OFFLINE

"if these folks could get decent job..."
Precisely!
Who provides jobs in this country? While some uphold the rich and repeat leave them alone repeatedly saying it will"trickle down" and they've done enough.  Where are the jobs?  Who is paying a living wage?  Could you live on minimum wage?  Are these individuals who are supposed to be aiding the poor according to Dod really contributing?  You know, my husband works on millionaire homes, CEO's for oil companies seem to be about the only ones who can pay for specialty built homes...at least in the Carolinas.  My husband took a $20,000 pay cut last year.  He is lucky to have a job.  We had 4 children when he was making good money now we have 4 kids and scrape by, still, not taking assistance.  It takes money to invest but i don't see any rich people investing in America or helping my husband make a decent wage.  We don't get welfare or anything else from the government.  Don't want it.  Just want to see people put the jobs here instead of making themselves richer by outsourcing jobs to sweatshop in other countries.  
And, I feel I should address the fact that the republican stance on Planned Parenthood is pretty ridiculous being that the only care about said child until it is born into this world.  So, if you don't want to help those who cannot afford a child not get pregnant (by birth control that is affordable), why would you want them to carry an unwanted child that they cannot support?  Abstinence is great in theory but not always effective.  It isn't a real solution to a real problem.  Besides, nobody in the republican party wants to aid those who cannot help themselves so why make people suffer...?

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:

we don't disagree at all. i agree with what you just said, it's just that the rich ARE paying the most. and i don't understand why that's not enough to most people on the left.

Well, maybe the reason the rich are paying the most tax is that they have the most in the first place to be paying it on?



taken from http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

"In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%. "

And apparently, a study done back in 2005 revealed that pretty much everyone, regardless of ideology, believed that the wealth distribution in the country should be far more equitable, despite the fact that they thought it was already more even than it actually is.  

http://www.npr.org/2011/04/16/135472478/study-americas-wealth-not-widely-distributed

and the report is here: http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton%20ariely%20in%20press.pdf

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Kieran Colfer:

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:

we don't disagree at all. i agree with what you just said, it's just that the rich ARE paying the most. and i don't understand why that's not enough to most people on the left.

Well, maybe the reason the rich are paying the most tax is that they have the most in the first place to be paying it on?



taken from http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

"In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%. "

And apparently, a study done back in 2005 revealed that pretty much everyone, regardless of ideology, believed that the wealth distribution in the country should be far more equitable, despite the fact that they thought it was already more even than it actually is.  

http://www.npr.org/2011/04/16/135472478/study-americas-wealth-not-widely-distributed

and the report is here: http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton%20ariely%20in%20press.pdf

so the top 1% holds 34% of the wealth, and pays 40% of the taxes. sounds fair to me.

OFFLINE

I hear its closer to 50-60% in taxes.  What percentage should the wealthy in this country pay in taxes?  How much out of every dollar should go to the govt? .70 cents?  .80 cents?

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Lelania Bailey:
"if these folks could get decent job..."
Precisely!
Who provides jobs in this country? While some uphold the rich and repeat leave them alone repeatedly saying it will"trickle down" and they've done enough.  Where are the jobs?  Who is paying a living wage?  Could you live on minimum wage?  Are these individuals who are supposed to be aiding the poor according to Dod really contributing?  You know, my husband works on millionaire homes, CEO's for oil companies seem to be about the only ones who can pay for specialty built homes...at least in the Carolinas.  My husband took a $20,000 pay cut last year.  He is lucky to have a job.  We had 4 children when he was making good money now we have 4 kids and scrape by, still, not taking assistance.  It takes money to invest but i don't see any rich people investing in America or helping my husband make a decent wage.  We don't get welfare or anything else from the government.  Don't want it.  Just want to see people put the jobs here instead of making themselves richer by outsourcing jobs to sweatshop in other countries.  
And, I feel I should address the fact that the republican stance on Planned Parenthood is pretty ridiculous being that the only care about said child until it is born into this world.  So, if you don't want to help those who cannot afford a child not get pregnant (by birth control that is affordable), why would you want them to carry an unwanted child that they cannot support?  Abstinence is great in theory but not always effective.  It isn't a real solution to a real problem.  Besides, nobody in the republican party wants to aid those who cannot help themselves so why make people suffer...?

i hear ya.  Folks cant make it on minimum wages...especially if they have kids.  

But I wouldnt say nobody in the GOP wants to help folks who need it.  A lot of conservatives do want to help and do help as well.  But its 1 thing to help folks, its another thing altogether to have the govt take your money away from you and give it to someone else (aka Robin Hood).

Planned Parenthood might not be such a bad thing if the govt didnt force those of us who are pro life to give our tax dollars to pay for abortions.  Let em pay for that bit themselves.  I dont wanna be taxed for it because, as it is now, people can have abortions any way they like.  And while some folks need them for purposes of **** or incest or maybe its a life-threatening situation....a much higher % are having abortions as a form of birth control.  People like myself are solidly against abortion as a form of birth control.  We dont want our tax dollars paying for that.  Its not right that we have to participate in something against our religious faith.

But the left doesnt care about our faith.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Kieran Colfer:

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:

we don't disagree at all. i agree with what you just said, it's just that the rich ARE paying the most. and i don't understand why that's not enough to most people on the left.

Well, maybe the reason the rich are paying the most tax is that they have the most in the first place to be paying it on?

Thats exactly why they pay the most.  But the Dems want even more.

At the same time they dont want to curb govt spending.  They are like giving a teenager a credit card and dropping them off at the mall.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:

Originally Posted by Lelania Bailey:
"if these folks could get decent job..."
Precisely!
Who provides jobs in this country? While some uphold the rich and repeat leave them alone repeatedly saying it will"trickle down" and they've done enough.  Where are the jobs?  Who is paying a living wage?  Could you live on minimum wage?  Are these individuals who are supposed to be aiding the poor according to Dod really contributing?  You know, my husband works on millionaire homes, CEO's for oil companies seem to be about the only ones who can pay for specialty built homes...at least in the Carolinas.  My husband took a $20,000 pay cut last year.  He is lucky to have a job.  We had 4 children when he was making good money now we have 4 kids and scrape by, still, not taking assistance.  It takes money to invest but i don't see any rich people investing in America or helping my husband make a decent wage.  We don't get welfare or anything else from the government.  Don't want it.  Just want to see people put the jobs here instead of making themselves richer by outsourcing jobs to sweatshop in other countries.  
And, I feel I should address the fact that the republican stance on Planned Parenthood is pretty ridiculous being that the only care about said child until it is born into this world.  So, if you don't want to help those who cannot afford a child not get pregnant (by birth control that is affordable), why would you want them to carry an unwanted child that they cannot support?  Abstinence is great in theory but not always effective.  It isn't a real solution to a real problem.  Besides, nobody in the republican party wants to aid those who cannot help themselves so why make people suffer...?

i hear ya.  Folks cant make it on minimum wages...especially if they have kids.  

But I wouldnt say nobody in the GOP wants to help folks who need it.  A lot of conservatives do want to help and do help as well.  But its 1 thing to help folks, its another thing altogether to have the govt take your money away from you and give it to someone else (aka Robin Hood).

Planned Parenthood might not be such a bad thing if the govt didnt force those of us who are pro life to give our tax dollars to pay for abortions.  Let em pay for that bit themselves.  I dont wanna be taxed for it because, as it is now, people can have abortions any way they like.  And while some folks need them for purposes of **** or incest or maybe its a life-threatening situation....a much higher % are having abortions as a form of birth control.  People like myself are solidly against abortion as a form of birth control.  We dont want our tax dollars paying for that.  Its not right that we have to participate in something against our religious faith.

But the left doesnt care about our faith.

Unless I'm mistaken its illegal for federal funding to pay for abortions except in such cases where the mothers life is in jeopardy.  So, it would seem that your demands (ones, by the way, I completely agree with!) have been met.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:


Unless I'm mistaken its illegal for federal funding to pay for abortions except in such cases where the mothers life is in jeopardy.  So, it would seem that your demands (ones, by the way, I completely agree with!) have been met.

not quite. planned parenthood is subsidized by the federal government. and while the left claims that tax money only goes to the other procedures that planned parenthood carries out, it all goes to the same place and into the same pot. there's no separation between the abortion aspect of PP, and all of their other services. this is a problem for pro-lifers, who are being forced to fund this. why do they need federal funding? if they provide good services and are profitable, then they don't need federal funding. the same goes for NPR, PBS, and every other subsidized entity.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Kieran Colfer:


Because lowering taxes and reducing regulation worked so well in the run-up to 2008?

Yeah!!!!

I got my daily dose of broad, sweeping generalities that are mostly false!!!!

I feel good now!!!!

OFFLINE

All I got from the original posting of this thread is:

"Damnit but I turned out poor and I hate it. To hell with those rich bastards until they give me a handout 'cause damnit I deserve it even if I can't think of a good reason why I deserve it."

Commonsensedad need to do more homework. The majority of wealthy Americans voted for the Democrats the last few election cycles. Democrats are generally wealthier than Republicans and have a better chance of being college educated. Commonsensedad needs to realize that the biggest block of wealthy in tUSA is actually entertainers (sports, music, TV and movies), not the so called "evil CEO" and they overwhelmingly support the tax hikes (of course none of them voluntarily give the proper amount to make up the difference).

Commonsensedad should have just left it alone and remained silent.

Gimme one good reason why I should pay more of my hard earned dollars than commonsensedad (confession: yes I do make the cut for the proposed hike in taxes). Does he make more sacrifices than me??? Does he put in more hours than me??? Does he spend as much time away from his family as I do??? Just what exactly does he do that exempts him from the same percentage of taxes that I pay???

**** commonsensedad and anyone else who thinks that I should give a larger percentage of what I toil for.....and if anyone is one of the 47%-50% of the population that pays no taxes, the just STFU 'cause IMHO you got no right to even open your mouth on the subject.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Mark Simmons:

I got my daily dose of broad, sweeping generalities that are mostly false!!!!

No problem, glad to be of service.... Only mostly false? Which bit do you agree with then? ;-P