Raising Taxes On The Rich Would Reduce Income Inequality

Truth Detector said:
LMAO!!! There you have it folks; the real agenda for unintelligent dunces like this leftist asshole is to SLOW the accumulation of wealth so that we can make EVERYONE feel the same misery.

LMAO; you truly are a stupid small minded little dunce. Dismissed Comrade; we have heard enough of your Marxist dogma for one day.
Click to expand...


Thats priceless.....sometimes the truth actually slips out....stop people from getting wealthy, thats the goal of the socialist/communist pinheads....spread the wealth and along
with it, spread the suffering....don't strive to be exceptional, strive to be mediocre......once everyone is average it will be Utopia.....
 
maineman said:
Bravo... In the real world, people realize that income tax does indeed take a bite out of their income... Just like sales tax really does make the price you PAY for your 30 rack of malt liquor more than the sticker says it costs. Progressive income tax has always been designed to take more in taxes from those who have benefitted more from our society, and who thus can afford to pay more towards the optimal operation of that society. That process of taxing the greater incomes to a greater degree has always had the effect of marginally reducing the differential between the net, after tax incomes of those taxed at the higher tax rates and those taxed at the lower rates. Is this really news to you?
Click to expand...


Bravo, bravo,bravo....Karl Marx couldn't have said it better.....

but "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is more poetic.
 
maineman said:
Blah blah blah... Then every president since Wilson has been a Marxist.

Boring.
Click to expand...

Did a president make your post ?...I thought we were talking about what your beliefs are....

anyway....not all presidents nor all politicians for that matter are Maxist, just Democrats........there has been ideas put forward and attempts made to abolish the progressive tax rates in favor
of a fair flat tax, but alas, due to a majority of voters being bought off (by Democrats with other peoples money) with either little or no taxes at all, those attempts have failed....

like Romney pointed out, about 47% of the voters don't give a shit about taxes because they already don't pay any....
 
have any republican presidents ever vetoed a tax bill because of its progressively?

I'll bet not and none of them are any more of a Marxist than I am.

Shit... you're just all the other Faux fed GOP sheeple... that word is nothing but an epithet to you... you've never read a word of Marx's writings or have a fucking clue what Marxism is really all about.
 
Just keep diggin' amigo.......Its plain you've studied Marx in depth, and sucked it up like a dry sponge....patriot my ass....
 
Of course it hurts us.....if there was more money collected from billionaires...actually not taxing them more, just restoring what they were paying which was fine with them, more money would mean better schools etc
 
Isalexi said:
Of course it hurts us.....if there was more money collected from billionaires...actually not taxing them more, just restoring what they were paying which was fine with them, more money would mean better schools etc
Click to expand...

Why not just take ALL their money.... once and done, get it over with...start with George Soros, Irwin Jacobs, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Teresa Hintz...you'd be in Utopia...
 
NOVA said:
Just keep diggin' amigo.......Its plain you've studied Marx in depth, and sucked it up like a dry sponge....patriot my ass....
Click to expand...

like I said, you're a Faux fed sheeple... you don't know a fucking thing about Marx other than, according to your handlers, it's a dirty word.

Did your one hitch at Gitmo and think you're a fuckin' military stud.... what a fucking joke.
 
NOVA said:
You'd lose........because you ARE a loser.
Click to expand...

I'd lose??? really??? post a link to the GOP president's veto of an income tax bill along with his rationale for the veto that shows he did so because of its progressively.

We both know you can't because we both know you are all hat and no fucking cattle.
 
maineman said:
like I said, you're a Faux fed sheeple... you don't know a fucking thing about Marx other than, according to your handlers, it's a dirty word.

Did your one hitch at Gitmo and think you're a fuckin' military stud.... what a fucking joke.
Click to expand...


wow....now Fox gets into this....and I'm a military stud ?....and did I insult one of your heros, Karl Marx by saying his quote was more poetic than
your more earthly version of his teachings.............you're right, this is a fucking joke....

THIS is all ya got.....ya tryin' to take over for desh ?....rants bordering on the insane.....

Get if off you chest, commie....rant on....play the fool.
 
Marx is no hero of mine, bravs.... But I am smart enough to have actually read all of his major work and understand the basis of his philosophy. You've never read anything he ever wrote and are clueless as to what Marxism is beyond what your handlers feed you. I can't imagine stumbling through life like you do, relying on limited education and even more limited intellect. Every day must be a struggle... poor guy!
 
maineman said:
Marx is no hero of mine, bravs.... But I am smart enough to have actually read all of his major work and understand the basis of his philosophy. You've never read anything he ever wrote and are clueless as to what Marxism is beyond what your handlers feed you. I can't imagine stumbling through life like you do, relying on limited education and even more limited intellect. Every day must be a struggle... poor guy!
Click to expand...
we all know that there are no textbook marxists but similarly we all know much gas heen done in his name that is not found in his writing. Same is true of all political thinkers. Forest Gump may have caltured it well (and I paraohrase
) marxist is as narxist does....
 
there are no textbook marxists, that is for sure... which seems to give the right license to call anyone they want a marxist. Marxism is not a piecemeal philosophy that operates well with other elements of other political philosophies or economic theories. It really is an all or nothing sort of system and, what is equally important is that the method of achieving it - through the dialectic process and the dictatorship of the proletariat vanguard - is very important in the process OF reaching it. In a capitalist society, if the people decide to set up public ownership of the electrical grid, that is not Marxist... if they want to publicly own the collection of trash, or the provision of security, or... even the provision of medical services, those pieces, established by democratic means in a capitalist system, are not "Marxist". Classic Marxism is the whole enchilada and the establishment of that enchilada through a very well defined series of relatively abrupt and cataclysmic events. When people label folks with whom they disagree as "Marxists", they merely misuse the word and highlight their own ignorance of it.... but I know full well that, for those folks who are on the "right" frequency, the dog whistle of the epithet "Marxism" is a powerful rallying cry.
 
So the idiots are still blathering about "taxing billionaires"?

Do they still not realize that Bill Gates does not pay taxes on his billions of dollars of wealth, only on his income during the year?

Do they still not realize that taxing income mostly hurts working people, not billionaires?

Do they still not realize that the only effective way to tax the wealthy is to tax wealth, not income?
 
Taft2016 said:
So the idiots are still blathering about "taxing billionaires"?

Do they still not realize that Bill Gates does not pay taxes on his billions of dollars of wealth, only on his income during the year?

Do they still not realize that taxing income mostly hurts working people, not billionaires?

Do they still not realize that the only effective way to tax the wealthy is to tax wealth, not income?
Click to expand...

They can hide their wealth too. That is why they give it to foundations.

1) it shields it from government (opposite their stated goal)
2) their money gets used to fund elitist left wing causes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top