Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

• BoatShoes

  This is an article by Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the 2001 Nobel Prize in economics. He is undoubtedly a liberal but my opinion on the article is that he makes some good points and that people interested in free, competitive markets and capitalism would agree too.
  
  
• fish82

  

  Just kill the rich people and take their farking money already. I'm tired of listening to all the crying about them.
• Thread Bomber

  

  Learn how to use the link thingy... I'm usually to lazy to do the cut and paste thing.
  
  
  
  Response: I think you are 100% jealous of the 1% that have done well for themselves.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  I didn't bother opening it because I knew it was more class warfare shit. It's the only song and dance most liberals know.
• sleeper

  

  The 1% have earned it. Want to be in the 1%? Work for it.
• O-Trap

  

  sleeper;736277 wrote:The 1% have earned it. Want to be in the 1%? Work for it.

  To be fair, not ALL the 1% earned it, but if they didn't, whoever gave it to them earned it, so SOMEBODY earned it.
  
  In any case, just because the rest of us (I'm in the 99%) have the majority, that doesn't give us the right to abuse the democratic system to oppress the minority (ie take what they've worked to get until we've all got the same resources in this case). That spreads over more than economic lines as well. Racial lines, political affiliations, ages, genders ... there's a minority in pretty much each case there. The minorities should not be abused by the majority.
  
  Might doesn't make right in every single instance. It would just become a case of "he who has the biggest proverbial guns wins." Isn't that how military dictators seize power in other countries (on a more literal level, of course)?
• tk421

  

  OK everyone, especially you class warfare loving Liberals, it's math time. Gather round kids, let's educate ourselves before we look stupid.
  
  If we took the absolutely very top 1% of the super rich that the liberals just love to hate in this country and "taxed" absolutely everything from them at 100% (*cough* confiscate *cough*) it would not even cover the deficit for this year. Taking all the income earned from these top 1% will NOT solve our *cough* SPENDING *cough* problem. We do not have an income problem, we have a spending problem.
  
  The top 1% in 2010 had an AGI of $1,685,472,000,000 and paid $392,149,000,000 in taxes. So, even if you take all their money, which would absolutely kill the economy, you wouldn't have enough for 1 year of federal spending. And then after that year you can not tax the rich again, because they have no money. Liberals, can you see the problem here? I seriously doubt it, you all just do not understand.
  
  Let's say that the Liberals say well let's take everything from the top 5% and that will fix our problems. OK, lets look at that. The top 5% in 2010 had AIG of $2,926,701,000,000. If you confiscated absolutely everything from the top 5% in this country, you'd fix the deficit problem in this country for a whole single 1 year. The government spends about 3.7 Trillion and this is less than 3 Trillion. Not to mention the collapse of our economy when the government steals all money from everyone making more than $159,619 a year. Do you finally understand the problem Liberals? WE CAN NOT TAX OUR WAY OUT OF THIS PROBLEM.
  
  http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
  
  
• Belly35

  

  first thing first you lose your man card ... Vanity Fair
  
  I'm 100% sure I worked for my 100% that some of you would like to take that 1% from
  I'm 100% positve that I put up 100% of the risk to make that 100% you would like to take that 1% from
  I'm 100% that the burden I endured 100% of the time to achieve that 100% you want to take that 1% from
  
  Is not yours for the taking... work, risk, achievement= earned 100% of it .... That the type of math you liberals don't understand.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  tk421;736307 wrote:OK everyone, especially you class warfare loving Liberals, it's math time. Gather round kids, let's educate ourselves before we look stupid.
  
  If we took the absolutely very top 1% of the super rich that the liberals just love to hate in this country and "taxed" absolutely everything from them at 100% (*cough* confiscate *cough*) it would not even cover the deficit for this year. Taking all the income earned from these top 1% will NOT solve our *cough* SPENDING *cough* problem. We do not have an income problem, we have a spending problem.
  
  The top 1% in 2010 had an AGI of $1,685,472,000,000 and paid $392,149,000,000 in taxes. So, even if you take all their money, which would absolutely kill the economy, you wouldn't have enough for 1 year of federal spending. And then after that year you can not tax the rich again, because they have no money. Liberals, can you see the problem here? I seriously doubt it, you all just do not understand.
  
  Let's say that the Liberals say well let's take everything from the top 5% and that will fix our problems. OK, lets look at that. The top 5% in 2010 had AIG of $2,926,701,000,000. If you confiscated absolutely everything from the top 5% in this country, you'd fix the deficit problem in this country for a whole single 1 year. The government spends about 3.7 Trillion and this is less than 3 Trillion. Not to mention the collapse of our economy when the government steals all money from everyone making more than $159,619 a year. Do you finally understand the problem Liberals? WE CAN NOT TAX OUR WAY OUT OF THIS PROBLEM.
  
  http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
  
  

  Belly35;736329 wrote:first thing first you lose your man card ... Vanity Fair
  
  I'm 100% sure I worked for my 100% that some of you would like to take that 1% from
  I'm 100% positve that I put up 100% of the risk to make that 100% you would like to take that 1% from
  I'm 100% that the burden I endured 100% of the time to achieve that 100% you want to take that 1% from
  
  Is not yours for the taking... work, risk, achievement= earned 100% of it .... That the type of math you liberals don't understand.

  But, think of the children...
• O-Trap

  

  CenterBHSFan;736338 wrote:But, think of the children...

  LOL!
• Belly35

  

  CenterBHSFan;736338 wrote:But, think of the children...

  WOULD THAT BE THAT 27 YEAR OLD UNEMPLOYED ON YOUR INSURANCE PLAN
• Footwedge

  About 3/4 of Americans are not happy at all that the separation of wealthy and the poor has widened drastically. I doubt if 75% of Americans can be classified as "class warfarists".
  
  Stigler's article, if one actually read it, explains that the ever rising gap is very damaging to the UNITED STATES from a macroeconomic standpoint. I agree with him.
  
  After the "exec government bailout" of 2 years ago, the CEO's are once again "stock optioning" annual incomes at pre government bailout rates.
• I Wear Pants

  Wait wait wait, who said anything about taxing the wealthy super high rates or 100%? No one.
• Footwedge

  sleeper;736277 wrote:The 1% have earned it. Want to be in the 1%? Work for it.

  That's the way it used to work. It won't work that way for your generation. You will now have to compete with the Indians and the Japanese, who will work at 1/2 your wage or less. Did you know that there will be more English speaking Indians than Americans in 2 years? India has more honor student kids...than America has kids?
  
  Here ya go Sleeper...right here...right now...
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mmz5qYbKsvM
• I Wear Pants

  O-Trap;736298 wrote:To be fair, not ALL the 1% earned it, but if they didn't, whoever gave it to them earned it, so SOMEBODY earned it.
  
  In any case, just because the rest of us (I'm in the 99%) have the majority, that doesn't give us the right to abuse the democratic system to oppress the minority (ie take what they've worked to get until we've all got the same resources in this case). That spreads over more than economic lines as well. Racial lines, political affiliations, ages, genders ... there's a minority in pretty much each case there. The minorities should not be abused by the majority.
  
  Might doesn't make right in every single instance. It would just become a case of "he who has the biggest proverbial guns wins." Isn't that how military dictators seize power in other countries (on a more literal level, of course)?

  Tell that to some posters here in regards to foreign policy.
  

  tk421;736307 wrote:] WE CAN NOT TAX OUR WAY OUT OF THIS PROBLEM.
  
  
  

  
  Can't cut taxes out of the problem either.
• jhay78

  

  tk421;736307 wrote:OK everyone, especially you class warfare loving Liberals, it's math time. Gather round kids, let's educate ourselves before we look stupid.
  
  If we took the absolutely very top 1% of the super rich that the liberals just love to hate in this country and "taxed" absolutely everything from them at 100% (*cough* confiscate *cough*) it would not even cover the deficit for this year. Taking all the income earned from these top 1% will NOT solve our *cough* SPENDING *cough* problem. We do not have an income problem, we have a spending problem.
  
  The top 1% in 2010 had an AGI of $1,685,472,000,000 and paid $392,149,000,000 in taxes. So, even if you take all their money, which would absolutely kill the economy, you wouldn't have enough for 1 year of federal spending. And then after that year you can not tax the rich again, because they have no money. Liberals, can you see the problem here? I seriously doubt it, you all just do not understand.
  
  Let's say that the Liberals say well let's take everything from the top 5% and that will fix our problems. OK, lets look at that. The top 5% in 2010 had AIG of $2,926,701,000,000. If you confiscated absolutely everything from the top 5% in this country, you'd fix the deficit problem in this country for a whole single 1 year. The government spends about 3.7 Trillion and this is less than 3 Trillion. Not to mention the collapse of our economy when the government steals all money from everyone making more than $159,619 a year. Do you finally understand the problem Liberals? WE CAN NOT TAX OUR WAY OUT OF THIS PROBLEM.
  
  http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
  
  

  
  
• O-Trap

  

  Footwedge;736347 wrote:About 3/4 of Americans are not happy at all that the separation of wealthy and the poor has widened drastically. I doubt if 75% of Americans can be classified as "class warfarists".

  Not liking it isn't quite the same as what's being discussed here. I don't like it. Many don't like it. Hell, that 1% probably don't even like that others cannot live the same way they do.
  

  Footwedge;736365 wrote:That's the way it used to work. It won't work that way for your generation. You will now have to compete with the Indians and the Japanese, who will work at 1/2 your wage or less. Did you know that there will be more English speaking Indians than Americans in 2 years? India has more honor student kids...than America has kids?

  Eh, it will still work that way. It'll just be a global contest instead of a national one.
  

  I Wear Pants;736367 wrote:Tell that to some posters here in regards to foreign policy.

  Oh I would freely do so, and have on a few occasions.
• believer

  

  Footwedge;736347 wrote:About 3/4 of Americans are not happy at all that the separation of wealthy....

  Link to back up your claim?
  

  Footwedge;736347 wrote:...and the poor has widened drastically.

  America's "poor" drive cars, use cell phones, enjoy 120 channels of HD cable, and are usually obese.
  

  Footwedge;736347 wrote:I doubt if 75% of Americans can be classified as "class warfarists".

  Perhaps not but they can envy the wealthy thanks to the "class warfarists" and wealth redistributionists who covet that wealth.
  

  Footwedge;736347 wrote:Stigler's article, if one actually read it, explains that the ever rising gap is very damaging to the UNITED STATES from a macroeconomic standpoint.

  Same shit, different era. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. I have no issues with the wealthy getting wealthier. Their success puts food on my table. And again, America's "poor" are rich compared to the true poverty found in most other countries.
  

  Footwedge;736347 wrote:After the "exec government bailout" of 2 years ago, the CEO's are once again "stock optioning" annual incomes at pre government bailout rates.

  And the benevolent and trustworthy Big Government politicians in DC allow that to happen....provided, of course, they get their cut.
• sleeper

  

  Footwedge;736365 wrote:That's the way it used to work. It won't work that way for your generation. You will now have to compete with the Indians and the Japanese, who will work at 1/2 your wage or less. Did you know that there will be more English speaking Indians than Americans in 2 years? India has more honor student kids...than America has kids?
  
  Here ya go Sleeper...right here...right now...
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mmz5qYbKsvM

  Oh so competition is increasing? Boo hoo.
• believer

  

  sleeper;736400 wrote:Oh so competition is increasing? Boo hoo.

  We all live on an even playing field, right?
• tk421

  

  I Wear Pants;736360 wrote:Wait wait wait, who said anything about taxing the wealthy super high rates or 100%? No one.

  
  That's what I hear all the time from the left anytime someone mentions cutting spending. They bring up the ultra rich and the ultra evil businesses as that would somehow solve our problems. I've just shown that even taking 100% from the top 5% of earners in this country wouldn't fund the government for a single year.
  
  There is no amount at all you can raise taxes that will magically solve our problem. If ...........IF the government would cut spending to a balanced budget and then say we're going to raise taxes on that 1% back to pre 2001 levels, and only use that money to pay down the debt, I'd be all for it. No one has ever said that though, they always parrot tax increases as the only thing we need to do.
• I Wear Pants

  That's how I feel with many on the right and tax cuts. Both tax cuts and tax raises have to be done intelligently and in sync with other actions otherwise they just make things worse.
• Thread Bomber

  

  I Wear Pants;736360 wrote:Wait wait wait, who said anything about taxing the wealthy super high rates or 100%? No one.

  Actually, It was Niel Boortz yesterday,,,,
• Footwedge

  sleeper;736400 wrote:Oh so competition is increasing? Boo hoo.

  The point is....you, your economics degree...and your working 90 hours a week will not land you anywhere near the top 1%.
• O-Trap

  

  Footwedge;736550 wrote:The point is....you, your economics degree...and your working 90 hours a week will not land you anywhere near the top 1%.

  Not with that attitude, no.
  
  The people in that top 1% are almost all people who thought outside the proverbial box, and they followed that thought.
  
  And they made a hell of a lot of money doing it.
  
  Their idea. Their risk. Their effort.