How come...

[dcentity2000]

Greed on the part of whom? Those that earned it and want to keep or on the part of those that didn't earn it and want to take it? Or both?

And no, I don't think it's a noble idea at all.

Greed come in many guises; one of them is the human trait of penny scrapings that are closely guarded instead of invested in health systems, schooling and so on.

Selflessness is a measure of a polite society - no man gets left behind.

There are those who would oppose a drive towards true equality, but then again there are people who want Stalin back in power.

bsnyder is right though - it is just a fantasy and so it should be - centralisation and pressed conformity (the areas you should have focused on) are NOT high points of human nobility.



Rich::

 

[BuckNaked]

Greed come in many guises; one of them is the human trait of penny scrapings that are closely guarded instead of invested in health systems, schooling and so on.

And another one of those guises is the human trait that some possess which makes them believe that they have a God given right to the money and goods that are earned by others. That's just as bad as what you rail against, is it not?

There are those who would oppose a drive towards true equality,

I'm all for the right to equality of opportunity, but I'm opposed to the belief that there is a right to equal outcomes regardless of effort.

bsnyder is right though - it is just a fantasy and so it should be - centralisation and pressed conformity (the areas you should have focused on) are NOT high points of human nobility.

I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing where it's up to you to decide what *I* should be focusing on. You believe that everyone is entitled to an equal outcome, whether they try and work for it or not. I don't.



Rich::[/QUOTE]

 

[dcentity2000]

Whoa, Brenda, calm down! Do as HAL says before you collapse!

[EDIT]: Joke follows

Two Russian friends, longtime members of the Soviet Communist Party, meet in the Red Square of Moscow 15 years after the collapse of the ComBloc. One of them tells to the other:
" Do you see, my friend... everything they used to tell us about how good Communism was, it was all a lie!".
"Oh, pal, there's much, much worse!", the other replies.
"And WHAT might be worse than this?", the friend asks.
" Well...", the second pal replies, "...everything they used to tell ys about how bad the Capitalism was... it was ALL TRUE!".



For the record, I support the Republic and capitalism as the most viable political landscapes.



Rich::

 

[BuckNaked]

Whoa, Brenda, calm down! Do as HAL says before you collapse!



Rich::

Oh don't worry, I'm not about to collapse. I just find your notions of the "perfect world" to be far ,far, from perfect.

 

[dcentity2000]

Oh don't worry, I'm not about to collapse. I just find your notions of the "perfect world" to be far ,far, from perfect.

The world clearly isn't perfect; Bush is in power



Rich::

 

[BuckNaked]

The world clearly isn't perfect; Bush is in power



Rich::

Yep, don't you love it? I know I do!!

 

[dcentity2000]

Yep, don't you love it? I know I do!!

It certainly keeps all the satirical comedians in work



Rich::

 

[peachgirl]

The world clearly isn't perfect; Bush is in power



Rich::

Bush is President, but how much power he has, at least to get any of his agenda pushed through is becoming more questionable every day. Republicans are not happy at all and some of them are even having the nerve to say so publicly. After all, Bush may not be facing re-election, but they are and midterms are not that far away.

You can bet that while the right wingers are putting on a good face, in private they're cringing at the thought of all these social programs.

Remember the huge outcry on these boards regarding a mere pittance of $2000 given to evacuees? If that sent them up the wall, what do think Bush's plan to give them an additional $5000 on top of whatever they get through FEMA (up to 26K) to hunt for jobs and pay for babysitters?

And after 6months (I believe it's 6 months) if they haven't spent it all, they get to do whatever they wish with the remainder! Add to that the fact that he wants to give them land for free, pay for healthcare..it goes on and on and on.

Of course, there's no real plan to pay for it, all the budget cuts in the world won't come close so there goes the deficit.

You can bet they aren't happy campers at all, but they're not going to let you know it.


The only thing I found encouraging in Bush's speech is that he finally admitted that poverty "has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which has cut off generations from the opportunity of America." Now, let's see if he really intends to do anything about it besides talk.

 

[Pugdog007]

As a notion, communism is very noble - to each according to their needs and so on.

Communism doesn't, however, take into account human greed and cynicism and as such just doesn't work; it's sad, but it's true.

I heard an interesting statistic recently that said that one in three Russians would like to have Stalin back in power more than any other leader (cue quips on his current vitality.) He brought great suffering to many, proving that facism and communism can indeed be muxed.

It's a fascinating bit of history, the USSR.



Rich::

And he was responsible for more deaths than Hitler. Yeah that's noble. Where exactly did you "hear" this statistic?

 

[ThAnswr]

ThAnswer, you know it is very possible that my calculations are off a bit. Please take a look at the following link and work your magic. If I am wrong them I apologize to everyone up front. I still make mistakes, darn I hate being humans sometimes, what a burden not being perfect.

lolhttp://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6

You might try this link as well. You will find that the information they use is not as recent but in my view it pretty much arrives at the same conclusion.

http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/

I look forward to your interpretation of the numbers.

Your links aren't working, but thanks anyway.

 

[ThAnswr]

You mean something like this?

Your photo, I assume it's a photo, isn't working either. Maybe it's me?

 

[ThAnswr]

Because Americans are very kind and caring people. We want to help out any way that we can. The government will do it's share, the insurance companies will do their share and the American people will do what is in their hearts.

Having been through Charley, I wouldn't count on the insurance companies. You wouldn't believe some of the horror stories down here.

 

[wvrevy]

Anybody but me.

Seriously, I agree with you. I get tired of others telling me I don't pay enough. They are the ones who are in the lower 50%. I am paying both their share and my share. What I really love is the argument that tax cuts are for the rich and the poor don't get anything. I should get it if I paid it. If they paid it they would get it too.

That has to be the single silliest statement I've seen yet. "They are the ones who are in the lower 50%." Really ? And exactly how would you know what my income household level was last year ? My wife is a CPA and a bank officer, and I'm a data analyst for a fairly large, publicly traded international corporation...and you think that I must be in the "lower 50%" just because I don't think rich people should get huge tax breaks at a time that our national debt is going through the roof ?!?

You'll have to pardon me, TheAnswr, 'cause I have to borrow you're line on this one...You really can't make this stuff up.

 

[wvrevy]

I'll take a beating from the ignorant for this, but I agree 100% with what Rich said. The concept of communism - not the practice, which never approached the actual ideal - is certainly a noble one. More than that...it's a very christian concept. After all...aren't we all supposed to be "equal in the eyes of God" ?

Where Marx failed was in being too optimistic about the goodness of human nature. We simply aren't advanced enough as a species to care as much about a stranger as we do about ourselves.

 

[BuckNaked]

...and you think that I must be in the "lower 50%" just because I don't think rich people should get huge tax breaks at a time that our national debt is going through the roof ?!?

And as I pointed out earlier, it isn't just the rich that are getting tax breaks. You said that you don't want to go back to the tax rates as they were under President Clinton, but you didn't specify what you did want. Are you looking for a top bracket that kicks in at $1 M? $500,000? And what top marginal rate do you think would be optimum for those in the top bracket?

I'll take a beating from the ignorant for this, but I agree 100% with what Rich said.

I'm not why you believe it is ignorant to believe that people shouldn't be forced to turn over everything to the community at large just so that everyone is totally equal in the area of income.

After all...aren't we all supposed to be "equal in the eyes of God" ?

Sure, but then again, God doesn't measure worth based on material belongings, so people are equal to him no matter how much they have or don't have. In other words, he loves the rich just as much as he loves the poor...

 

[wvrevy]

And as I pointed out earlier, it isn't just the rich that are getting tax breaks. You said that you don't want to go back to the tax rates as they were under President Clinton, but you didn't specify what you did want. Are you looking for a top bracket that kicks in at $1 M? $500,000? And what top marginal rate do you think would be optimum for those in the top bracket?

As I've said a million times, I'm not an economics expert. All I know is that people making seven figures weren't hurting during the Clinton years, and they certainly are not hurting now. Returning their tax rates to that level is not going to be the end of the world for anyone.

I'm not why you believe it is ignorant to believe that people shouldn't be forced to turn over everything to the community at large just so that everyone is totally equal in the area of income.

It's not...but then, that's not really what communism is, either. The whole ideal of communism is to place the needs of the many above the wants of the few. It's about wanting everyone to have the same opportunities, be they the son of a dishwasher or the daughter of a CEO. You're focusing completely on what is being "taken away" from that CEO...but who said his job was more important than the guy that picks up his trash ? Can anybody do it ? Of course not (although...considering the mismanagement of some corporations, apparently others disagree with me on that point ). But the job that trash man does is important as well. Why must the one be made to seem inferior to the other ?

But again, communism is simply too idealistic for us. In the CEO's position, I would probably want more money than the trashman, too. We're conditioned to equate financial standing and material wealth with self-worth.

Sure, but then again, God doesn't measure worth based on material belongings, so people are equal to him no matter how much they have or don't have. In other words, he loves the rich just as much as he loves the poor...

Didn't Jesus share everything with his apostles ? Didn't he preach that you should help those unable to help themselves ? Seems to me that is a lesson many people ignore, particularly on the so-called religious right side of the fence. I stole the following from some web page I found, but it basically describes what I'm talking about (with biblical references):

1- Communism believes that everyone is equal. Capitalism's human equality is largely influenced by money.

2- Jesus disliked very much the tax collectors because they were money-driven and money-hungry (Matthew 5:46, 9:10, and Luke 3:11-13).

3- Jesus disliked the rich people and promised that only few of them will make it to Heaven (Matthew 19:23-26).

4- Jesus in points 2 and 3 clearly disliked the "Capitalist" people. He clearly disliked Capitalism, because this system is all about money. Human value is precisely determined by the amount of money the person has.

 

[BuckNaked]

As I've said a million times, I'm not an economics expert. All I know is that people making seven figures weren't hurting during the Clinton years, and they certainly are not hurting now. Returning their tax rates to that level is not going to be the end of the world for anyone.

And that's the whole point that I'm trying to make - there IS no tax bracket specifically for those making 7 figures. That's why I'm asking if you're in favor of adding a bracket at the top. And if so, what marginal rate do you believe would be appropriate? The 39% that was in effect during the Clinton administration? The 70% prior to the Reagan tax cut? The 90% prior to the Kennedy tax cuts? How much do YOU (personally, not as an economist) think is high enough?

 

[wvrevy]

And that's the whole point that I'm trying to make - there IS no tax bracket specifically for those making 7 figures. That's why I'm asking if you're in favor of adding a bracket at the top. And if so, what marginal rate do you believe would be appropriate? The 39% that was in effect during the Clinton administration? The 70% prior to the Reagan tax cut? The 90% prior to the Kennedy tax cuts? How much do YOU (personally, not as an economist) think is high enough?

For the first part of your question, yes, I think that the tax brackets, as they stand, are out-dated. There is no reason that someone making $100k a year should be paying the same rate as someone making $100 million.

For the second part...I couldn't even hazard a guess. What I do know is that a few percentage points of increase aren't going to hurt them nearly as much as a few percentage points would to someone actually in the middle class.

 

[BuckNaked]

I'd love to see the site from which you cited the interpretations of the Bible verses.

There was nothing even pertaining to tax collectors or Jesus' dislike for them in the verses from your cite, perhaps they were "interpreting" the wrong verses.

Matthew Chapter 5: 23) Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24) Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." greatly astonished and asked, "Who then can be saved?"
26) Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."

Nothing in there that said Jesus disliked the rich.

In fact, I've never found anything in the Bible that stated that Jesus disliked anyone. He certainly disliked the actions of many, but that isn't the same thing as disliking the people themselves.

 

[BuckNaked]

No one making $100,000 is paying the same as someone making $1 M, but I understand what you're saying, though I disagree.