Isn't it time for a new election thread?!

[Guest Jules]

No, they may have to live with a little less bling & that can hurt. Perhaps one less vacation home, or god forbid, one less vacation. No scratch that, those are sweet tax right offs.

stereotype much?

[markosis]

Ah, the variation of the ole

[Party @ the Moontower]

stereotype much?

 

No truth in my statement?

 

 

 

 

 

I hate rich people..cause I wish I was rich bitch!

 

Ah, the variation of the ole "America, love it or leave it" clich

[bleedorange]

See, I have a little problem with the Protestant work ethic. Why is your life better if you work harder? What are you trying to prove? and to whom? I'm happy to work to have just enough, and spend more of my life doing what I enjoy. It's also why I work for nonprofits -- I feel like I'm contributing something worthwhile, something that's not a widget.

 

The older I get, the more of a hippy I become.

 

 

So you want to work just enough to get by and then have the government redistribute the wealth of those that work harder to benefit you even more?

[austrya]

So some kid in a poor neighborhood busts their ass all through school and gets grants and scholarships to go to a pretty good college. He graduates with an engineering degree and goes on to develop some system that increases productivity. He's good at what he does, starts his own business, and little by little through hard work, investments, and ingenuity, he becomes a millionaire.

 

He's not entitled to take an extra vacation if he earned his money? We should take some of that away so he lives like the middle class? Why would anyone want to work hard and make something of themselves?

[Party @ the Moontower]

I work less and have less so that I can be a mother to my 3 year old and actually have a husband I get to see. I would never want him to work 80 hours a week so that I can buy shit. I work as a massage therapist so luckily I can work part time but still make a full time wage most of the time.

 

I wouldn't assume people who work less or make less are doing this to get out of working. I just don't see the connection to making money being what should define you.

[bleedorange]

I work less and have less so that I can be a mother to my 3 year old and actually have a husband I get to see. I would never want him to work 80 hours a week so that I can buy shit. I work as a massage therapist so luckily I can work part time but still make a full time wage most of the time.

 

I wouldn't assume people who work less or make less are doing this to get out of working. I just don't see the connection to making money being what should define you.

 

Nobody is making that connection. My wife and I both work. Are you implying that we are not being parents to our 1-year-old? Or that we don't see each other? Or that we only work so we can "buy shit"?

[markosis]

I just don't see the connection to making money being what should define you.

 

Welcome to America. How was your flight?

[lost highway]

So you want to work just enough to get by and then have the government redistribute the wealth of those that work harder to benefit you even more?

 

Again you present the fallacy that those with more money necessarily work harder. Not always true. In fact a number of my friends have commented as they have moved up a bit in the world that often times the higher paying jobs are much easier.

 

One summer between semesters of teaching I was a line cook. I couldn't figure out how anyone continues to work that hard for eight dollars an hour. Hardest days I've worked since I was a landscaper. Plugging in figures to make a power point presentation for the meeting on Wednesday? Easier than prepping three eight quarts of tomatoes, or creating a retaining wall out of flag stone.

[Party @ the Moontower]

Nobody is making that connection. My wife and I both work. Are you implying that we are not being parents to our 1-year-old? Or that we don't see each other? Or that we only work so we can "buy shit"?

 

Your taking that a bit far. I feel this country places more of an emphasis on consumerism than on family. I feel many roadblocks to being a mother 1st, good consumer 2nd. I don't recall saying you and your wife don't take care of your child.

 

It seems to me far too many people in this country worship stuff. I just don't. I want family first is all. I don't feel this country supports this. I see far too many families suffer to be good consumers of stuff they really don't need, cause that's what we are told to do, and the family gets left behind.

 

You don't have to agree with me, just don't make me look like I somehow personally attacked you, your wife, and your family. That was a bit much on your part.

[bjorn_skurj]

In a market economy, demand dictates salary. Maybe there's a better way to do it, but a utility-based system has its flaws too. All I ask is that people who work in jobs that are less in-demand be able to have a decent, if not spectacular, standard of living and are able to educate their kids and weather a major illness without going bankrupt.

[austrya]

Your taking that a bit far. I feel this country places more of an emphasis on consumerism than on family. I feel many roadblocks to being a mother 1st, good consumer 2nd. I don't recall saying you and your wife don't take care of your child.

 

It seems to me far too many people in this country worship stuff. I just don't. I want family first is all. I don't feel this country supports this. I see far too many families suffer to be good consumers of stuff they really don't need, cause that's what we are told to do, and the family gets left behind.

 

You don't have to agree with me, just don't make me look like I somehow personally attacked you, your wife, and your family. That was a bit much on your part.

 

I get what you're saying.

[bleedorange]

Again you present the fallacy that those with more money necessarily work harder. Not always true. In fact a number of my friends have commented as they have moved up a bit in the world that often times the higher paying jobs are much easier.

 

One summer between semesters of teaching I was a line cook. I couldn't figure out how anyone continues to work that hard for eight dollars an hour. Hardest days I've worked since I was a landscaper. Plugging in figures to make a power point presentation for the meeting on Wednesday? Easier than prepping three eight quarts of tomatoes, or creating a retaining wall out of flag stone.

 

 

Yes. They worked hard to get there. And working harder doesn't necessarily mean more physically taxing work. There are other factors.

[Party @ the Moontower]

I get what you're saying.

Thank you.

 

I have a yummy beautiful thread wating to be started just for you in the AM. I found these glorious pictures that screamed "Austrya in the Morning". I only wish this board came with a "smell this thread option".

[austrya]

Thank you.

 

I have a yummy beautiful thread wating to be started just for you in the AM. I found these glorious pictures that screamed "Austrya in the Morning". I only wish this board came with a "smell this thread option".

 

 

Haha, you must be talking about coffee!

[bleedorange]

Your taking that a bit far. I feel this country places more of an emphasis on consumerism than on family. I feel many roadblocks to being a mother 1st, good consumer 2nd. I don't recall saying you and your wife don't take care of your child.

 

It seems to me far too many people in this country worship stuff. I just don't. I want family first is all. I don't feel this country supports this. I see far too many families suffer to be good consumers of stuff they really don't need, cause that's what we are told to do, and the family gets left behind.

 

You don't have to agree with me, just don't make me look like I somehow personally attacked you, your wife, and your family. That was a bit much on your part.

 

I know what you're saying, and I didn't feel attacked. I was just being argumentative. I don't necessarily agree with your assessments on consumerism, though, because there are many things that we choose to go without or sacrifice. I think the individual is responsible for making those decisions, not the people offering the goods.

[uncool2pillow]

No truth in my statement?

This thread has sunk to new lows and I wasn't going to post, but now I feel compelled. I'm pretty sure my 91 year old grandmother is a millionaire. I haven't asked, but she's tucked away a ton of money in her lifetime. She grew up on a small farm in eastern KY during the depression. She went on to become a small business owner, a farmer, a president of a small, rural bank. Is it patriotic for her to pay more taxes?? She's not spending it on "bling". Has she taken some vacations in her lifetime? Hell yes! But through her WORK she put other people to work, made safe, secure loans that allowed people to buy farms and homes, and produced WEALTH (and helped send her 2 grandsons to college, thanks grandma ) !! Does she need her money? No. Do I, as her grandson, deserve an inheritance? Not necessarily. But how is it any better to take her money away through an estate tax so the government fritter it away on bailouts, horribly planned wars, horribly planned social policies, and other nonsense.

 

Just because some rich people (and usually people who aren't as rich as they try to look) have "bling" doesn't make your stereotype fair. That's why it's a goddamned stereotype! It's a generalization and it's wrong to stereotype people by race, religion, or class.

[viatroy]

So you want to work just enough to get by and then have the government redistribute the wealth of those that work harder to benefit you even more?

 

 

no the point is I'm satisfied without having much. I work to live, not live to work. And the taxes I pay put a whole lot more hurting on me than they do on someone worth millions. For me it just always begs the questions -- how much do you need/wants/gots to have?

 

I'm suggesting if someone works for 40 hours a week, regardless of what they're doing, they should be able to expect a wage that allows them to feed, shelter and clothe themselves and their families. Even heat their homes. Transport themselves. It blows my mind how middle class folks (say, oh, up to $250,000 in income a year) are so anxious to stick up for the rights of the filthy rich. And I've never understood why regular people think Republicans have their best interests in mind (unless it's the narrowminded social agenda. oh, did I say that out loud? gosh darn it).

 

And I absolutely believe it is the proper role of government to provide essential services -- and I'm sure our definitions of essential would vary.

[Party @ the Moontower]

I know what you're saying, and I didn't feel attacked. I was just being argumentative. I don't necessarily agree with your assessments on consumerism, though, because there are many things that we choose to go without or sacrifice. I think the individual is responsible for making those decisions, not the people offering the goods.

 

I guess I get a little pissed when I see that someone on MTV Cribs (I don't really watch that show ) has a gold toilet while we have children in this country who can't even get computers in their school, healthy food, healthcare, housing..etc.

 

Your right though, there isn't anyone forcing me to buy buy buy, but our government does very little to help out those choose to live with less. It would have been nice to get a tax break on our very expensive solar panels for example.

[lost highway]

But how is it any better to take her money away through an estate tax so the government fritter it away on bailouts, horribly planned wars, horribly planned social policies, and other nonsense.

 

If this is all you think the government does, you have been badly hurt by the Bush administration.

 

P.S. I would also like to address that none of the conservative, anti-tax folks on here have use a single word to address the realities of socioeconomic class.

[sweetheart-mine]

P.S. I would also like to address that none of the conservative, anti-tax folks on here have use a single word to address the realities of socioeconomic class.

 

my educated guess would be that it's inconvenient for them to do that.

[lost highway]

Yes. They worked hard to get there. And working harder doesn't necessarily mean more physically taxing work. There are other factors.

 

I'm willing to admit that some big earners are workaholics. But are you willing to admit that many people who earn six figures a year have been pampered, have had every privilege thrown at them and work a desk job that only requires a small fraction of a normal work day to achieve expected productivity?

[austrya]

I'm willing to admit that some big earners are workaholics. But are you willing to admit that many people who earn six figures a year have been pampered, have had every privilege thrown at them and work a desk job that only requires a small fraction of a normal work day to achieve expected productivity?

 

The people that I know personally that make 6 figures have in no way, shape, or form been pampered.

 

I know a lady who from the age of 8 was a latch key kid who had to prepare dinner for her whole family at that age. She went to college and then into the army. She is now very successful and although she has a "desk job" she's in charge of some pretty important areas of her workplace. Not anyone could do the job she does. She works hard.

 

Oh, I just thought of another person...He was just a normal guy in high school who just happened to be really smart. Some would say brilliant. He went to Michigan Tech for his undergrad and was employed right out of college as an engineer at one of the big 3. He then went to Michigan for his MBA and then to MIT for his masters in some sort of engineering. He is one of the developers for the SYNC deal on some Ford cars. He now works for a company in Paris. He payed his own way through college for his undergrad (he also got academic scholarships) his graduate degrees were paid for by his workplace. He works damn hard and is very humble. Not pampered one bit.

[viatroy]

So some kid in a poor neighborhood busts their ass all through school and gets grants and scholarships to go to a pretty good college. He graduates with an engineering degree and goes on to develop some system that increases productivity. He's good at what he does, starts his own business, and little by little through hard work, investments, and ingenuity, he becomes a millionaire.

 

He's not entitled to take an extra vacation if he earned his money? We should take some of that away so he lives like the middle class? Why would anyone want to work hard and make something of themselves?

 

Taking a nice vacation, having a great car, a college fund, hell even a vacation home -- fairly middle class pursuits.

 

I'm suggesting a more equitable distribution to the point where people can expect a safety net, or earn wages that make it less necessary. The way that works is through the government. For thirty years we've heard the fallacy that creating a desirable climate for wealth and job creation that would trickle down and benefit us all. Not so much, it turns out (surprise!).

 

 

Again, how do you defend someone worth billions deserving more tax cuts, when people are failing? The homeless shelter here is jammed, our food pantries can't keep up (and are seeing more regular middle class folks, etc., plenty of people are going to freeze this winter).

 

 

Bernie Sanders says it best

 

To me, it is grossly unfair that the middle class, whose standard of living is declining, is forced to pick up the tab for Wall Street's greed and irresponsibility, and not the top 1 percent who have benefited from Bush's reckless policies. While the middle class has declined under President Bush's failed economic policies, there has been a massive transfer of wealth from working families to the very rich. Incredibly, for the first seven years of Bush's tenure, the wealthiest 400 individuals in our country saw a $670 billion increase in their wealth. That is just 400 families.

[Party @ the Moontower]

This thread has sunk to new lows and I wasn't going to post, but now I feel compelled. I'm pretty sure my 91 year old grandmother is a millionaire. I haven't asked, but she's tucked away a ton of money in her lifetime. She grew up on a small farm in eastern KY during the depression. She went on to become a small business owner, a farmer, a president of a small, rural bank. Is it patriotic for her to pay more taxes?? She's not spending it on "bling". Has she taken some vacations in her lifetime? Hell yes! But through her WORK she put other people to work, made safe, secure loans that allowed people to buy farms and homes, and produced WEALTH (and helped send her 2 grandsons to college, thanks grandma ) !! Does she need her money? No. Do I, as her grandson, deserve an inheritance? Not necessarily. But how is it any better to take her money away through an estate tax so the government fritter it away on bailouts, horribly planned wars, horribly planned social policies, and other nonsense.

 

Just because some rich people (and usually people who aren't as rich as they try to look) have "bling" doesn't make your stereotype fair. That's why it's a goddamned stereotype! It's a generalization and it's wrong to stereotype people by race, religion, or class.

 

From my joke you get this? WOW! So Obama wants to strip your grandma of her loot? That's where my JOKE stemmed from. The discussion that somehow O wants to bring the rich down the middle class standard of living. Punish them. It's BS.

 

And hey, all you have to do to see the rich stereotypes I speak of, and they exist, is take a trip to Hollywood. How can you even begin to say that most of the rich don't live in a world of overpriced stuff that sparkles while most of the rest of live only a few paychecks away from losing it all. What country do you live in?

 

Fair taxes for all.

 

It does not sound like your Grandma has gold teeth and an excessive amount of fur coats, so doesn't look like my joke was aimed @ her.