Raising Taxes On The Rich Would Reduce Income Inequality

[Truth Detector]

people who avoid freezing to death because of LiHEAP will all tell you that they consider the program to be a big benefit in their lives. I'm sorry. Avoiding frostbite does that to you.

Again; I am amused by the dimwitted, and false, premise that without the Nanny State, people will freeze and starve to death. It is an arrogant and stupid premise that cannot be supported by facts.

But it is equally stupid to presume that if we allow the "State" to take more of what the wealthy earn; it will prevent poverty.

Only uninformed dishonest twits can make such fantastically false claims.

 

[Truth Detector]

cell phone ownership.

wow.

you gotta be a fucking einstein to be able to turn on a fucking cell phone.

:lol:

LMAO; I am not the one who arrogantly presumes people are too stupid to function in this complex modern world without the BIG Nanny State to help them.

Dunce.

 

[Truth Detector]

you didn't answer my question about LiHEAP.

I'll wait.

But I did answer it; you're just too stupid and dishonest to comprehend it.

Dunce.

I did notice that you did not wish to answer any of my questions and instead run off on tangents like idiots tend to do when they wish to drag everyone down to their low IQ levels and wallow in the never ending circle of stupidity.

 

[Truth Detector]

For the benefit of dunces who seldom get anything unless it is repeated over and over again:

Another desperate yet false claim; that one "benefits" from being dependent on others; you truly have a very warped definition of what is beneficial. But then, you arrogantly presume people are too stupid to make it on their own, therefore they need the nanny State to care for them and pay their bills run by arrogant leftist dunces who pander to gullible fools.

Again, why is it people are too poor to pay their own bills and need to be dependent wards of the State? How has the $20.1 trillion spent on the war on poverty made their lives any better? They are still poor, and dependent.

Again; Liberals merely seek to hand out the fish because it gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that they care more than anyone else while keeping people dependent on them and thus, in political power. Conservatives want to TEACH the poor to fish so they can be independent and feed themselves for a lifetime and thus, not needing a vast Government nanny state.

But alas, I am talking to the dunces who still believe that Government is the solution to all our social ills but ironically only Government run by arrogant leftists who arrogantly presume to know what is best for all of us; when the OTHER guys win elections, Government is hypocritically presumed to be bad by these same dunces.

 

[maineman]

nobody ever said that government is the solution to all our social ills. I DID say that LiHEAP, which does in fact keep low income people from freezing to death in the winter, is viewed by those people who qualify for it, as a BENEFIT.

 

[Truth Detector]

nobody ever said that government is the solution to all our social ills. I DID say that LiHEAP, which does in fact keep low income people from freezing to death in the winter, is viewed by those people who qualify for it, as a BENEFIT.

I am amused that you think a handout is a benefit. But I am equally amazed by this incredible and false premise that without Government largess, people will freeze and starve. Where do you come up with such nonsense?

It is almost as stupid as your claim of tax differentials using "simple" math and claims that redistribution schemes benefit the poor.

 

[maineman]

LMAO; I am not the one who arrogantly presumes people are too stupid to function in this complex modern world without the BIG Nanny State to help them.

Dunce.

I never said shit about a big nanny state. I did say that there are people who are not intelligent enough to be able to succeed in today's high tech economy. I know this to be true. I was a minister at a church whose primary ministry was feeding hungry people who couldn't make ends meet to the point where they could supply themselves with FOOD on a regular basis. I expanded our outreach to provide sleeping bags for the scores of folks sleeping outside. There IS poverty in the world, in America... it is not caused by the rich any more than it is caused by the government. It is just there. We have to decide, as a society, how we are going to deal with it. You and I have different philosophies about that. That does not make either one of us "dunces"... it merely means that we have a difference of opinion. Why can't you attempt to have a conversation and leave the nonstop insults at the door?

 

[Cancel 2020.1]

Again, why is it people are too poor to pay their own bills and need to be dependent wards of the State? How has the $20.1 trillion spent on the war on poverty made their lives any better? They are still poor, and dependent.

This really jumped out at me. How can someone generalize this much?

Who know how much of that went to help people who were just temporarily down on their luck, or needed a little help to get to the next level. My goodness; to just dismiss every bit of gov't assistance like that. It boggles.

 

[maineman]

IBut I am equally amazed by this incredible and false premise that without Government largess, people will freeze and starve. Where do you come up with such nonsense?

So... you do not think that LiHEAP helps to prevent people from freezing in the winter?

really?

Where do you live? Have you ever seen poverty and homelessness overlaid on top of a New England winter?

 

[Truth Detector]

This really jumped out at me. How can someone generalize this much?

Who know how much of that went to help people who were just temporarily down on their luck, or needed a little help to get to the next level. My goodness; to just dismiss every bit of gov't assistance like that. It boggles.

Once again the debate is completely over your head; it is arrogant and stupid to presume that people will starve or freeze to death without the Federal Government.

But then, your ignorance is mind boggling.

 

[Cancel 2020.1]

Once again the debate is completely over your head; it is arrogant and stupid to presume that people will starve or freeze to death without the Federal Government.

But then, your ignorance is mind boggling.

Things like welfare & unemployment benefits are definitely the only thing that have kept a lot of good, hard-working people off of the streets at times.

You really don't know shit. This is what worries me about righties, and especially about righties setting policy: for the most part, they don't know shit.

 

[maineman]

truth deflector is obviously a teenaged dork banging away from his man cave in his mommy's basement. He has never seen real life, so cannot really be expected to comment upon it with any degree of insight.

 

[Truth Detector]

So... you do not think that LiHEAP helps to prevent people from freezing in the winter?
really?

Dear dishonest dunce; what I am saying is that if LiHEAP did not exist, people would not freeze to death.

But again, you’re too painfully stupid to figure out the “why”.

Where do you live? Have you ever seen poverty and homelessness overlaid on top of a New England winter?

What the hell does that mean; poverty and homelessness overlaid on top of a New England winter?

Overlaid on top of winter? Where did you learn English grammar dunce?

Have I never seen poverty and homelessness? Why yes, I see it a lot; and unlike you I understand it’s cause and the reasons for its existence and also know that without LiHEAP and other massive Federal programs, people would not “freeze” or “starve.”

But you’re welcome to prove how many people froze to death before the creation of LiHEAP. While you are at it, show me all the children who starved before the creation of SNAP.

But again you dishonestly avoid the FALSE thread premise that raising taxes on the rich would reduce income inequality.

Of course you cannot prove that raising taxes on the rich would reduce income inequality so you laughably wander into the never ending circle of stupidity hoping that we all forget your moronic nonsense claiming it will.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

truth deflector is obviously a teenaged dork banging away from his man cave in his mommy's basement. He has never seen real life, so cannot really be expected to comment upon it with any degree of insight.

I think he has rabies. He is one of the most vituperative posters I've ever seen. My favorite is when he finishes one of his malicious, foaming at the mouth posts by complaining that liberals call him names! LMAO

 

[maineman]

raising the marginal tax rate by its very nature will reduce the income differential between the rich and the poor. That is not politics, it's arithmetic.

 

[The Dude]

I think he has rabies. He is one of the most vituperative posters I've ever seen. My favorite is when he finishes one of his malicious, foaming at the mouth posts by complaining that liberals call him names! LMAO

Mad props on the vituperative.

 

[Truth Detector]

Things like welfare & unemployment benefits are definitely the only thing that have kept a lot of good, hard-working people off of the streets at times.

That is nothing more than wishful thinking and a gross fabrication; I would argue that without such Federal largess, Americans would help their fellow Americans.

So back to the threads premise; how will raising the taxes of wealthy Americans reduce income inequality?

You really don't know shit. This is what worries me about righties, and especially about righties setting policy: for the most part, they don't know shit.

Wrong again shit-for-brains; it is Liberal dunces like you who don't know shit, don't learn shit and don't remember the last stupid argument you made because you really are THAT incredibly stupid.

The Federal Government does not have a Constitutional duty to provide for income inequality any more than it has a duty to provide for "social security" (an oxymoron), pay for one's heating bill or pay for one's food.

That belongs to the local "community" and States.

But alas, I am arguing with idiots who haven't the slightest clue of what is contained in the Constitution or what the primary cause of poverty and income inequality is.

So back to the threads premise; how will raising the taxes of wealthy Americans reduce income inequality?

 

[maineman]

http://www.facesofliheap.com

great read.... my old buddy Dale McCormick is featured.

 

[Truth Detector]

truth deflector is obviously a teenaged dork banging away from his man cave in his mommy's basement. He has never seen real life, so cannot really be expected to comment upon it with any degree of insight.

LMAO; and you are a pitifully stupid poorly informed gullible leftist dunce who has been beaten to a pulp on this thread.

Carry on Comrade; I will consider your grade school effort above as concession that you really are too stupid to comprehend facts or the truth.

 

[Callinectes]

It is reasonable to say that I think the government should ask more from people in the upper income brackets, and I contribute money to the democratic party to help them do just that.

So, you want politicians to raise your taxes, so you send money to those politicians who promise to do so. In the meantime, you pay only the taxes required of you, and take every legal deduction? But you won't write a check directly to the U.S. treasury? Isn't that more efficient? I think it's pretty American, too. Raise your own taxes! It's YOUR choice! And get this, if everybody in America that thinks like you do raised their own taxes by $5000, by the end of the first year of doing this it could raise tax receipts by as much as...oh, I don't know...maybe $10,000!!! WOW!!! Economy!!! One less thing to worry about!!!