rawhide Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 So you say democrats aren't greedy?? And some may even be Christian. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 So you say democrats aren't greedy?? And some may even be Christian. Blasphemy Link to comment
carlfense Posted March 17, 2014 Author Share Posted March 17, 2014 So you say democrats aren't greedy?? And some may even be Christian. Sure. Some Republicans are pro-choice and don't care about same sex marriage. Some think that we should cut military spending. Etc. That said, in general which party do you think tends to minimize any ill effects of greed? 1 Link to comment
commando Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 i think there are enough greedy politicians to fill both parties. not sure what that has to do with the flooding though Link to comment
carlfense Posted March 17, 2014 Author Share Posted March 17, 2014 i think there are enough greedy politicians to fill both parties. No doubt. I was thinking more about party platforms. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Which is worse? a) A party who promotes pro-business efforts and believes if you earn your money you have the right to keep it even though they take that tactic too far. b) A party who garners power by acting like they support minorities while at the same time doing things that keep those monitories under their power. Both are forms of greed and power hungry people. Link to comment
carlfense Posted March 17, 2014 Author Share Posted March 17, 2014 Which is worse? a) A party who promotes pro-business efforts and believes if you earn your money you have the right to keep it even though they take that tactic too far. b) A party who garners power by acting like they support minorities while at the same time doing things that keep those monitories under their power. Both are forms of greed and power hungry people. Could you explain what you mean in b)? Also, regarding a) it's not so much "promot[ing] pro-business efforts" so much as it is a quasi-religious fervor. Link to comment
tschu Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 a) is really selling things short. The top earners and wealth-holders now hold many many times what they ever have in the past. And being "job-creators" is a myth - these executives and companies do not invest that money in jobs. They put it in hedge funds and mutual funds and overseas banking. They keep it and earn interest on it and pass it on to their kids, who keep it and do the same (estate taxes currently are a joke.) Trickle-down is a lie. I'll repeat that - TRICKLE-DOWN IS A LIE. As a result, the middle class has far less money than ever before (the middle 50% of people now earn close to 30,000 when in the 70s it was something like 48,000) which, as a result, depresses the economy. Lower taxes don't shrink the government - they simply take money away from the things that help the middle class like financing or education, healthcare, social security, and other programs that help our workforce become smarter and more productive. It's a vicious cycle that needs to be stopped. 1 Link to comment
tschu Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Most GOP beliefs are based on the fact that "Well if I ever become rich, I want to keep that money!" Guess what, 99% of you are not going to become rich. And your misguided economic beliefs are destroying the middle class. 2 Link to comment
rawhide Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Do you mean that even Democrat billionaires like Soros or Bloomberg invest rather than give it all up?? Link to comment
carlfense Posted March 17, 2014 Author Share Posted March 17, 2014 Do you mean that even Democrat billionaires like Soros or Bloomberg invest rather than give it all up?? 2 Link to comment
tschu Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Do you mean that even Democrat billionaires like Soros or Bloomberg invest rather than give it all up?? It makes zero difference what political affiliation the billionaires are. The system allows them to a) accumulate a massive, massive, ridiculously unnecessary amount of wealth, more than has been really possible except for extreme outliers who had monopolies in manufacturing and commodities during that boom (Carnegie, Rockefeller, etc.). The top 400 wealthiest Americans have more wealth than over half of the population of America combined. b) pay less taxes on that money than the middle class - the 1% pay an average of between 11 and 15% effective tax rate, between all of the tax sheltering they are able to do with offshore accounts, creative accounting, low capital gains taxes, etc. c) they do not create more jobs with this wealth - seriously, this is a myth. it does not happen. CEOs take massive bonuses and profits all the time, even as they cut thousands upon thousands of jobs. There are countless examples of this. The money gets put into stock options, hedge funds, into buying things in their business that allow them to shelter increasing money from taxes, you name it. It does not trickle down. That is a farce that is being sold to you by predominantly republican lawmakers, corporations, and lobbyists. Why? Because they're able to get richer that way. d) this wealth does not find its way back into the major US economy. Even a very rich person only needs so many clothes, only one cell phone, only a few cars, only a couple of houses, etc. Your average middle class family spends the majority of what it earns, which is the major productive driving force of any economy worldwide. The very rich spend a very small percentage of their annual income in comparison. e) Smaller taxes do not equate to less wasteful spending or smaller government. The things that end up getting cut are not the wasteful things like massive corrupt government contracts (looking at you, military) or programs and codes that help already ridiculously profitable industries like the oil industry. What gets cut is spending on local programs, schools, roads, higher education, research money, and the like. Stuff that hurts the middle class and makes it increasingly hard to become upwardly mobile. Yes, you can move up. Yes, you can get rich. You absolutely can! But the deck gets increasingly stacked against those who started in a poorer place. Which is not the American dream that we all want to be available. This is not a partisan issue, although by just the platform that they happen to run on the GOP does have more to do with this problem than democrats. This is an issue of money influencing political power - the rich found out that by lobbying, they can get favorable deregulatory and tax laws influenced, which allows them to keep more of their wealth, which they use to get even more political power, etc. The sad fact is that most lower-middle-class, rural Americans somehow favor less government, even when "less government" simply means that the system is further and further putting them at a disadvantage. And the problem is that they don't realize that - how many people that you talk politics with know a damn thing about economics? Or tax law? Or business regulations? Let alone have the critical thinking ability to put all of this together. Fortunately I think that with the wide array of information available to a younger generation that knows how to find and use it, people may eventually wake up and realize what is truly going on. My fear though is that it is going to get quite a lot worse before it gets better. 4 Link to comment
tschu Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Schnikeys, lookie here http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/07/30/13034655-top-ceos-donate-to-romney-over-obama-by-4-1-margin?chromedomain=nbcpolitics Link to comment
tschu Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 It's not about class warfare either. That's a ridiculous angle that Fox News like to play all the time. I don't hate anyone for being rich - I mean isn't that the goal? I don't hate Tiger Woods or Phil Mickleson for being good at my favorite sport of golf. And capitalism is the greatest system society has come up with because when run properly it generates the most productivity, the greatest gains to society, it does create upward mobility and reward hard work. But capitalism with very little regulation and with money driving all of the political decisions in the country creates a situation where hard work isn't rewarded. Where upward mobility is less and less possible. Where, instead of hard work paying off and generating more money to spend and driving a growing economy, the middle class struggles just to get by. So you get what we have now - Families with both parents working long hours - more hours than any country on earth - struggling to get by, drowning in debt, while the very rich just speculate and play with our debt using various speculative investments and securities, able to hedge against losses while playing with other people's money. AND THEN WHEN THE BUBBLE BURSTS WE HAVE TO BAIL THEM OUT USING OUR MONEY TO PREVENT TOTAL ECONOMIC COLLAPSE. There needs to be wealth inequality. It is a product of capitalism. Those who innovate and bust their asses and are talented need to be rewarded with riches. But right now the scale is tipped waaaaaaaaay too far in their favor. Link to comment
rawhide Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Proves it. They aren't CEO's cause they're stupid. How many tv/film moguls and celebrities donated to Obama's campaign or provided public service statements. They want something too. Link to comment
Recommended Posts