Jump to content


Income Inequality


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, RedDenver said:

Indeed they did.

Stupid comment.

 

However, I just roll my eyes at people who act pissed that a couple billionaires went to space.

 

I saw somewhere an estimate as to how much per minute Bezos' space flight cost him and it was one hell of a lot.  The comment was meant to outrage people.  BUT....he spent that on what?  There were a hell of a lot of people who had jobs working on that and THAT is what he spent it on.  He employed people to send him to space.  Why should I be upset about that?  I'm sure the people he employed aren't upset.

 

It's like when someone builds a million dollar home and people look at it in disgust.  You know what?  The construction workers and contractors benefited and loved it.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Stupid comment.

 

However, I just roll my eyes at people who act pissed that a couple billionaires went to space.

 

I saw somewhere an estimate as to how much per minute Bezos' space flight cost him and it was one hell of a lot.  The comment was meant to outrage people.  BUT....he spent that on what?  There were a hell of a lot of people who had jobs working on that and THAT is what he spent it on.  He employed people to send him to space.  Why should I be upset about that?  I'm sure the people he employed aren't upset.

 

It's like when someone builds a million dollar home and people look at it in disgust.  You know what?  The construction workers and contractors benefited and loved it.

All this flight research these billionaires are spending their money on will benefit mankind immensely.   People getting upset about it is just sour grapes IMO.  
 

I wish they would put their money into this website so mobile users didn’t have their pages refreshed three different times while reading or writing a post!

  • Plus1 2
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

53 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

 

 

Taxing the rich is where a lot of middle class relief will come from, Atticus. 

 

And of course it will be politicized as class warfare and partisan gamesmanship, but the truth is not that we should raise taxes on the rich as much as we should return to a slightly higher tax rate on the rich, similar to the rates under Bush, and far lower than it was in America's golden past. 

 

Assuming the President can walk and chew gum, we can discuss wealth inequity at the same time we fix supply chain issues and have photo ops in the Rose Garden. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, DevoHusker said:

 

 

 

That's a clever quip, but it's not like those things can't all be accomplished at the same time.

 

And the replies to this tweet are nailing that. Dude's getting dragged for pretending one is more important than the other.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

2 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Taxing the rich is where a lot of middle class relief will come from, Atticus. 

 

And of course it will be politicized as class warfare and partisan gamesmanship, but the truth is not that we should raise taxes on the rich as much as we should return to a slightly higher tax rate on the rich, similar to the rates under Bush, and far lower than it was in America's golden past. 

 

Assuming the President can walk and chew gum, we can discuss wealth inequity at the same time we fix supply chain issues and have photo ops in the Rose Garden. 

 

I see the same solution. Not the "eat the rich" photo ops and people talking about taking away any wealth over a certain, arbitrary, number. I have no problem with raising the rate to a point higher than it is at present. But, Mr Finch does make a valid point with finding some relief for those of us in the middle class. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

That's a clever quip, but it's not like those things can't all be accomplished at the same time.

 

And the replies to this tweet are nailing that. Dude's getting dragged for pretending one is more important than the other.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed, but that is not the line from the President's progressive wing...

  • Oh Yeah! 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, DevoHusker said:

 

I see the same solution. Not the "eat the rich" photo ops and people talking about taking away any wealth over a certain, arbitrary, number. I have no problem with raising the rate to a point higher than it is at present. But, Mr Finch does make a valid point with finding some relief for those of us in the middle class. 

 

As long as we have an honest conversation why the middle class needs relief, having taken the brunt of the tax burden for the last 40 years while a remarkably small upper percentile has accumulated unprecedented wealth. I mean, "tax the rich" is a highly charged term, but it's weird how many people jump to the defense of the last people on Earth who need it.  Shifting the conversation to anything else, as Atticus suggests, is how they've gotten away with this for years,  and avoids the very middle class relief you're talking about.  

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

As long as we have an honest conversation why the middle class needs relief, having taken the brunt of the tax burden for the last 40 years while a remarkably small upper percentile has accumulated unprecedented wealth. I mean, "tax the rich" is a highly charged term, but it's weird how many people jump to the defense of the last people on Earth who need it.  Shifting the conversation to anything else, as Atticus suggests, is how they've gotten away with this for years,  and avoids the very middle class relief you're talking about.  

Valid points.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...