hakr100
Android Expert
That's damned close to where we are now...
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
What's wrong with "Democratic Socialism"?
- Thread starter ZDroid1
- Start date
That's damned close to where we are now...
WAdude
Android Enthusiast
But if we simply tax the upper class more, then to compensate for the lost money in taxes they just fire a couple of workers, now you tell me, is that any better?
ZDroid1
Android Enthusiast
Should we fund an army no matter what the cost?
ZDroid1
Android Enthusiast
I think the idea is that the upper class has enough disposable income to cover the extra tax.
Besides a business hires and fires workers based on demand, ideally. They need more workers to service more customers, and vice versa. It's not like they have a few extra workers sitting around out of the kindness of the owner's heart, that he has to fire when he's taxed more.
I think it's more likely that a business would raise prices when they're taxed more.
stainlessray
Android Enthusiast
answer my question..... that's a weak dodge. should we or not?
WAdude
Android Enthusiast
Yes we should, but we should limit ourselves, by that I mean we should stop over funding them. I've heard from friends and my dad that they get so much money, the commandants, that they find no use for it and use it, they have to use it or its lost, on automatically opening trashcans, 55'' flatscreen LED TVs, and other unnecessary stuff. I've seen it myself. It's nuts, they should be using that money to raise the soldiers base pay insead of on crap like that. And I'm talking about billions of dollars worth.
ZDroid1
Android Enthusiast
Yes, at any cost that we can pay. Obviously we can't pay what we can't pay.
ZDroid1
Android Enthusiast
Yeah that's what it is, class envy. When a hard working person goes bankrupt because he spends his life savings on his life threatening cancer treatments, his real problem is class envy. He's just jealous of the healthy rich people, that's it.
copestag
Android Expert
thats 100% exactly what it is....... when he places the blame for his cancer and the fact that it cost him all his money squarely on the rich people......
its somehow the fault of the rich that he got sick? its their responsibility somehow to pay more money because he got sick? what exactly does him having cancer have to do with someone else being rich?
btw ....... rich people get cancer too!!! ........ none of them think its your fault
ZDroid1
Android Enthusiast
Nobody blamed the rich people for any of that. The point was that the construct of progressive taxation is not based on blame or envy. It's really based on compassion.
There are those who believe that a person who gets a fatal disease he can't afford to treat should just die. It's not our problem as a society to create a system to help such people. Life sucks and sh@t happens. That's true conservatism.
Some conservatives might have realized the harshness of that view, so they envisioned the modified "compassionate" conservatism. Whatever that is.
You're entitled to that view. It is logically consistent. I personally don't want a society where a human being dies of a treatable disease because he can't afford the treatment, first because I care about human beings, and second because that person might be me or someone I love.
wiretap
Android Enthusiast
I would prefer everyone get taxed equally, paying for the basic necessary functions of federal government. State/localized government would be in charge of everything else, and if people didn't like the services provided or taxes charged by a certain state, put it up for a vote or move elsewhere.
What I do not like is the growing federal tyranny where involuntary servitude breaching the 13th amendment has become our tax code. One class is held hostage to another class, with the transfer of wealth based on socioeconomic status.
What I do not like is the growing federal tyranny where involuntary servitude breaching the 13th amendment has become our tax code. One class is held hostage to another class, with the transfer of wealth based on socioeconomic status.
Zenze
Well-Known Member
I think that most people would agree that a societies strength is closely linked to the strength of its middle class. For a while now in the US the gap has been widening between the upper and lower classes. In 2005 the top 10% of Americans owned around 70% of the nations wealth. This is not a good sign for the country.
Something needs to be done about this. Should we just take money from the rich and give it to the poor? Of course not. However this money could go to great use investing in education etc. so that people can build the skills that they need in order to move themselves up.
While I think there are better ways we could tax other than the income tax it is false to say that increaseing the tax on the upper class would result in lost jobs. First of all the tax is not on the buisness, its on your personal income from that buisness. Also I would think that an intelligent business owner would have the number of employees needed for the business to be successful and grow. To fire needed employees because you don't want to pay their salaries seems counter productive.
Something needs to be done about this. Should we just take money from the rich and give it to the poor? Of course not. However this money could go to great use investing in education etc. so that people can build the skills that they need in order to move themselves up.
While I think there are better ways we could tax other than the income tax it is false to say that increaseing the tax on the upper class would result in lost jobs. First of all the tax is not on the buisness, its on your personal income from that buisness. Also I would think that an intelligent business owner would have the number of employees needed for the business to be successful and grow. To fire needed employees because you don't want to pay their salaries seems counter productive.
hakr100
Android Expert
Should we fund, no matter the cost:
the fire department?
the police department?
The postal service, the FD and the PD are among the most necessary of public services.
Cut $500 billion out of the military budget. That would cut wasted tax dollars.
wiretap
Android Enthusiast
Businesses don't pay taxes. The customer pays it for them. They relay the cost to the customer through higher product/service prices. You'd be a ******ed business owner to just let more of your profit go to waste in terms of tax dollars. You jack up prices to make up for it. Also, you don't just hire more employees because you think it is good for society. You hire just the right amount to run your business and don't keep people there just to hand them a paycheck and millions of dollars in insurance. If businesses ran the way you'd like them to run, they wouldn't be in business very long.
Have you ever been hired by a poor person?
Zenze
Well-Known Member
Unless there is a competing business, in which case you cant jack up prices unless you want to lose all your customers. Most industries have a good amount of competition.
It seems that you either didn't read my post your that you didn't understand it. I said that a business would have the number of employees needed for the business to be successful. To understaff yourself because you don't want to pay their salaries would be counterproductive.
In an attempt to get back on topic I don't think that anyone could argue for a pure capitalist system. Competition is what drives innovation and advancement, and pure capitalism alone would not allow competition. For example, monopolies kill compeition and the regulation to prevent monopolies are a regulation on the free market and therefore not in adherence with capitalist ideology. A hybrid is a necessity.
wiretap
Android Enthusiast
1. We're seeing that today with everyone in collusion with each other. Cell phone bills, cable/satellite bills, medical bills, gasoline, groceries, etc. All of this and you still have your choice for who you want to buy from.. yet companies are still jacking prices. It isn't competition, it is the illusion of competition. Regulation has leveled the playing field.
2. Yes.. it would be counterproductive, but they are doing it. Businesses across the nation are becoming understaffed due to a thing we call "layoffs". (hint: unemployment rate and rate of bankrupt/closed businesses) Operations continue, but with a smaller staff and slightly less output because of decreased demand. Talk to or visit nearly any business from a mom & pop shop to a fortune 500; they're cutting back and other workers are picking up the slack. They aren't hiring as many people when people retire, they are cutting back on facilities management, they are cutting people's benefits... and the list goes on.
Zenze
Well-Known Member
Yes lol I am aware of both of those things. As to the first one I belive that companies in collusion can be prosecuted as breaking anti trust law. However if they are in collusion and are not being prosecuted then finding a way to enforce the law should be the focus.
Secondly, obviously many companies are laying off workers. There is decreased demand and they can no longer continue to be successful and profit with the amount of workers that they previously required. However doing what is best for the company and getting rid of workers you no longer need or can't afford due to decreased demand is different than firing workers, regardless of whether it is in the companies future best interest, simply because you want more money in your pocket in the short term.
It's funny how easily some people muddle financial wealth and class; some of the classiest people I know have been poor, some with the least class wealthy.
Droid_Genius
Android Enthusiast
Vent on
Hmmm...this is interesting, but I am no expert but it seems this capitalism crap got us where we are and it didn't work....its like the rich make the rules and the middle class gets crapped on. People probably hate Obama but I like him because he stirring things up in Washington make big reform. Healthcare is huge because he making it the law to have like car insurance, but nobody complains to Allstate right? Why should some dickhead get shot and we have to foot the bill, same as if someone hit your car and has no insurance and now he footing the bill. Also people complain of spending money, well he may be the 1st African American in office, but did we expect him to be the 1st President to not spend money? Yea Yea I know deficit this, deficit that....lets start by taking back that 700 billion we gave out cause banks not lending, they just buying out these small community banks, I think thats a good start. I would rather a place where everyone eats, no homeless people in the streets instead of watching some rich phaggot pays 11k for a car wash but wont buy a homeless person a 1.00 McDouble. ($11,000 Car Wash! The Most Expensive Car Wash In The World! Video). As I see it today, there is no middle class its just rich and poor and unfortunately I am one of the poor. Poor = go to work to pay bills all to be given a 1100.00 a month check when I am 62....hell I am 30 so by then retirement will be 80 or obsolete. And lastly F--- HP CEO, they pay him 12mil to leave....just like AIG, all those dicks got paid millions as the door hit them on the way out.... pathetic
Vent Off
Hmmm...this is interesting, but I am no expert but it seems this capitalism crap got us where we are and it didn't work....its like the rich make the rules and the middle class gets crapped on. People probably hate Obama but I like him because he stirring things up in Washington make big reform. Healthcare is huge because he making it the law to have like car insurance, but nobody complains to Allstate right? Why should some dickhead get shot and we have to foot the bill, same as if someone hit your car and has no insurance and now he footing the bill. Also people complain of spending money, well he may be the 1st African American in office, but did we expect him to be the 1st President to not spend money? Yea Yea I know deficit this, deficit that....lets start by taking back that 700 billion we gave out cause banks not lending, they just buying out these small community banks, I think thats a good start. I would rather a place where everyone eats, no homeless people in the streets instead of watching some rich phaggot pays 11k for a car wash but wont buy a homeless person a 1.00 McDouble. ($11,000 Car Wash! The Most Expensive Car Wash In The World! Video). As I see it today, there is no middle class its just rich and poor and unfortunately I am one of the poor. Poor = go to work to pay bills all to be given a 1100.00 a month check when I am 62....hell I am 30 so by then retirement will be 80 or obsolete. And lastly F--- HP CEO, they pay him 12mil to leave....just like AIG, all those dicks got paid millions as the door hit them on the way out.... pathetic
Vent Off
TambourineMan
Well-Known Member
I think only our greedy socialist leaders should take half a million dollar vacations to Spain. The nerve of some dirty capitalist thinking he should be able to do the same!
The rest of us with jobs should continue to slave away to pay for our dearleaders many vacations, and if we don't have a job, we should gratiously accept the food stamps that the Messiah passes out.
The rest of us with jobs should continue to slave away to pay for our dearleaders many vacations, and if we don't have a job, we should gratiously accept the food stamps that the Messiah passes out.
hakr100
Android Expert
Former President Bush made 77 trips to Crawford TX on Air Force One.
At a bare minimum, for the flights alone, Bush's 77 vacation trips to Crawford cost us $226,072 per trip. That's $17,407,544 so he could ride his bicycle in the woods and clear brush for the cameras.
The minimum cost per trip to Crawford TX is $226,072. That's just the estimated cost of flying Air Force One round trip - about two hours of flight time each way at $56,518 per hour.
http://oversight.house.gov/From the House committee on government
THE COST OF PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE
PRESIDENTIAL POLITICAL TRAVEL
PREPARED FOR
REP. HENRY A.WAXMAN
This report assumes that flight operating costs are $56,518 per hour for Air Force One and $14,552 per hour for Air Force Two. These figures are based on the per hour cost figures cited by GAO for fiscal year 2000, adjusted for inflation.
According to the Congressional Research Service, the President’s domestic travel also involves the use of accompanying cargo planes.This report assumes one cargo plane accompanies the President on each trip at an operating cost per hour of $6,960. This figure is based on the per-hour cost cited by GAO for fiscal year 2000 for the C-17 cargo plane, adjusted for inflation.
And those are only some of Bush's taxpayer-paid vacations.
http://www.cbsnews.com/From CBS News:
George W. Bush is today making his final visit to Camp David as president.
He will likely miss the place: According to CBS News White House Correspondent Mark Knoller, today's trip marks Mr. Bush's 149th visit to the presidential retreat. The planned three-day stay, during which the president is being joined by family and former and current aides, will bring his total time spent at Camp David to all or part of 487 days.
Yes, that's 487 days. And Camp David is not even where the president has spent the most time when not at the White House: Knoller reports that Mr. Bush has made 77 visits to his ranch in Crawford during his presidency, and spent all or part of 490 days there.
TambourineMan
Well-Known Member
Hmmmmm. Let's see. 72 trips divided by 8 years is 10 trips a year. Just how many trips did you say the Obama didn't take?
I don't recall Bush going to NYC for dinner, can you provide a cite?
Oh, BTW, Bush was a dear leader also.
You must understand it is OK for our our massa's to do this. it's just not OK for the little people.
I don't recall Bush going to NYC for dinner, can you provide a cite?
Oh, BTW, Bush was a dear leader also.
You must understand it is OK for our our massa's to do this. it's just not OK for the little people.