What I don't get about the redistribution of wealth....

[Obamarama]

Gramps is on MSNBC speechifying at some SS/GOP rally. Blathering about this and that and the other thing to the howler monkeys in attendance.

So he spouted the ominous threat that the howler monkeys should hold onto their wallets because Obama wants to take away their wealth and redistribute it. Of course, this is in the form of higher taxes for people making greater than $250,000. And even then, at $250,000 a year, you aren't likely to feel it much. The howler monkeys went wild with snorts and howls of approval.

So my question is this: WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE? Why is it that I, who makes quite a bit less than $250,000 a year, am more than willing to pay a little more in taxes if it means my fellow citizens who are having a rough time can have a little easier time? Why do I not mind paying more in taxes if it means I could care for patients who can afford to treat their chronic conditions instead of leaving them untreated until they are so sick that their health has been permanently destroyed. Have these people never heard the adage that a rising tide lifts all boats? And under Obama's plan I won't HAVE to pay more in taxes...but I WOULD if it would help fix some of the things that need fixing in this country.

Why do I not mind sharing a little more of what wealth I do have with my fellow citizens?

Because I'm a DEMOCRAT!

[DesertFlower]

1. exactly, but republicans think

differently. they don't want to help others. it's kind of the attitude "i've got mine so screw you".

[hedgehog]

2. Hear, hear! Someone will someday win the Noebel Prize for Economics

by proving that unless some sort of redistribution of wealth is built into the system, everything stops!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

3. It's not even a matter of sharing, my friend...

It's a matter of STOPPING the Repukes from sucking the money out of our WORKING clases through bills meant to benefit the rich, bills meant to impoverish the working class, lies, trickery and crooked schemes and give it to the already-wealthy.

[Obamarama]

4. Yeah...that TOO!

Very salient points. I agree wholeheartedly.

[DesertFlower]

7. obama just said McCain

is going to cut medicare which is already in trouble.

i've heard the republicans hate medicare and would love to do away with it.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

10. Yep, and yet I hear Democrats saying that we must sing kumbaya with Republicans nt

[treestar]

5. I never understand them either

Most Republicans are living comfortably, and have everything they need. What do they want the extra for when it could go to someone who doesn't have all they need?

They always go on about charity and how the government should not do it. I suspect most of them would not give to charity even if their taxes were reduced. If they did, maybe it's because they want control - either over who it goes to for what or directly over people they would help.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

6. People that gravitate towards Republicanism are sociopaths, fascists, etc.

They could no more be empathetic than a piranha could be.

[knowbody0]

8. but we are witnessing the end to their era.

the "consumers" have lost their good jobs, the money changers are freaking out because the circle has been broken. believing greed was a good god, they followed without looking down. now they cry "the bailout is not enough" because they have been conditioned to believe in themselves without concern for humanity.

[JonLP24]

9. David Simon has said it best

“We’re headed separate Americas.”

unencumbered Capitalism has become our God.” In our greedy society, Simon underscored: “Human are worth less, not more: less.” He said America is going to be a “more brutish, cynical and divided place.”

“I am wholly pessimistic about American society. I believe ‘The Wire’ is a show about the end of the American Empire. We...are going to live that event. How we end up...and survive on what terms, is going to be the open question... There will be cities. We are an urban people...What kind of places they will be are...dependent on how we behave towards each other and how our political infrastructure behave...Here is the great conceit of ‘The Wire,’ and I think it is the great question that is in front of the entire world. The ‘Third World’ has encountered this long before we did and increasingly we are finding ‘Third World’ conditions in some of our major cities. <2> Here is the reason why: Every single moment on this planet from here on out, human beings are worth less, not more: less!” <3>

Continuing, Simon emphasized: “We are in the postindustrial age. We do not need as many of us as we once did. We don’t need us to generate capital...to secure wealth. We are in a transitive period where human beings have lost some of their value. Now, whether or not we...can figure out a way to validate the humanity of the individual...I have great doubts...We (America) haven’t figured out the answers to these questions. I have doubts whether anyone is going to be able to do it...That is what we have been arguing about on ‘The Wire.’ Anyone who thought they were watching ‘a cop show,’ and couldn’t understand why the cops didn’t catch the ‘bad guy’ at the end and make everyone happy, there is your answer.” As for the characters on the program, Simon explained, “Their lives are less and less necessary. They are more and more expendable. The institutions in which they serve...are indifferent...to their existence.” <3>

The economic numbers back up Simon’s position. One percent of the U.S. population is estimated to own between “forty and fifty percent of the nation’s wealth, more than the combined wealth of the bottom 95 percent.” <4> Person bankruptcies are at an all-time high in the U.S., while union membership continues to decline. <5> Globally, the statistics paint an even more dismal picture. “The richest two percent of adults...own more than half of all household wealth.” <6> Half of the world’s population exist on less than “two dollars a day.” <7> Some of the factors driving the economic crisis in the U.S., are: one-way free trade policies, foreign takeovers of corporations, out sourcing of jobs and massive debts. <8>
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/40742

[napi21]

11. I wish I would hear more TV show hosts actually point out that the

actual increase in tax dollars for the wealthier people would actually be relatively small. Several of the radio hosts have done that. Randi used an example of someone who had $350,000 taxable income whould see their taxes increase $175.00. It's clean, clear statements like that that really make an impact.

[JonLP24]

15. People such as O'reilly claim

Taxing big oil companies will cause them to raise their gas prices which will hurt hard working americans. Boo-fucking-hoo!!!!! ExxonMobile is the RICHEST company in the WORLD!!!!!!!! They deserve to have that kind of freakin' money distrubited to some of the hardest working americans that barely get by.

"A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death" -MLK

and

"something is wrong with capitalism. There must be a better distribution of wealth, and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism." - MLK

[notaboutus]

12. Only 5% of Americans make over $250,000.00

that alone should make Americans of all party affiliations vote democratic this year.

[Fovea]

13. Every Democrat has a two word shut down

when the subject is class war.

Kevin Phillips.

The great great grandfather of todays Republican party strategists.

If you don't know why he's important to the argument, I seriously suggest you read him.
At least 'The Politics of Rich and Poor.'

[EmeraldCityGrl]

14. It seems McCain uses the phrase "small business owner" in place

of "the middle class" giving the illusion to some that they are better than or in a higher class than others.
You could gross $10,000 a year and qualify as a small business owner.

It's really interesting to see people identify with one phrase over the other.

[jwirr]

16. You said it because we are Democratic. We believe in we the people.

My father raised us to look around us at what we were receiving for our tax money: roads, snowplowing, schools, school buses, libraries, hospitals, recreational sites, the knowledge that there is help in a crisis (food stamps, energy assistance, medical assistance, and other safety net programs), police, fire fighters, national guard. These are just a few of the blessings of a government run by Democrats.

[prayin4rain]

17. I think it is funny because I guarantee 99% of those howling morons

don't make even close to that and they would be the ones BENEFITING from it. True, real live freaking idiots. I don't like the idea of paying more taxes, like Obama said, nobody does. But it is sure as hell worth it to help my fellow citizens and to preserve the wonderful community/country that we ALL have built. It is patriotic to pay taxes it is an important responsibility and those who have benefited the most from this community should reinvest the most in the community. You would think they would want to preserve the community that allows them to be successful.

[Bonhomme Richard]

18. They call it redistribute. I call it FAIR. n/t

[MiniMe]

19. We have had a wealth redistribution for the last 8 years - all of it UP

[Greyhound]

23. Except it has been almost 30 years. n/t

[notalemming]

20. Jesus had something to say about it. Matthew 19:21

"Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me."

[SammyWinstonJack]

21. Admit, you'd much rather be a non-thinking howler monkey, wouldn't you?

:evilgrin:



I'd love that 250k salary and the increased taxes that go along with it. So would those howler monkeys, I bet. They're probably just pissed because they don't make anywhere near that amount of $$$ and likely never will.

[Caliman73]

22. I am assuming that you don't mind paying more taxes

because you are a decent person and were raised in a family that taught you that you are part of something larger than your own immediate self interests. Which would probably explain why you are a Democrat too. If I am assuming too much, I apologize. Perhaps I am projecting. I was raised to balance my needs and desires with those of other people in my family and community. It feels wrong to me to deny someone the basics while I might have an abundance. Life to me is more than having more money than I know what to do with. I mean I would love to have enough money that I never worried about the bills or buying food, or other expenses...I just think that if I can contribute to someone else having a better life by doing something that does not financially destroy me and my family, then why not? I mean is I make 250k and have to pay 97.5k that still leaves me with 152.5k to use for my needs. Right now we live comfortably with the 65k my wife and I take home after taxes, I cannot imagine what an extra 90k would add to our lifestyle. Sorry rich people, no sympathy from me. People poorer than us, get our sympathy and need to be helped out.

[RainDog]

24. CEO salaries are not set by god or any natural law

in fact, many CEO salaries are set by board members who are many times also family members -- or people who owe their jobs to the CEO, etc. In other words, wealth redistribution goes on ALL the time - when it's to the advantage of the rich, they don't have a thing to say. when it's to the advantage of the other 95% of the nation, it's suddenly horrible.

I heard the bullshit from McCain's butt boy after the debate last night... we're not a nation that does wealth redistribution. what a crock. when you shift the burden of the public welfare so that one group never pays an equivalent % of their assets, that's redistribution of wealth. I hate these motherfuckers so badly because they cough up bullshit over and over again in hopes that someone will believe their crap.

there is NO absolute determination of salaries for anyone - beyond the very least a gov. allows someone to pay, or what a "going rate" is for a profession at a given time... which can and does change. in other words, people who work at McDonalds could make 100.00 an hour and lawyers could make 6.50 an hour and it would still be the same nation.

I wish they would choke on their lying tongues.

[Londoner]

25. Pay and bonus deals equivalent to 10% of US government bail-out package

I just had to post this from todays UK Guardian.
I wanted to make a separate thread but this is my first time post after following these forums for about 1 year so it wouldn't let me. If a vet thinks it worthwhile please make a separate thread.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/17/executivesalaries-banking

Financial workers at Wall Street's top banks are to receive pay deals worth more than $70bn (£40bn), a substantial proportion of which is expected to be paid in bonuses, for their work so far this year - despite plunging the global financial system into its worst crisis since the 1929 stock market crash, the Guardian has learned.

Staff at six banks including Goldman Sachs and Citigroup will pick up the payouts despite being the beneficiaries of a $700bn bail-out from the US government that has already prompted widespread criticism. The government cash has been poured in on the condition that excessive executive pay will be curbed.

Pay plans for bankers have been disclosed in recent corporate statements. Pressure on the US firms to review preparations for annual bonuses increased yesterday when Germany's Deutsche Bank said many of its leading traders would join chief executive Josef Ackermann in waiving millions of euro in annual payouts.

The sums that continue to be spent by Wall Street firms on payroll, payoffs and - most controversially - bonuses appear to bear no relation to the heavy losses incurred by investors in the banks. Shares in Citigroup and Goldman Sachs have declined by more than 45% since the start of the year. Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley have fallen by more than 60%. JP MorganChase fell 6.4% and Lehman Brothers has collapsed.

At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.

In the first nine months of the year Citigroup, which employs thousands of staff in the UK, accrued $25.9bn for salaries and bonuses, an increase on the previous year of 4%. Earlier this week the bank accepted a $25bn investment by the US government as part of its bail-out plan.

At Goldman Sachs the figure was $11.4bn, Morgan Stanley $10.73bn, JP MorganChase $6.53bn and Merrill Lynch $11.7bn. At Merrill, which was on the point of going bust last month before being taken over by Bank of America, the amount accrued in the last quarter grew 76% to $3.49bn. At Morgan Stanley, the amount put aside for staff compensation also grew in the last quarter to the end of September by 3% to $3.7bn.

Days before it collapsed into bankruptcy protection a month ago Lehman Brothers revealed $6.12bn of staff pay plans in its corporate filings. These payouts, the bank insisted, were justified despite net revenue collapsing from $14.9bn to a net outgoing of $64m.None of the banks the Guardian contacted wished to comment on the record about their pay plans. Behind the scenes, one source said: "For a normal person the salaries are very high and the bonuses seem even higher. But in this world you get a top bonus for top performance, a medium bonus for mediocre performance and a much smaller bonus if you don't do so well."

Many critics of the investment banking model have questioned why firms continues to siphon off billions of dollars of bank earnings into annual bonus pools rather than using the funds to shore up the capital position of the crisis-stricken institutions. One banking source said: "That's a fair enough question - and it may well be that by the end of the year the banks start review the situation." Much of the anger about investment

banking bonuses has focused on boardroom executives such as former Lehman boss Dick Fuld, who was paid $485m in salary, bonuses and options between 2000 and 2007. Last year Merrill Lynch chairman Stan O'Neal retired after announcing losses of $8bn, taking a final pay deal worth $161m. Citigroup boss Chuck Prince left last year with a $38m in bonuses, shares and options after multibillion-dollar write-downs.

In Britain, Bob Diamond, Barclays president, is one of the few investment bankers whose pay is made public. Last year he received a salary of £250,000, but his total pay, including bonuses, reached £36m. One London-based banking source, who worked for a US bank, said many in the City were expecting star traders to see little reduction in their bonuses. "The real 'rain-makers' will not notice an impact. It will be the more middle-ranking people who will be really hit."

[RainDog]

27. great link/post. thanks and welcome!

I was out for a bit - has someone else posted this? You can post replies in various forums and then, with 10 posts, re-do this one as a thread. Or if you'd like, I will be happy to post this in your name.

the real scandal is the total piggishness - the total greed of those at the top of the economic pyramid. too bad they didn't jump instead of getting bailed out.

[Johnny Potpie]

26. Exactly

Barack Obama should be defending his own statements about "spreading the wealth" in the proper contexts. They have smeared him for this, and people I know have been recently using it against me. My response is, so what. I think it's great that Obama wants to spread the weatlh. I'm proud of him for it. People need healthcare, food, prescription drugs and education and a place to live. What's wrong with assuring them that they can have access to it. Gee, greedy people being forced to share their horded wealth might actually help us get better educated citizens with better overall health. That's great! Yes, Obama. Say it and be proud.