Nice obfuscation. Unless you're homeless or you live on a paid for homestead completely disconnected from the economy, work just enough to pay property taxes, barter for the rest, you will put money in the pockets of the financial elite. Forced? gotta eat, gotta keep a roof over your head, wear clothes & shoes, keep from freezing in the winter- minor details, obviously.
Nice obfuscation. Unless you're homeless or you live on a paid for homestead completely disconnected from the economy, work just enough to pay property taxes, barter for the rest, you will put money in the pockets of the financial elite. Forced? gotta eat, gotta keep a roof over your head, wear clothes & shoes, keep from freezing in the winter- minor details, obviously.
I don't have to do any of those things Jhhnn, we aren't forced to. We could just die if we felt like it(isn't that illegal too though?), but if I CHOOSE to do those things I am FORCED to pay taxes to the government. If I CHOOSE to do those things, I am not forced to buy products or deal with the rich elite. Makes sense to me... sounds like you're the one with the screwy logic.
Despite all evidence to the contrary, you determined that participation in the economy is entirely voluntary, even to the point of claiming that dying is a rational alternative. Once you've resorted to that, it's obvious to any rational observer that your argument is bankrupt, busted, an effort to win rather than to make sense.
Righties do it all the time, because what they believe is emotionally satisfying, comforting, insulating them from the truth which is often far less so...
her209
No Lifer
- Oct 11, 2000
- 56,336
- 11
- 0
Well, you could CHOOSE to live in a place where there are no public roads, no police to keep order, no fire department to make sure your house doesn't burn down, no laws to be written, no courts to adjudicate, no schools to teach children, no armies to defend against foreign enemies, etc.
Your fear of death is the only reason it's not a rational alternative TO YOU. I happen to believe fear of dying is irrational so yeah I believe I'm right. I don't have to participate with the government, I could leave it's bounds if I wanted to, but then what? I'm still forced to deal with governments. There is NO ESCAPE. Dealing with other shit holes though? That's completely optional.
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
But it is your choice where and how you spend your money.
You can shop at the local produce market for locally grown food.
You can build a house using wood from locally owned hardware stores.
There are other places you can buy clothes other than Walmart/Target etc etc.
When it comes to how you spend money you have some control over it. But when it comes to taxes you have NO control over it.
What makes it worse is that the government can come in and take MORE of your money when ever they want. Revenue is down so lets raise taxes and take more money from the people.
Meanwhile the people can barely make ends meet so they cut back on spending, only to learn that the government has raised sales taxes another 1%.
More obfuscation. Most people live in urban centers, where locally grown produce is available only seasonally if at all. Few have the funds to build a home from scratch, let alone the requisite knowledge. Clothing? Get real. American labels are hard to find, and more expensive than the average person can afford. Used? sure, but that just stretches out the utility- the financial elite got their cut off the top when it was sold new.
There's always this problem with the thinking of Righties- things that I can do personally won't necessarily extend to everybody.
None of which changes the fact that we all depend on each other in no small way, and the more we do so the more prosperous we are in general, the better money flows in the economy. We need the financial elite, too. We also need to control the power of wealth via democracy, to limit and allow it in ways that benefit the vast majority, not just the wealthy few. We can't do that w/o govt, and we haven't done a very good job of it over the last 30 years, at all.
In aggregate, we do have control over taxes, because we live in a democratic republic. Government isn't imposed, it's elected. When the middle and working classes choose representatives who favor wealth, then the middle and working classes will suffer as a consequence. A variety of mechanisms foster a situation where that happens, and it starts with convincing people to believe in ideas that are harmful to their economic well being, like Reaganomics and the "right" of the wealthy to take a bigger and bigger share of national income. You obviously support those notions.
Raise sales tax? That's the Republican ideal- to have the working & middle class pay for govt through regressive taxation, while the mechanism that creates top tier incomes, capital gains, isn't taxed at all. Consult the Ryan budget, various VAT tax schemes, & the national sales tax scheme. Paying 25% of total median inocme earnings in taxes is a helluva lot more significant sacrifice than paying 40% of incomes in the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars.
I'm continuously amazed at how difficult it seems to be for well indoctrinated Righties to wrap their heads around that. It's apparently impossible to understand the diminishing utility of money when thought processes have been poisoned by the ravings of ultra wealthy and ultra greedy anti-tax zealots.
JMapleton
Diamond Member
- Nov 19, 2008
- 4,179
- 2
- 81
No one on this Earth lives in complete isolation, but the average person can disconnect themselves from nearly 99% of corporate influence if they so choose to live that lifestyle. Grow your own food, make your own clothing, build your own house, people do it.
I agree with ProfJohn. Neither the businessman nor the politician are honest people, but I trust the businessman far more than I do the politician.
If I do not like one business, I can purchase from another. I cannot "be taxed" by the country of my choice (especially in the US, who makes it very very difficult to forfeit citizenship and avoid taxation).
her209
No Lifer
- Oct 11, 2000
- 56,336
- 11
- 0
Its very easy to renounce your citizenship.
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
Heh. Like that'll work, solve the problems in the economy. It's another of those libertopian notions that won't scale up to include everybody.
Nebor
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2003
- 29,582
- 12
- 76
her209
No Lifer
- Oct 11, 2000
- 56,336
- 11
- 0
Oh look, another higher up getting a huge paycheck (nearly $1 million)
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/13/MN491IVQ4R.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/13/MN491IVQ4R.DTL
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 66,563
- 14,970
- 146
Meh...as disgusting as that is, it's not really any different than when any contracted employee is let go. The company has to buy out the contract.
JMapleton
Diamond Member
- Nov 19, 2008
- 4,179
- 2
- 81
Do some research on it, they make it sound easy, but there are all kinds of restrictions, especially if you've got money.
In some cases, they'll tax you for 10 years after you've renounced your citizenship. Yeah get that, getting taxed by a country you do not live in and are not a citizen of.
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
It's amusingly ironic that the people always throwing around accusations of greed are the very people demanding that other people's work product be seized for their own benefit.
the OP and media is missing an important point. You cannot do anything about the pension of that are already promised, especially fr those who are retired and on those pension already.
You people forget that pension is part of the work contract. When most people sign on to a job, the pension is defined and is part of the work package. Company, state, federal employers don't get to change contract anytime they want. Especially on the define pension package when those pension are past obligations that are supposed to be funded already as employers are promising them.
Are those retirees getting lot of money? yeah but that's because back when they were hired they were paid little but promised a secured retirement.
Most of the public employers no longer give the kind of pension they gave in the past, and many are on 401K already. So what are you gonna do with those that are already promised a pension or on a pension? nothing because you had a contract. What already can be done is already done with the new hires. You people need to move on and complain about something else.
You people forget that pension is part of the work contract. When most people sign on to a job, the pension is defined and is part of the work package. Company, state, federal employers don't get to change contract anytime they want. Especially on the define pension package when those pension are past obligations that are supposed to be funded already as employers are promising them.
Are those retirees getting lot of money? yeah but that's because back when they were hired they were paid little but promised a secured retirement.
Most of the public employers no longer give the kind of pension they gave in the past, and many are on 401K already. So what are you gonna do with those that are already promised a pension or on a pension? nothing because you had a contract. What already can be done is already done with the new hires. You people need to move on and complain about something else.
"Work product"? Ownership and control are not work. The relationship between work and reward is often indirect and tenuous, serendipity playing a huge role.
If you think that the top hedge fund manager who earned $5B in 2010 worked proportionately harder than the guy who earned $25K in a sweat shop somewhere, you might be interested in some Arizona oceanfront. If you think that the last dollar earned by each has the same utility to the recipients, you're truly delusional.
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
I think the hedge fund manager worked proportionally smarter than the sweat shop worker. As far as utility, I think if a man legally earns something and/or owns something, whether or not I think he is overpaid or deserves it, I have no claim on it. "Thou shalt not covet" does not have a relative utility codicil.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter