The rich should get more votes and Taxes will lead to 'economic extinction' of the 1%

[Pocatello]

The guy is a fool, the rich 1% don't need votes, they already control the government. The rich pretend to let the poor vote so the poor have an illusion they have some political power.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

If bailing out large investment banks, essentially throwing money at the rich, constitutes a "War on the 1%" then I wonder what Coddling the 1% would look like.

 

[nickbits]

I don't like the idea of them getting more votes but I do like the idea of not letting people on welfare vote.

 

[ElFenix]

Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.

12

 

[MagickMan]

LOL It's % based. Earning $60k, someobody who's single, claiming just themselves with no itemized deductions (& assuming no IRA/401k contribution) would pay roughly $8-9k in federal taxes. That's about 1/7th their income.

If Kerry's effective tax rate was ~11%, he was paying 1/10th of his earned income.

So you tell me... Who's actually paying more?

You don't need that money, how would it positively affect your "lifestyle"? They know what's best for you, just submit. :sneaky:

 

[K1052]

Yeah, as if the military transport needs of fighting the Civil War had nothing to do with that. Just like Pearl Harbor had nothing to do with the feds subsidizing shipyard building in the 1940s. It's not like the "little guy" got screwed by the railroad land grants in any event since the Homestead Act was giving away federal land to individual citizens anyway.

While you're at it, why not take it back yet another layer? Do you mean the government that was built in return for land grants from British kings or the one whose own land grants to railroads were enabled via people being paid by the scalp to exterminate millions of Native Americans and seize their ancestral lands?

Hey you wanted to pretend that these independent businesses built the national rail network all on their lonesome without any incentive from the government, which for basically everything west of the Mississippi is not the case. Use of these huge subsidies far outlived the civil war and were not really intended to help with the war. But what the hell...nobody really gives a shit about the history only the rhetoric that makes people feel comfortable in their beliefs.

 

[MagickMan]

If bailing out large investment banks, essentially throwing money at the rich, constitutes a "War on the 1%" then I wonder what Coddling the 1% would look like.

Actually that was a union bailout, because their massive pensions were propping up the banks' fractional loans. If the "evil investment banks" had gone down the drain, all the little union boys and girls would have lost their shirts. Don't you realize all of that is/was connected, or do you believe the Left was somehow spotless throughout that?

 

[K1052]

And sure, many cities are having mini-renaissances in the heart of downtown with lofts being built. And the amount of people involved is still fairly tiny (typically in the hundreds or low thousands). The Census Department (see Table 3.4 on page 26) says that total percentage of people living within 2 miles of town hall is 1.9, 3.2, and 3.6 percent of the population of MSA sized 5MM, 2.5MM, and 1MM people respectively. Even so that would in no way drive a larger demand among them for city-wide infrastructure projects. Indeed they'll probably drive out-sized infrastructure spending in their very local area of the city at the expense of poorer areas.

The broader point is that urbanization is increasing. The statistic you cite is totally irrelevant for that discussion. If you think that what's happening is a mini-renaissance you need to do some traveling. The amount of construction in urban (not limited to traditional city cores) areas these days is mind boggling. There is a huge pent up demand for urban infrastructure, transportation in particular.

DC is a pretty good example of what is happening. People are moving into the city core itself and driving huge residential demand (many thousands of units) and at the same time other people are clustering around transit and other urbanish areas (Tysons, Reston, Arlington, etc) in the surrounding metro instead of moving further and further out into the suburbs.

 

[sourn]

"I do believe that voting should only be afforded people with a basic mental capacity and demonstrable understanding of what they are voting about."

So what you're saying is anybody that votes for reptards or demasses shouldn't be allowed to vote?

Hey I'm all for that.