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 57 of 81 FirstFirst ... 747555657585967 ... LastLast
Results 561 to 570 of 809

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

  1. #561
    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
    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.
    Long term maybe, what do you consider long term?

    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.
    Really what happens when the American economy goes in the tank, when the transfer of wealth has been completed and we no longer have the ability to maintain our military? I know that will never happen, will it?

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

  2. #562
    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
    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?
    Exactly what does that have to do with anything?

    He said the election results prove his point of view, damn whatever a graph or any statistics no matter how valid have to say about the issue.

    I say that is the logic of a mob.

  3. #563
    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
    Long term maybe, what do you consider long term?



    Really what happens when the American economy goes in the tank, when the transfer of wealth has been completed and we no longer have the ability to maintain our military? I know that will never happen, will it?
    1. I consider long term within the next 10 years.

    2. That is wonderful hyperbole. However, it is contradicted by the fact that our economy grew last year and unemployment fell. Obviously we are trending up, even if it is slower then I would like. But if you are predicting that the economy is going to tank because you can see into the future, please let me know. I have a lot of questions to ask about the future stock market as well as who is going to win the next 20 Super Bowls. Seriously.

  4. #564
    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 Boo Radley View Post
    You can run something like something it isn't.
    English???

    No attempt to address the governmental mismanagement that has lead us to where we currently are I see.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  5. #565
    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
    English???

    No attempt to address the governmental mismanagement that has lead us to where we currently are I see.
    The US is not a business, so trying to run it like one us folly.

    Now management s a different issue. But I did address that! All things considered, few things have been managed well enough to have lasted this long. Perfect, no. But tell me, what is.

    The point we're discussing is if something that is not a business should be run as if it were?

    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.

  6. #566
    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
    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.
    Please read that list and think carefully about what you see. Most of those corporations ARE run with the intent to make a profit from offering the products and/or services to their client base. They are - in a truly Marxist sense - state owned business. That doesn't include the other kinds of US gov't owned business interests - such as its very deep meddling within and ownership of Government Motors, not to mention taking the asset from shareholders and creditors in bankruptcy and giving it freely to the party's power base of the UAW and itself. Actually, a sleezey deal the likes of which would make Romney proud.

    If the US had an actual business person or two in the Oval office and Administration - one that has actually WORKED for a living by producing something and growing a company - not merely robbing shareholders in Romney style nor oblivious to the real world such as the current guy in there who has never signed the front side of a paycheque, they would run it like a real business and not spend money that is neither theirs nor realistically ever able to be repaid.
    Last edited by cannuck; 01-06-13 at 10:25 PM.

  7. #567
    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 Boo Radley View Post

    The point we're discussing is if something that is not a business should be run as if it were?
    It should be run with the same sort of responsibility to the shareholders(citizens) in terms of using their money. It's not. Not even close. Accountability and responsibility don't get inside the beltway.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  8. #568
    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
    Please read that list and think carefully about what you see. Most of those corporations ARE run with the intent to make a profit from offering the products and/or services to their client base. They are - in a truly Marxist sense - state owned business. That doesn't include the other kinds of US gov't owned business interests - such as its very deep meddling within and ownership of Government Motors, not to mention taking the asset from shareholders and creditors in bankruptcy and giving it freely to the party's power base of the UAW and itself. Actually, a sleezey deal the likes of which would make Romney proud.
    ,

    Actually, no. They are not. Nor was the GM bit. The government does not own GM, and never did. Like any lender, they only set the terms. But even that lending wasn't for profit.

    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.

  9. #569
    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
    It should be run with the same sort of responsibility to the shareholders(citizens) in terms of using their money. It's not. Not even close. Accountability and responsibility don't get inside the beltway.
    I'm all for accountability, but not in the business nature. CEOs are not the oly people held accountable.

    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. #570
    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 ReformCollege View Post
    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.
    Eh...kind of. There is a lot more money made by NOT producing anything - just hyping the price - than there ever will be from producing products. The best returns from operating company dividends seldom reach 10%, but in the world of finance, the real money is in just playing with the ink dots.

    Until you/we learn to separate out financial activity that is merely wealth redistribution and concentrate on productive endeavors that actually create wealth, the only real recovery will remain on Wall Street, not Main Street.

Page 57 of 81 FirstFirst ... 747555657585967 ... 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
  •