View Poll Results: Is it unreasonable to pay a little more?

Voters
97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. I'm a greedy bastard!! I need MORE!!!

    28 28.87%
  • No. There's comes a point in wealthiness where it just doesn't even matter anymore.

    61 62.89%
  • I'm not sure.

    8 8.25%
Page 56 of 81 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866 ... LastLast
Results 551 to 560 of 809

Thread: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

  1. #551
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReformCollege View Post
    The key phrase is more qualified. Maybe running a business isn't like running a country. But there has to be some skills he acquired that overlap the two, which is more then our President could say.
    Oh they hypocrisy of the left showed when they said Pailin (who was a governor) didn't have enough 'in charge' 'government' experience, but they elected someone with even less experience.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  2. #552
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-15-17 @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    424

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I don't think so. He had more experience running a company, but neither a country nor a national economy is a business. The president has far less control than a CEO, and the government sells no product.
    Nor do many businesses, as they deliver service. And THAT is what government IS supposed to do, not spend its time dispensing special privilege to banks/finance and their exact free ride counterpart - dependent citizenry.

    BTW: some government businesses include (many of which DO have a "product":

    Fannie Mae
    Farmer Mac
    Federal Home Loan Banks
    Freddie Mac
    Commodity Credit Corporation
    Corporation for National and Community Service (Americorps)
    Corporation for Public Broadcasting
    Export-Import Bank of the United States
    Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation
    Farm Credit Banks
    Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
    Federal Financing Bank
    Federal Home Loan Banks
    Federal Prison Industries
    The Financing Corporation
    Gallaudet University
    Government National Mortgage Association
    Legal Services Corporation
    National Consumer Cooperative Bank
    National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
    Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation
    Millennium Challenge Corporation
    National Corporation for Housing Partnerships (NCHP); Washington, DC.
    National Credit Union Administration Central Liquidity Facility
    National Endowment for Democracy
    National Park Foundation
    National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
    Overseas Private Investment Corporation
    Panama Canal Commission
    Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation; Washington, DC.
    Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
    St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
    Securities Investor Protection Corporation
    Tennessee Valley Authority

    That being said, I would not want Romney running an outhouse cleaning franchise, never mind the country. His kind of slimeball is what has ruined US business, and the US.

    PLEASE do not confuse that with any tacit approval of Obama or his policies, it is not.

  3. #553
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    01-22-17 @ 09:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    4,136

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by EarlzP View Post
    Partisan Hacks? Please explain the transfer of wealth, where have the jobs gone, where did the rich get their new found wealth from? What's your version? It had to come from some where right? My explanation is simple and obvious they stole it from the poor and middle class.
    Economics isn't a zero sum game my friend. The rich get rich by creating wealth, and they create wealth by employing people, they have just decided that it would be more cost effective to employ other countries citizens rather than our own. Which is why the global middle class is set to nearly triple by 2030. So if we are talking "the middle class," the middle class is doing just fine. If we are talking the "poor," nearly 70 million people move out of absolute poverty every year. The poor are doing better. The rich don't get rich and stay rich by taking your money. The government gets rich and stays rich by taking your money.

  4. #554
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    04-26-13 @ 03:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,404
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReformCollege View Post
    My point is, the rich getting richer usually implicates that they are employing more people and producing more products/services.
    They are definitely employing more people but the US unemployment numbers indicate it is not in the USA

    Billions and billions of dollars have been invested in these countries that otherwise would not have. That investment was not by people who were poor, nor did it spontaneously appear in countries so poor their citizens would dig through dumpsters for food.
    Your right the poor can't invest what they don't have

    We invest in their countries, we use their cheap labor, their citizens have money, their economies flourish.
    With any luck one day they will nationalize all foreign companies.

    Perhaps it is merely a difference of definitions. I don't consider "trickle down" as the give the rich money and somehow it'll trickle down. I say a strong economy will inevitably make the rich richer, while making the poor richer as well. The things consider most important are strong business fundamentals, free trade, capital investment and large profits for future reinvestment, all of this usually causes wages to rise and everyone to be better off. If what you mean by "bottom up" to be rising wages of those formerly in poverty creating flourishing markets, then yes I agree. But I see the second as being an inevitable result of the first.
    I wonder if wonder boy Reagan considered that the trickle down he talked about would be trickling down in foreign countries, what do you think

  5. #555
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    01-22-17 @ 09:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    4,136

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    There is no need for a graph. We just had an election where people got to choose whether they wanted a leader that would continue trickle down economics and deregulation, and they rejected him.
    Mob rule right? Screw logic and reason!

  6. #556
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    Well, 200+ years of running the country unlike a business as certainly lead us to a great spot in terms of the economy and the debt on our kids shoulders. eh?
    You can run something like something it isn't. And frankly, I seem to like this country a bit better than you. I see a country that has been around some two hundred plus years, still a serious world power, still largely free, still largely wealthy, and capable of adapting to whatever the times bring about. Businesses often fail to do that.

    However, I note you didn't address the reasons why I say it isn't a business.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  7. #557
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    01-22-17 @ 09:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    4,136

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by EarlzP View Post
    They are definitely employing more people but the US unemployment numbers indicate it is not in the USA

    Your right the poor can't invest what they don't have



    With any luck one day they will nationalize all foreign companies.



    I wonder if wonder boy Reagan considered that the trickle down he talked about would be trickling down in foreign countries, what do you think
    I'm not a Reagan boy. I think for myself, do research, and reach my own conclusions. Reagan did a lot of things I like, but that doesn't mean that I like something because Reagan did it. I know in the long term, our citizens will benefit from increased goods and services provided by the rest of the world, and increased demand for our goods and services by those places as well.

    And you're right, the poor can't invest what they don't have. So if there isn't any money in a third world country to build a factory that will employ thousands of its citizens, that factory doesn't get built, and the poor remain unemployed and in all likely cases starving. We come in, we build that factory, the poor have jobs and can afford basic neccessities, and both parties are better off for it.

    Its called a mutual beneficial trade and is the foundation that made an economy possible.

  8. #558
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    04-26-13 @ 03:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,404
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReformCollege View Post
    Mob rule right? Screw logic and reason!
    I would guess that you may be predicting the future, mob rule or revolution one and the same thing? What would you do to feed your children?

  9. #559
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by ReformCollege View Post
    The key phrase is more qualified. Maybe running a business isn't like running a country. But there has to be some skills he acquired that overlap the two, which is more then our President could say.
    Yes. May I suggest a list:

    1. Good people skills and the ability to inspire.

    2. An ability to reason well, take in information, not overreact or under react.

    3. The ability to make sound judgements(related to #2).

    4. Not an ideologue. A pragmatist.

    5. The ability to take in information, synthesize, and see possibilities.

    6. Make the tough choices.

    7. And in today's world, get re-elected.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  10. #560
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by cannuck View Post
    Nor do many businesses, as they deliver service. And THAT is what government IS supposed to do, not spend its time dispensing special privilege to banks/finance and their exact free ride counterpart - dependent citizenry.

    BTW: some government businesses include (many of which DO have a "product":

    Fannie Mae
    Farmer Mac
    Federal Home Loan Banks
    Freddie Mac
    Commodity Credit Corporation
    Corporation for National and Community Service (Americorps)
    Corporation for Public Broadcasting
    Export-Import Bank of the United States
    Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation
    Farm Credit Banks
    Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
    Federal Financing Bank
    Federal Home Loan Banks
    Federal Prison Industries
    The Financing Corporation
    Gallaudet University
    Government National Mortgage Association
    Legal Services Corporation
    National Consumer Cooperative Bank
    National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
    Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation
    Millennium Challenge Corporation
    National Corporation for Housing Partnerships (NCHP); Washington, DC.
    National Credit Union Administration Central Liquidity Facility
    National Endowment for Democracy
    National Park Foundation
    National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
    Overseas Private Investment Corporation
    Panama Canal Commission
    Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation; Washington, DC.
    Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
    St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
    Securities Investor Protection Corporation
    Tennessee Valley Authority

    That being said, I would not want Romney running an outhouse cleaning franchise, never mind the country. His kind of slimeball is what has ruined US business, and the US.

    PLEASE do not confuse that with any tacit approval of Obama or his policies, it is not.
    No, a business delivers a service to make a profit. We're not selling those services. No bey would be more qualified if we were, but we are not.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Page 56 of 81 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •