A word to the rich who think that taxes are too high.

LEAVE. Take your money and go. America will survive without you.

People who who think nothing of throwing money away on exclusive country clubs or luxury cars for every day of the week complain that taxes are killing them. well did paying taxes ever take food out of the mouths of your children? They do for the working poor. Go away if you want to tax the poor further, they cannot afford any more taxation then they already have.

Many rich are living here because our tax structure lets them keep more of their money than other countries. But even here they complain. What do you want, no taxes? Why do you not want to give back to the society that made you rich in the first place? Is the thought that some poor person may benefit from a social program so repugnant? If you would rather people starve, then leave we do not need you.


America is the best country in the world to be rich in. When you pay country club dues you do it with the knowledge that being there gives you access to business contacts to continue your decadent life. Taxes are the membership dues for America. They allow you to live like kings here in relative safety. If you like your peasants even more desperately poor go elsewhere.

So rather than ruin our country for the other 90% whom you despise. Go away. Take all of your precious money and go elsewhere. Even if it means depression we will be better off in the long run without your manipulation of our government just for the sake of having your cake and eating it too.

"Tax the rich, feed the poor" --Alvin Lee, Ten Years After, 'I'd Love To Change The World'

I don't know that this was a "liberal" message?

The McMansioners do not realize that they are just tools to an end. When the poor have run out of money, the rich will start sucking off the wannabees. The point of investment is to make money. This is why income must be balanced. When there is not more middle class, there is no point in investment.

With that said, the wealthy are doing just fine. They can afford to send in a few more dollars to rebuild our infrastructure.

They do help fuel the economy with all of the expensive stuff they consume. Here's an article I read in Newsweek about how we need their investment. One interesting point it makes is how much of a hometown advantage American markets get for their investment. Most Americans only have a small fraction invested in foreign markets.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/96364

but the country as a whole not only doesn't need them, but would be a far better place without them. They are a huge and constant drain on the rest of us.

What we need is a strong middle class, not the bulk of wealth concentrated in the top two percent of income earners.

and that concentrating weath in the top two percent isn't good for us. But to say that they should move away and take their money with them will adversely affect our economy. We are in agreement that we want them to share their wealth and treat people more equitably, but I don't think that having them disappear and putting their money into another country is the way to solve the problem.

I have seen these super rich individuals spend the equvilant of a year's worth of a working man's salary on meaningless shit. And their kids aren't learning anything either when they get a $1 million sweet sixteen back. WTF!?!?

Sure they do ... they're called gated communities.

It's not like this is new to America. We have gone through this before. The Union movement put a stop to it. It brought real protections to people who do grunt work. There was nothing communist about it as you would still make more money by educating yourself as their kids did.

I am really concerned about our economy. I am also very concerned about labor as they appear ready to self implode. Companies can and are outsourcing their operations overseas. At the same time, the lucky union laborers who are still on the "inside" are commanding higher salaries than a lot of highly educated persons.

This isn't sustainable. When guys are busting there hump in school for 4 years to get and and see that they'll make as much money as a steel worker, it's not going to last. Nor will it endear them to other folks busting their hump for $8/hour and no benefits.

I realize this is a mixed message. But America is getting into a really bad place and the unions don't seem to be dedicating their resources to the right places to "spread the wealth". Rather, they seem to be circling the wagons, holding on to what they had at any cost and not putting enough "foot time" into political candidates who are going to stop NAFTA, etc...

... but there are better countries in the world to be rich in.

Other countries which have found ways to provide health care for everyone,
other countries which have found ways to educate everyone,
other countries in which households and kids on the street do not have guns,
other countries in which people are citizens, and not religious sheep,
other countries in which politicians work on finding solutions,
other countries in which veterans are not homeless.

... just to name a few.

There are rich people there to be sure but the ones who want to have their own kingdom have went elsewhere and these counties are better off.

The wealthy don't need health care for everyone, they can afford their own just fine.
The wealthy don't care about everyone getting educated, their kids will do just fine, fuck everyone else.
The wealthy don't care about kids on the streets with guns, their ivory towers keep them protected from the riff raff.
The wealthy are all about religious sheep, it's mostly them that ensure they can continue to fuck over the middle and lower class to gain more wealth.
The wealthy definitely don't want politicians to find solutions to our problems. The bulk of our problems stem from income disparity.
These are all reasons why the rich love living in America. I'm not disparaging them all, I know many wealthy people have strong morals and live to do good. But the bulk use America as a great place to live wealthily without having to pay their fair dues.

in poor countries. They want to be richer in relation to the rest of us to hold us in thrall. The worse conditions are for us, the more exploitable we become.

they have their cake and eat it too

It has a fairly long cycle, and rich folks can usually manage to decamp before it comes down to their necks on the block. If you look at a country like Brazil, you'll see that the rich haven't been under serious threat for a pretty long run. There are daily problems of crime, but the richest live behind high walls and have private police forces at their disposal. The main difference between here and there is that they can enlist literally armies of servants where a rich American family might have two or three. Everything is handed to them on a silver platter--except when the platter is gold.

Don't think for a minute that they don't want and desire the same conditions to exist in this country. They've been working at it for decades.

people. You think that the world works on a system that is fair and open? Think again. Their little networks are such an important aspect of their life, that they don't even know they're cheating. Until someone points that out to them, they will always complain about high taxes. Without throwing the truth in their face they can stay on the offensive.

I simply said that they should see America as that country club where they pay money for admittance to opportunities to gain wealth. I do not hate the rich because of their wealth. I hate them for what they do with it.

Dubai, where they're building stupid man made islands for stupid rich people.



Wat does the island on the right, below, **really** look like? They call it Palm Island, but I think it ought to be Prick Island.



The one on the left ought to be called Asshole island ...... as in, it is the place where, if the Earth ever needs an enema, they can stick the nozzle.

and it is the most obscene waste of resources ever. Dubai can have them so long as they stay there.

25°13'16.89"N 55° 8'22.21"E!

In fact, they're being discussed on 60 Minutes as I type this.

These child-slave-fucking assholes will be drowned.

Haiti. You know, where 1% of the country has 90% of the wealth? There's no infrastructure, no roads, no social welfare, very little policing, and a lot of crime. Oh yeah, and the poor people are forced to eat DIRT because there's no food!

If a group is being treated unfairly, it's disgusting to tell them to "just leave"!

I assume you'd use the same argument to women who want an abortion, or blacks who want the right to vote? That's AWFUL.

They are here to use our country for no other purpose then to get more money. They use their influence to control our government, destroy our environment, and turn our poorest citizens into a resourse to be used and then discarded. I am sure that there are rich who do not fit into this description, they can stay. People who have no respect for our way of life but have immense political power are tearing down our institutions for the sake of money and power. If we cannot get a handle on them we are lost.

...powerful corporation, union, or other interest group who harms others' property or rights, and uses their influence to control government should be punished, along with the politicians who let it happen.

Even if you work ridiculously hard to become rich, you aren't being treated unfairly due to progressive taxation. However, the bulk of the rich don't work ridiculouly hard to become rich. Most are rich because they know the right people, or their parents or close friends are rich too. Those people comprise a large amount of the wealthy and it needs to stop. Unfairly? Are you fucking kidding me?

... treat them unfairly, and to tell them the classic rightist line: if you don't like it, don't try to reform, just get the f* out.

They make more than most of us will ever dream of and then complain about it? Take a rich person making 7 figurs. Does this person work 20 times as hard as I do? 50 times? 100? No, most of these assholes simply manipulate money and become rich that way. I work my ass off for the little money that I make. I don't want the rich trying to reform anything, they're already living the American dream. What's wrong with this country is NOT that the rich are not rich enough. If that's what they want. FUCK THEM. Let me repeat that once again, FUCK THEM. They can get the fuck out of this country if they're not happy. Of course, they won't do that because the rest of the world doesn't want them as a drain on their economies. That's only a rightist line if it's spoken to the decent people of this country trying to get it back on the right track. Not to those greedy bastards that have everything, yet still manage to want more. I will NEVER defend greedy bastards who already have so much, yet still want more.

It doesn't matter how hard you work, how much value you create for others.

For an extreme example, if I spend every day punching a concrete sidewalk as hard as I can, would I have a right to complain that I work significantly harder than the guy behind the register at McDonald's, and he should be forced to give me his money?

How much value does someone receiving a trust fund provide? How much value does the typical CEO making 7 figures provide? Almost nothing. Certainly not as much as their hard working employees. Yet they get to be in charge of meaningless decisions for the company, so they receive a certain percentage of their company's assets. That's the way they like it and that's the way they'll fight to keep it. It used to be that CEOs made something like 6 or 7 times the average salary of their workers. Now they make hundreds of times what their employees make. Are CEOs doing dozens of times more work then they were in the past? Or are employees just becoming much more lazy? Or perhaps it's just because current circumstances ALLOW them to make that obscene amount of money? It's got to be one of the three.

Don't they have a right to decide who gets their money? Why should you be allowed to decide for them?

Am I saying that people shouldn't decide what to do with their estates when they die? Stop it already, those types of arguments make it seem like you have no idea how to debate properly. Our gripe is with the taxes that they pay and their attitude towards it.

I said that people get paid based on how much value they create for others. That is inarguable.

You brought up a different example of someone simply giving money to someone else (a trust fund). I assumed by bringing it up, you felt those were unfair as well, and I presented an argument. What's the problem?

Rather than address that, you try and change the subject by lying and saying that I think that people shouldn't have the right to have trust funds or that the wealthy shouldn't have the right to do what they want with their inheritance. Get it? Didn't think so.

I was talking about someone paying someone else, and you were talking about someone giving someone else money.

People pay others for perceived value, and people have a right to decide who gets their money.

Do you disagree with either of my arguments? If so, how?

No, another stupid strawman brought up by you.

...as well. So only people that get paid should be taxed?

Trust funds should be taxed.... progressively, get it? The bulk of the wealthy in this country don't deserve their wealth. That's issue number one. Also, those assholes who are wealthy and want to complain about paying too much taxes? They can go fuck themselves.... and leave. Anything about that you don't understand? Care to raise any more strawmen?

Stop being so arrogant and allow people to live their own lives! If you want to fund a program, then ask for voluntary donations. Don't force anyone else to pay. Thanks!

This thread is about how the wealthy who don't happily pay their taxes because of how lucky and blessed they are can go fuck themselves. That's a very simple thing that you can't seem to wrap your head around. By the way, taxes are the law, so the government kind of forces people to pay them. Thick, thick, thick.

What's your deal? Calm down!

WHO is arrogant? How about you build your own roads and run your own utility lines because I don't want to subsidize your travel and connectivity? If you think you have an answer to that let me warn you, I have a LONG list of things my taxes contribute to that you use.

"Who are you to decide who deserves wealth?" And do you think you know better, water?

Better than what our country bases its identity on? Pushing birthright? Are you kidding?

However, it's not fair to say, "You use what taxes provide, you can't speak out against them" any more than you could say "You eat at the breadlines, you can't speak out against them" in North Korea. You use the system you live in.

Imagine a corporation forcing you to buy its product. Then realize how that's exactly what's going on right now.

that's not what you said. You said:

"Trust fund owners don't create value, but someone else did.

Don't they have a right to decide who gets their money? Why should you be allowed to decide for them?"

They don't have the right to fight for no taxes on that money once it becomes someone else's income. They still need to pay taxes on that inheritance. THAT is what I mean by fair.

Any other absolute truths you'd like to throw out there? A CEO loses billions of dollars for his/her company. So, due to your logic, not only should the CEO not get paid, but he/she should OWE the company he/she worked for, BILLIONS of dollars. Yet that same CEO earns millions or billions of dollars. I'm guessing you think this scenario is made up, don't you? There's a whole lot you need to learn about a whole lot of things. Lot of learning you need to do.

If the board of directors hired them, they felt they were better than the other candidates.

If they were wrong, that's that, but forcing them to lower pay would dilute the pool of potential CEOs, hurting the companies even more.

Other than that, do you have anything substantial to add? Saying that lowering CEO pay being lowered would hurt companies is as ludicrous as your other arguments. CEOs make the money they do because they decide their own salaries. Do you still not get this simple fact? It's not about value, or even 'perceived value' as your silly back peddling implies.

Why do companies raise wages? Why does any company pay higher than the minimum wage?

To get better employees!

Someone who is skilled won't want to take on the extreme responsibility of being an executive without being paid more!

That being said, CEOs don't choose their own salary any more than any other employee does. Like I said before, the board of directors, elected by the owners, chooses their salary.

"That being said, CEOs don't choose their own salary any more than any other employee does. Like I said before, the board of directors, elected by the owners, chooses their salary. "

This really says all I need to know about you. Continue living life with your head in the sand, I really don't think there's much help for you. I just know that I'll be able to save myself a lot of sanity by leaving you and your ridiculously naive ideas alone. You've heard all you will from me. Some people simply can't be taught.

Do you disagree with my above post? I know you do, how about explaining point by point how it's wrong?

Or, perhaps, you know that no employee chooses his/her own salary unless they are working for themselves?

parties?

Stick around. You might be surprised that many people around here aren't all that impressed with libertarian "ideas."

Until they inevitably have a need for it. Nothing should ever come in the way of corporations and their never ending quest to do public good. I really think that water should check out the Ron Paul web site.

children, building houses, caring for babies, paving roads, caring for the elderly, growing food, or picking up refuse create less "value" than moving money around? You accept the artificial status we accord to profiteering leaches (actually, that's a slur on leaches, since I'm sure they serve some actual purpose in the natural world), and then assign this totally artificial construct some mythical "real" value.

The real work of the world is done in jeans, in scrubs, in work boots and coveralls. You'd miss those workers a hell of a lot more than hedge fund managers if they disappeared from the face of the earth.

I refuted that stupid argument more than an hour ago and he still hasn't tried to defend it. Apparently, if you attach the adjective 'inarguable' before something, that therefore makes it inarguable. So don't even bother posting some sort of rational response.

Yeah, it's insensitive and mean-spirited to say, but basic work like that can be done by anyone, and any one worker quitting can easily be replaced. I could not run a company like Apple, and neither could you.

As for teachers: I agree they are under paid. The government should just let the market work and get out of the education business.

EDIT FOR EOTE: REMOVING THE WORD "AT" FROM THE SUBJECT

It's very difficult to tell by the tone of your post.

"If you don't like it, leave!"

When rightists have used this line in the past, leftists have correctly pointed out how unfair it is; that people who feel they are being treated unfairly have a right to try to reverse that treatment, not to be told to "get out".

Now members of the left, motivated by hatred, are starting to adopt rightist talking points. Disgusting.

to put this country back in the right direction. They're not the ones complaining that they're not getting more when they're already getting an obscene amount. More than 99% of the country who complain about it far less.

Many are not even Americans. Many are people who came here for the sole purpose of having a great place to spend money on crap. The rightest talking points were aimed at people who were trying to make life better for all. Not a greedy bunch of hyenas here to rip at the corpse of of our country until there is nothing left for a working man or woman.

The left has come to the point where it's trying to silence reformers in this country, and it's disgusting.

Without their CEOs making ridiculous sums of money. What the hell is your point?

If they could find someone good enough to run a billion-dollar company just as well who would take less pay, they would!

Companies make money because someone had a good idea, founded them, and the EMPLOYEES created value for it. CEOs make as much money as they do BECAUSE THEY DECIDE THEIR OWN SALARY. Many companies would actually be better off WITHOUT a CEO. But the CEO certainly wouldn't see it that way, so he stays on. It's really amazing you don't see this.

The board of directors, elected by the owners, decide. In fact, if they truly felt that having a CEO would hurt the company, they wouldn't have one.

These people are hurting our country a hell of a lot more than any benefits they provide. If they are not willing to work with ALL Americans to better our way of life then goodbye and good riddance.

I was asking the poster who was sticking up for the poor, defensely and down-trodden rich is he/she was serious.

Didn't realize until now.

What kind of deluded, brain-damaged MANURE is that???

If we don't stick up for them, who will?

Shoe hurts when it's on the other foot.

Employment is a voluntary contract.

Taxes aren't; Taxes are used when individuals in government feel they have to use force to get the funds they need (who the hell would fund the Iraq War?).

However, I didn't like the job he was doing, so I told him to do a better job, or I'd hire someone else. No one would argue with me!

Let's look at a different scenario. My neighbor decides for himself that he will work on my pathway, and will steal $12 from me for each hour he works.

If I say "stop it" to him, does he have a right to tell me "if you don't like it, just leave"?

You make even less sense that way.

The first is an example of employment, the second is an example of a tax (forced to pay for something whether you want it or not).

to just leave. I was merely pointing out that those same people have probably used that same phrase against someone else weaker than they were with relish.

And as far as paying taxes to support the war in Iraq, is that meant to show me how progressive you are? While I'd rather my taxes not go to funding such a war, I generally have no problem with paying taxes and can accept that sometimes I may not agree with how that money is spent.

I'll have you know that Paris Hilton had to settle for a cast-gold bull for her foyer accent while she so had her heart set on a cast-platinum bull to impress her friends. This shitty economy is effecting everyone, you now, not just the poor.

Leading up to the 2000 election all the polls showed that taxes were a very low priority for voters. There weren't many complaints about Bill Clinton's taxes digging the country out of the red and helping to level the playing field for the less fortunate. It was responsible fiscal policy with some fairness thrown in.

Then came the Republicans pounding out their tired old meme about high taxes, tax-and-spend Democrats, etc. They essentially created an issue from a non-issue. I don't know how many people swallowed it.

I'm not sure it is rich people complaining about their taxes so much as it is Republican politicians drumming up phony issues because they never have anything substantial to run on.

They want the bush tax cuts and then some.

being rich and the bigotry displayed here towards them isn't something to be honored. The concept of this OP is all sorts of stupid. I mean "even if it means depression"? Do you not realize how absolutely stupid such comments make you look? Utter ridiculousness. Hate is hate, and hate is stupid.

The OP is talking about the rich who complain about giving their fair share. If you're rich, that's fine, but you should be thankful and want to give back even more. Not complaining that you're not rich enough because of that evil government. The government does a lot of fucked up stuff, but taxing the rich is NOT one of them. It's one of the things the government needs to do a hell of a lot moref.

The OP screams out hatred towards the rich and blatant bigotry towards them as a group. It oozes that concept. It gets tiresome.

And we all have a right to complain about our taxes, regardless of the bracket we're in.

who have more than they deserve, more than anyone needs, yet still feel the need to complain about their unfair lot n life. That's just the way it works.

give him some respect

and ignorant posts.

You're sure good at putting words in other people's mouths. I never said I have the right to decide how much others deserve, I KNOW how much people deserve by how much work or value they contribute. I have the right to say 'fuck you' do all those greedy, undeserving bastards. I'm not interfering with anyone. I've had enough of your worthless tripe.

You are obsessed with controlling other people! This is frightening!

But considering the other things that you don't know, I certainly wouldn't expect you to understand that.

If you aren't in favor of that, just let us know.

I'm not in favor of that, I want you to show me where I've said I advocate taking money from the rich because they don't deserve it. It's called taxation, and it's the law. Stop it with the smilies, they don't make you seem any less stupid.

You've said they should be taxed more because they don't deserve their money. When I asked rhetorically why you (and others like you, of course) think you should be able to decide how much money another human being deserves, you made a classic remark: that you don't decide, you know. You sound like Mr. Bush.

I'm saying they're overpaid, not that I should decide their salary. That simple concept you haven't been able to get through your incredibly thick skull. I'm done with you.

You don't want to decide how much they make, just how much they are allowed to keep.

If you say something so completely stupid or indefensible, just edit it like you've done with 6 of your posts, of course not explaining any of your edits. Funny how I'm able to stand by what I say without edits, or atleast explaining the edits I do make.

I have not made any substantial edits, I edit for clarity or for style. If moderators keep a record of edits, they could back me up.

For the post above you're talking about, I added the sentence "You don't decide, you know?" then moved "This is frightening!" down to the body of the post.

Are you going to deny that you've edited 6 of your replies without any explanation? Now, you wouldn't care to reply to mine, would you? Of course not. You still don't understand the difference, probably never will. All you care about is distorting what others have said.

...because it's extremely confusing for others trying to read my posts. You're just being argumentative now.

Pathetic. Here's a little hint for you, if you're going to edit 6 of your posts, hell, even one. Just provide a simple line as to what the edit is. Not terribly difficult or confusing. I take that back... some might find it confusing.

You're trying to pick fights over tiny edits! You're a troll!

You call me a liar without backing up a thing while I cite several of your lies by referring to your own words. And I'm the troll. You should really consider the website you're posting at.

You simply aren't used to being confronted.

You say that the rich don't deserve their money and that the "excess" should be taken. I respond by asking why you think that you (and others like you) can decide what others "deserve" to make... which you call a "lie". Why? You never used the word "make".

Edit: There is no difference between deciding how much someone "makes" and how much they are allowed to "keep".

Tell me one lie I've said this whole thread? I've been speaking about two different issues here. One is that most of the wealthy make far more than they are worth (this is my opinion, but an informed one unlike yours). I don't suggest that something should be done about this because if I did, CEOs would make about 1/1000th what they make now. The 2nd one is that our taxation should be much more progressive than it is now, that's a political issue. I've shown time and time again how you've misrepresented my words (IE LIED). But you've been completely unable to do so towards me. And now, you've just done it again by quoting me as saying 'excess' when you just using it now was the first time that word appeared in the thread. You're not just a liar, you're an idiot and not worth my time.

Making you an even bigger liar. You're despicable.

How did I lie? If you can't back up calling me a liar, don't call me a liar, idiot.

"If you say something so completely stupid or indefensible, just edit it like you've done with 6 of your posts"

I already explained I edit for style and clarity. I don't substantially change what I wrote. Was there something I said that I edited out with which you wish to respond?

because you've never explained your edits ON THE POSTS YOU'VE MADE THEM. So, even assuming you're telling the truth now (which is an awfully big assumptions). You still called me a liar and provided nothing to back it up. I've called you on many of your lies, you make it pretty damn easy.

Again, what did I edit out to wish you wish to respond?

EDIT: CHANGING "ME" TO "MY" IN THE SUBJECT

THEN I asked you to defend yourself for calling me a liar. But you can't, you lose idiot. I'm through with you and your idiotic arguments. Damn, are you incapable of getting through a single post without screwing something up?

And I'm a sloppy typist, sorry.

"yet still feel the need to complain about their unfair lot n life"

Where exactly is this happening?

And it's not up to you to determine what someone else deserves. And you also totally exposed your bullshit earlier about not hating the rich or having bigotry towards them, when it is quite apparent that you do. Get a grip.

It's those that I have a problem with. Those who pay without complaint I don't have a problem with. I'm also have quite the chuckle at your screen name right now. Mind crime is right.

...how much someone should be allowed to pay someone else, how much money someone should be allowed to give someone else, and how others' money is spent.

You aren't a liberal, you are an authoritarian. You are a control freak. If you think that someone should give up some of their money, why not ask them? Don't use the police-power of government to force them to do your bidding.

Not only that, but I said I was through with you and you continue speaking. I'm through with you and your idiotic arguments. Good bye.

Fair enough. See ya.

I don't have asshole relatives who complain far more than I do even though I have a small, small fraction of their means. Not only is your SN mighty ironic, but apparently you're a psychic too. Pathetic.

Apparently Mindcrime thinks my rebuttals are too STUPID to reply to.

I find it amazing that so many progressives don't realize how screwed up our income structure is in this country.