• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

The people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Ldir

Platinum Member
Jul 23, 2003
2,184
0
0
It's hard for butt clowns like you to understand that he earned the money. Get a job and find out for yourself what that is
Kiss my butt gramps. I have a job. I earn good money. I pay lots of taxes. I am probably supporting your sorry ass. Where did Romney's money come from? Whose pockets? I know it doesn't grow on trees. You probably knew that too before you became senile.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
0
0
Kiss my butt gramps. I have a job. I earn good money. I pay lots of taxes. I am probably supporting your sorry ass. Where did Romney's money come from? Whose pockets? I know it doesn't grow on trees. You probably knew that too before you became senile.
Whose pockets does your money come from? You accuse Romney, who are you stealing your money from?

Since Phokus is usually the only one that abuses the font here in the forums, I thought I'd use it also.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,007
571
126
Standard rightwing raving boilerplate.
And standard left-wing class-warfare below.

American capitalists are doing very, very well indeed- better than ever. Claiming that they've somehow been abused for the last 30 years is a bad joke, but that's what you're doing.
The challenge, since apparently you didn't read what I wrote but rather issued a hasty reply, was to identify what business owners are supposed to do when unions raise their prices to uncompetitive levels.

That's obviously why the top 1% share of income has doubled in that time frame, and why the top .1% now make basically the same share that the entire top 1% made in 1980.

Poor Things! Sooo Abused! Send the Wahmbulance!

Raising their taxes would be exactly like the invasion of Poland!
Yes. Why is this inequality occurring?
 
Last edited:

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,991
853
126
Standard rightwing raving boilerplate.

American capitalists are doing very, very well indeed- better than ever. Claiming that they've somehow been abused for the last 30 years is a bad joke, but that's what you're doing.

That's obviously why the top 1% share of income has doubled in that time frame, and why the top .1% now make basically the same share that the entire top 1% made in 1980.

Poor Things! Sooo Abused! Send the Wahmbulance!

Raising their taxes would be exactly like the invasion of Poland!
Hey nice name calling and...how do you often say...duh duh duhVERT!
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
Standard rightwing raving boilerplate.

American capitalists are doing very, very well indeed- better than ever. Claiming that they've somehow been abused for the last 30 years is a bad joke, but that's what you're doing.

That's obviously why the top 1% share of income has doubled in that time frame, and why the top .1% now make basically the same share that the entire top 1% made in 1980.

Poor Things! Sooo Abused! Send the Wahmbulance!

Raising their taxes would be exactly like the invasion of Poland!
And you think raising taxes is going to be the great equalizer? We have had a 70 and even 90% upper tax bracket. We still ran deficits and we still had poor and homeless. Better to have equality in despair than everyone prosper unequally.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,343
14,563
136
I didnt ignore it, I just didnt bring it up because it has nothing to do with the specific faux "transfer of wealth" that we were discussing.
Sure it does. If I strip a US company of $100M, push it into insolvency, then invest that money offshore for higher profit margin, I've transferred American wages to Chinese workers & kept the difference. It's a big difference.

American workers who would have used that money to advance their own wealth don't see it anymore.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,343
14,563
136
And you think raising taxes is going to be the great equalizer? We have had a 70 and even 90% upper tax bracket. We still ran deficits and we still had poor and homeless. Better to have equality in despair than everyone prosper unequally.
Prior to Reagan, federal income, capital gains & corporate taxes were the great equalizers, part of the structure of the New Deal.

Deficits were miniscule, total indebtedness being <$1T when Reagan took office. He and GHWB more than quadrupled it, and GWB doubled it again.

Everyone prosper unequally? There's nothing really prosperous about being perpetually unemployed, about being eligible for foodstamps, about wondering when the next financial calamity will push you down another peg.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/19/us/census-measures-those-not-quite-in-poverty-but-struggling.html?pagewanted=all

Don't worry, however, Mitt thinks those people are the same "middle class" as those making $250K...
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
462
126
No wealth was transferred anywhere. That implies it was taken from the middle and lower class and given to the .01%. Which is unequivocally false.
To the left, all money belongs to government. Therefore any money not taken from you by government is given to you by government.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
To the left, all money belongs to government. Therefore any money not taken from you by government is given to you by government.
See, there's another example. An empty straw man argument bearing no relation to reality and adding nothing of value to the discussion. Pure tripe.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,343
14,563
136
To the left, all money belongs to government. Therefore any money not taken from you by government is given to you by government.
See, there's another example. An empty straw man argument bearing no relation to reality and adding nothing of value to the discussion. Pure tripe.
It's the usual tantrum of denial so favored by conservatives.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,343
14,563
136
He just admitted that he wants them to suffer
I didn't, but it might be the only thing causing them to reconsider their "values".

The nation had a great epiphany in the wake of the 1929 crash that brought on so much misery. We rejected the flimflam financial excesses of the 20's & the ideology that spawned them, embraced the New Deal.

Today, efforts to mitigate the same kind of crash have merely allowed room for denial. The extreme disparity of wealth and income of that era have returned, with a twist. The bread lines & soup kitchens are invisible, electronic, delivered in the form of EITC & other programs so disparaged by the Mittens lovers among us. All they see is the calm surface, not recognizing the turmoil below.

They have trouble seeing national income as a limited commodity, and the hoarding of liquidity as damaging to the fabric of society, actually reducing the amount of it available to the rest of America. They don't understand what a liquidity trap means, at all, don't understand that there's a tipping point of sorts wrt concentration of wealth. They don't understand that, in the current economic climate, much of money acquired by the uber wealthy just disappears from the general economy, whisked offshore for better returns, or stashed in banks that aren't lending. They don't understand that the incredible private sector debt acquired during the Bush years demands deleveraging, and that hard money policy & high unemployment just makes that a lot harder.

They don't understand a lot of things, because it's emotionally uncomfortable to even contemplate the idea that they're being conned, manipulated & robbed in the process.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
Matt1970 said:
Obama was talking about spreading the wealth around as far back as the Joe The Pumber video. But sure, it's all lie, a voiceover by the GOP.
Well said, People forget Joe the Plumber
What a surprise: Two right-wing fruit-cakes taking an Obama sentence out of context and holding onto that misinterpretation for dear life.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
You still didn't answer my question, if so many republicraps are on welfare then why dont we END WELFARE:D
Because 100 million dead republicraps - though mighty tempting - isn't worth the lives of 2 poor but innocent liberals.
 

disappoint

Lifer
Dec 7, 2009
10,137
380
126
Arithmetic only works with Democrats. Republicans hate math and science.
Arithma what? Is that a singer or something? Arithma Franklin? Speaking of Franklins, look I run a huge Wall St. investment firm and I got my bailout. Now you peon socialists need to stop living off the govt. teat so there's enough for us the next time we fail!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY