playing days. Any ballplayer who ever wore a Yankee uniform is treated as royalty by the Yankees.

Steinbrenner got me to believe in myself

By RAY NEGRON

Last Updated: 9:33 AM, July 15, 2010


I first came to the Yankees as a confused kid. One foot was firmly planted in the world of baseball -- I loved playing it, watching it, talking about it -- but the other was on shaky ground, as an insecure Latino kid walking the streets of The Bronx.

A chance meeting with George Steinbrenner changed my life forever. He caught me painting graffiti outside the ballpark and put me in a holding cell. But 15 minutes later, he came back and told the cops, "Give me the kid."

He took me into the locker room and gave me a uniform, and that night I was the batboy for the Yankees.

Mr. Steinbrenner took that troubled kid and put him to work in the Yankee Clubhouse. The rules were simple: Go to school, stay out of trouble, keep up my grades, and in return he would put his signature on a regular paycheck.

One day in 1977, when the Yankees lost a tough game, Mr. Steinbrenner was in Billy Martin's office having one of their "conversations" -- loud and heated. Finally, he stormed out and ran straight into me.

"Let's go for a ride," he said, leading me into his limousine.

Finally, after circling the streets of The Bronx, he asked the driver to stop and approached a young Latino family. I listened while the owner of the New York Yankees stood on a street corner getting advice on how to run his team.

When he was done, he handed the man a $50 bill. "Take your family to dinner on me," he said.

"Do you see how lucky we are, Ray?" he later asked me.

With that word 'we,' I knew I was part of the Yankee Family.

Thank you, Boss. I miss you already.

Ray Negron started as a Yankee bat boy in 1973, working his way up to team consultant. He was a close adviser to George Steinbrenner for 35 years.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/...n_myself_P8kqrsS1od0248toMSzgBP#ixzz1GSh3ilDs

small companies used to start out as families and then got so big that both sides forgot their beginning - i vote for companies as families

 

[apple0154]

This is where you depart from reality, and we really can't have a serious conversation anymore, because you live in a delusional universe I am just not familiar with.

Since FDR's New Deal, we have spent over $10 trillion to fight the War on Poverty, and current poverty rates are virtually unchanged. Your premise is illogical, it presumes that increasing the amounts of money one is dependent upon, will somehow 'motivate' the individual to let go of their dependency. This doesn't happen with human beings living on this Earth in this universe, it only happens in your delusional world of illogical behavior. Logic tells me, after $10 trillion is spent, the problem isn't the money. You continue to want to insist it is, but there is no evidence to support your illogical viewpoint.

Let's talk reality. Look at countries in Europe where their social policies include medical and housing and day care and subsidized education. Why aren't all those folks just sitting around doing nothing?

The reality is social policies prevent people from becoming destitute thereby maintaining their will to improve their lives. Human nature is not to be slovenly. Happy, healthy human beings want to improve their lives.

The problem is government help is the bare minimum. First, the government waits until a person has lost everything and then they give them such little assistance they still have to fight, day to day, to survive. That's the reality.

Do some research.

 

[apple0154]

So your solution is to get rid of all the wealthy people, and there will be no corruption? Do you really believe that will do it? If so, please join your brother Apple in his delusional universe, he must be getting lonely.

It is your universe which is delusional. Do you think the one small business owner who acquires abnormal wealth worked that much "harder" than all the other owners of similar businesses?

Only in a Dixie world.

 

[Bfgrn]

First of all, I reject your notion that these three things are cornerstones to anything other than socialism and government dependence. They certainly don't promote a strong middle class, if they did, our country would have the strongest and most vibrant middle class in the world, because we've spent more money on those three things, by FAR, than any other nation. This has been going on for 60..70 years now, just how long does it take?

Let's take these one at a time... Social Entitlements... How does paying people to sit on their ass and draw Welfare, HELP the middle class? Honestly, weening them off welfare and requiring they work for a living, is what HELPS the middle class. First of all, it helps by creating more middle class and fewer welfare class. It also saves the middle class a few bucks in taxes. So, welfare reform actually helped the middle class.

How is privatizing Social Security hurting the middle class? If I had invested the money I've paid into the system, I would be wealthy beyond belief right now, and what's more, my wealth could be passed on to my children, I own it! Seems to me that is BETTER for the middle class, than paying into a system our whole life, which isn't going to ever return the amounts we've paid in, much less a dividend!

Education: You socialists want to keep the teachers unions strong, and keep dumping trillions of dollars into an education system that simply is FAILING to educate our kids. How does THIS help the middle class? Wouldn't the middle class be markedly better off, if they could get a voucher for their share of education funding, and teachers had to compete on the basis of merit, for those dollars? Wouldn't the education of our children IMPROVE? Who wants to keep the status quot? Who wants to make our education system BETTER?

Collective bargaining... Who has proposed we get rid of private sector collective bargaining? No one I know of! Scott Walker didn't even want to eliminate collective bargaining for teachers wages, just for health care and pensions... but don't let the FACTS get in the way of your propaganda! It's easier to convince FOOLS that Walker wants to do away with ALL collective bargaining and ALL unions. From there, it's easy to convince IDIOTS that Republicans just want to get rid of ALL collective bargaining and unions in general. None of this has been said or indicated. FDR said public sector collective bargaining was STUPID... was HE opposed to the middle class???

Hey Dixie, how many times are you going to repeat the SAME right wing propaganda that has been debunked?

America DID HAVE the strongest and most vibrant middle class in the world. It happened during the Liberals era, from the New Deal through the Great Society.

For the first 200+ years of our nation, the word 'entitlement' referred to aristocrats. Aristocrats had titles, and they thought that they were thereby entitled to various things, particularly the deference of the common people. Yet in the 1990's, conservative rhetors, who have declared war on language decided that the people who actually claim entitlement are people on welfare. They furthermore created an empirically false association between welfare and dependency.

You and I had this 'conversation' about welfare before Dixie, did you forget how I debunked your bullshit?

Dixie, welfare and his fairy tale of BULLSHIT

Between 1964 and 1968, nearly one of every three poor Americans left the poverty rolls, the largest drop in a four-year period ever recorded. The war on poverty was a huge success, even though LBJ pulled funding to pay for the Vietnam War.

One thing that never changes is Dixie's self centered justifications, his fairy tales we must all believe, so no one can say his priorities are ME, MYSELF and I.

Your fairy tale is BULLSHIT...here's why; your fairy tale requires other people to play along and conform to a role YOU supply for them. There's always the 'able bodied but lazy poor person', the 'bleeding heart' liberal who just wants to hand out other people's money and of course, the clear headed 'conservative' whose 'tough love' always saves the day. Dixie refuses to educated himself on what the 'War on Poverty' was about and what it wasn't about, that ignorance enables his right wing bloviation that comes out of his ass. But it's a lot easier for you to define it under YOUR self righteous terms so you don't have to care. It is also predictable that you chose 'welfare', because that fits so neatly into their 'dependency' and 'entitlement' dismissal of others. There are reasons for and realities to poverty, you have focused on the least of them.

When JFK's brother-in law Sargent Shriver accepted LBJ's challenge and took on the 'War on Poverty' the first thing he discovered was rather startling and disturbing. Half of the Americans living in poverty were children. Another large segment were elderly and another segment were mentally and/or physically disabled. So a HUGE segment of the poor fit the TRUE definition of a dependent. So there is an obligation as a civil society to make sure those real dependents are not trampled on or extinguished.

To address some of the players in your fairy tale, voila! We have an unabashed flaming liberal...Sargent Shriver. But I hate to disappoint you. Sargent Shriver HATED welfare and had no intention of creating a handout program. He didn't believe in handouts, he believed in opportunity, responsibility, community and empowerment.. The 'War on Poverty' was called the Office of Economic Opportunity. The core principles were opportunity, responsibility, community and empowerment. The program goals were maximum feasible participation. One of the concepts of empowerment was poor people had a right to one-third of the seats on every local poverty program board, so they had a say in what were the priorities in their community. It was a community based program that focused on education as the keys to the city. Programs such as VISTA, Job Corps, Community Action Program, and Head Start were created to increase opportunity for the poor so they could pull themselves out of poverty with a hand UP, not a hand out. Even when Johnson effectively pulled the plug on the War on Poverty to fund the war in Vietnam, Shriver fought on and won. During the Shriver years more Americans got out of poverty than during any similar time in our history. (The Clinton years - employing the same philosophy - were the second best.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are the FACTS Dixie, ignore them at you own peril, because the conservative and Republican attack on the middle class and poor will not stop with unions. When they came for Dixie, there was no one left to speak out for him.

The middle class that is in peril in American is not because of lazy people or lazy workers. Another FACT you ignore: for the first 200 years of our nation, even though wages during early periods were very low, the difference between wages and productivity was slight. UNTIL the 1980's. Enter Ronbo Reagan and the conservative revolution, a bigger failure that the Bolshevik revolution.

The destruction of America, right wing style

ref ref

 

[Crashk]

It is your universe which is delusional. Do you think the one small business owner who acquires abnormal wealth worked that much "harder" than all the other owners of similar businesses?

Only in a Dixie world.

I used to think Dixie and the rest were just brainwashed by corporate propaganda. I realize now that they are delusional and need medical help or maybe just tratiorous scum.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Bfoon: DUDE, I don't hate capitalists, capitalism or have a problem with anyone getting rich. I have a problem with people who get rich by making other people poor.

But that is precisely how capitalism works! I am about to go to the grocery store, I plan to buy food for next week, and when I leave the store, I will be poorer and the grocer will be wealthier. There really isn't another way for that to work, and still call it "capitalism!"

Let's talk reality. Look at countries in Europe where their social policies include medical and housing and day care and subsidized education. Why aren't all those folks just sitting around doing nothing?

Who said they were doing nothing? Last I checked, pretty much all of them are out in the streets protesting their government making cuts in their entitlements. Yes, let's look at REALITY... Let's look at almost every Socialist European shit hole, and see they are ALL going under financially, ready to collapse into chaos, as the people burn cities to the ground because they've been cut off the government teat. And let's look at the REALITY of all those countries "Ruling Class" (wealthy), coming to America to see American doctors, instead of remaining in their shit hole, with their inadequate and inferior health care systems.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Do you think the one small business owner who acquires abnormal wealth worked that much "harder" than all the other owners of similar businesses?

What the fuck is "abnormal" wealth? Is this based on some birdbrain scale in your warped and twisted head or something? Who the fuck are YOU to be telling ME what is "normal" or "abnormal" with regard to the money I make and earn?

 

[Airstrip One]

It is your universe which is delusional. Do you think the one small business owner who acquires abnormal wealth worked that much "harder" than all the other owners of similar businesses?

Yes.

 

[apple0154]

Who said they were doing nothing? Last I checked, pretty much all of them are out in the streets protesting their government making cuts in their entitlements. Yes, let's look at REALITY... Let's look at almost every Socialist European shit hole, and see they are ALL going under financially, ready to collapse into chaos, as the people burn cities to the ground because they've been cut off the government teat. And let's look at the REALITY of all those countries "Ruling Class" (wealthy), coming to America to see American doctors, instead of remaining in their shit hole, with their inadequate and inferior health care systems.

Burning cities? Ready to collapse? What are you talking about?

Many countries have had government medical systems for 50 years. Fifty years! Some even longer. Not one country has dismantled their system. Not one country on the entire planet. There is not one example you can cite where a country's government medical has collapsed. Not one country.

Let's deal with reality, Dix. Just this once, let's deal with reality.

 

[apple0154]

What the fuck is "abnormal" wealth? Is this based on some birdbrain scale in your warped and twisted head or something? Who the fuck are YOU to be telling ME what is "normal" or "abnormal" with regard to the money I make and earn?

Abnormal: not normal, average, typical, or usual; (dic.com)

Now go back and read my post again and respond sensibly.