Obama Administration = Most successful at reducing income inequality in 50 years

[JSt0rm]

So viciously desperate. So far off topic, too, apparently by necessity.

I wouldn't presume to know how you make a living or what you're worth but you def embody that FUGM attitude so favored among self important conservatives.

Like poor republicans rich dems vote against their own interests.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Huh? Wtf are you arguing?

You said that South Dakota could support a population like Los Angeles or Tokyo "if the economic conditions supported that growth". What economic conditions would support that?

 

[Jhhnn]

Like poor republicans rich dems vote against their own interests.

Rich Dems are willing to give back to the country that made 'em that way.

 

[glenn1]

So viciously desperate. So far off topic, too, apparently by necessity.

I wouldn't presume to know how you make a living or what you're worth but you def embody that FUGM attitude so favored among self important conservatives.

So were you on the dole before she met you or did you enter the relationship as a hobosexual? How does she like being the breadwinner of the family?

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Rich Dems are willing to give back to the country that made 'em that way.

You mean the white country that was only successful because of all the money going to the white people, as Hillary has admitted?

"That message, I’ll give you America great again — If you're a white southerner, you know exactly what it means," Clinton told a crowd in Orlando, Florida this week. "What it means is I'll give you the economy you had 50 years ago and I’ll move you back up the social totem pole and other people down."

Enjoy your minimum wage immigrant laborers and their payroll taxes, buddy, you've surely earned a lifetime of government bux headed your way until death.

 

[JSt0rm]

You said that South Dakota could support a population like Los Angeles or Tokyo "if the economic conditions supported that growth". What economic conditions would support that?

I never said that you said something about a city the size of Tokyo in South Dakota. I said sure if the economics supported it. What's the problem?

 

[Jhhnn]

So were you on the dole before she met you or did you enter the relationship as a hobosexual? How does she like being the breadwinner of the family?

I'm actually the breadwinner atm which is no big deal. We've been together for nearly 24 years. When both of us worked, we earned about the same amount of money, existed at about the 80th percentile of family income. We saved & invested, planned for where we are today & it's all good. I've always been lucky. I wish more people had it as good & it'd probably be that way if it weren't for unfathomable greed at the top & those who find it admirable.

 

[MongGrel]

So were you on the dole before she met you or did you enter the relationship as a hobosexual? How does she like being the breadwinner of the family?

Man, you're screwed up.

 

[JSt0rm]

Glenn needs therapy.

 

[Knowing]

Rich Dems are willing to give back to the country that made 'em that way.

Rich Dems are willing to jabber from a bully pulpit about wanting to give back.

Not a single person has ever PMed me to remit a finder's fee for the "gifts to the US government" page I link to when some billionaire claims to want to pay more taxes.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I never said that you said something about a city the size of Tokyo in South Dakota. I said sure if the economics supported it. What's the problem?

They don't support it. Now how is your point about America being physically 20 times larger than Japan relevant?

 

[ivwshane]

Rich Dems are willing to jabber from a bully pulpit about wanting to give back.

Not a single person has ever PMed me to remit a finder's fee for the "gifts to the US government" page I link to when some billionaire claims to want to pay more taxes.

Always the victim.

#whinylittlebitch

 

[JSt0rm]

They don't support it. Now how is your point about America being physically 20 times larger than Japan relevant?

in 300 years they may dummy. you are dense.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

in 300 years they may dummy. you are dense.

You think our population will continue to grow at its current rate 300 years from now?

 

[Knowing]

Always the victim.

#whinylittlebitch

I feel as though I'm owed money, assuming that these billionaires are in fact 'paying more taxes' because they want to. I just thought that since the left was up in arms about Trump's debts that would carry over to their side.

I probably made one of the classic blunders - believing the Democrats are internally consistent with their own beliefs.

Do you know if any of those billionaires went out of their way to pay extra or did they just talk about it? I would really help me sleep at night if I knew whether I'm owed monies or not.

 

[Jhhnn]

I feel as though I'm owed money, assuming that these billionaires are in fact 'paying more taxes' because they want to. I just thought that since the left was up in arms about Trump's debts that would carry over to their side.

I probably made one of the classic blunders - believing the Democrats are internally consistent with their own beliefs.

Do you know if any of those billionaires went out of their way to pay extra or did they just talk about it? I would really help me sleep at night if I knew whether I'm owed monies or not.

So dishonest. It's not about individuals but about policy, about how we support the necessity of govt. On one side, we have "Taxes are for little people" & on the other we have the Buffet rule & Hillary's proposal that she'd raise her own taxes & those of other wealthy people as well.

We can either support our infrastructure, our struggling families, the sick, the aged, the lame, the crazy & even the lazy or we can sanction incredible greed at the top. It's a clear choice, one you've obviously already made.

Ponder the idea that Trump may well have paid a much lower tax rate than you have, for years, and who has gained greater benefit from our society. Or just worship at the altar of greed.

 

[yllus]

They don't support it. Now how is your point about America being physically 20 times larger than Japan relevant?

You really get into a lot of completely pointless side arguments in a lot of threads.

 

[Knowing]

So dishonest. It's not about individuals but about policy, about how we support the necessity of govt. On one side, we have "Taxes are for little people" & on the other we have the Buffet rule & Hillary's proposal that she'd raise her own taxes & those of other wealthy people as well.

We can either support our infrastructure, our struggling families, the sick, the aged, the lame, the crazy & even the lazy or we can sanction incredible greed at the top. It's a clear choice, one you've obviously already made.

Ponder the idea that Trump may well have paid a much lower tax rate than you have, for years, and who has gained greater benefit from our society. Or just worship at the altar of greed.

Literally how is it dishonest? A billionaire says they want to pay more taxes, I provide a needed service explaining to them how they can make a gift to the us government effectively increasing the share of their dosh that is used by our government.

Why, precisely, shouldn't I be paid for this service? Their team of elite accountants gets paid for lowering their tax burden, am I not equally deserving?

Buffet, doesn't he own a bank that's been in the news lately? Does he have a comment? What did that bank do to the little people? Have they contributed to any political campaigns?

 

[glenn1]

I feel as though I'm owed money, assuming that these billionaires are in fact 'paying more taxes' because they want to. I just thought that since the left was up in arms about Trump's debts that would carry over to their side.

I probably made one of the classic blunders - believing the Democrats are internally consistent with their own beliefs.

Do you know if any of those billionaires went out of their way to pay extra or did they just talk about it? I would really help me sleep at night if I knew whether I'm owed monies or not.

So dishonest. It's not about individuals but about policy, about how we support the necessity of govt. On one side, we have "Taxes are for little people" & on the other we have the Buffet rule & Hillary's proposal that she'd raise her own taxes & those of other wealthy people as well.

We can either support our infrastructure, our struggling families, the sick, the aged, the lame, the crazy & even the lazy or we can sanction incredible greed at the top. It's a clear choice, one you've obviously already made.

Ponder the idea that Trump may well have paid a much lower tax rate than you have, for years, and who has gained greater benefit from our society. Or just worship at the altar of greed.

Knowing, so that answers your question as if we didn't already know. Progressives will pay more to "support our infrastructure, our struggling families, the sick, the aged, the lame, the crazy & even the lazy" only when they are forced to by law and would face jail otherwise. Any suggestions to donate voluntarily without legal coercion will be addressed with a shrug and "collective action problem" excuse. The infrastructure, etc. is completely a secondary concern to their primary goal which is making others pay more because doing so is (in their minds) striking a blow against the "incredible greed at the top." If they can get someone like Trump to pay more taxes first then they'll accept higher taxes for themselves but not otherwise.

 

[Jaskalas]

Japan has half our population in 1/20th the space.

You think we could support 10x the population, to match Japan's density?
3... billion people? We already have water table issues...

 

[Jhhnn]

Literally how is it dishonest? A billionaire says they want to pay more taxes, I provide a needed service explaining to them how they can make a gift to the us government effectively increasing the share of their dosh that is used by our government.

Why, precisely, shouldn't I be paid for this service? Their team of elite accountants gets paid for lowering their tax burden, am I not equally deserving?

Buffet, doesn't he own a bank that's been in the news lately? Does he have a comment? What did that bank do to the little people? Have they contributed to any political campaigns?

And now the trollery. You fail to address the issue of policy quite intentionally.

 

[JSt0rm]

You think we could support 10x the population, to match Japan's density?
3... billion people? We already have water table issues...

my point was japan does not care about infinite growth. Everyone points to them being stagnant like its horrible. Its a fully mature society and everything works in balance.

 

[Knowing]

And now the trollery. You fail to address the issue of policy quite intentionally.

Why should I address the topic of policy? I don't make policy. I simply found a way to assuage the consciences of guilt stricken billionaires. Do I not deserve recompense for my efforts?

 

[glenn1]

Why should I address the topic of policy? I don't make policy. I simply found a way to assuage the consciences of guilt stricken billionaires. Do I not deserve recompense for my efforts?

"Policy" does tend to be an impossible barrier to the stated desire to be more generous by those rich progressives. They can build billion dollar enterprises but evidently opening their wallet without legal coercion is too much for them.

 

[Jhhnn]

"Policy" does tend to be an impossible barrier to the stated desire to be more generous by those rich progressives. They can build billion dollar enterprises but evidently opening their wallet without legal coercion is too much for them.

That's just more of the same dodge, the same effort to avoid the central issue. If you think that tax policy should enable insane greed at the top & even greater inequality, just say so. Just tell us how smart Trump & others like him are for ruthlessly exploiting current policy & how we should keep it that way because Freedumb! or some such.