The Super Rich
- Thread starter QueEx
- Start date
This is why I'm in favor of higher tax brackets. The family that earns 300k shouldn't be taxed like the ones who earn hundreds of millions, even billions of dollars.
How the Rich Hide Their Wealth
Most Americans say tax rich to balance budget: poll
Eat the Rich!!
9 Things The Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes
Baling Out The Rich: Fed Cuts Discount Rate
It's time to kill the rich and take their shit.
A Look at the Numbers: How the Rich Get Richer
Rich People Getting Food Stamps?
looking 4 audiobook science of getting rich
No Welfare For the Poor But let's Bailout the Rich?
So it seems that QueEx is becoming a lefty?
Your wish has already come true. THey aren't.
wOW
Correction
People earning 379K shouldn't be taxed like millionaires and billionaires (379K is the cutoff for the 35% bracket).
Well, this is how your savior has it set up.
Jesus set up the tax brackets?
Here I thought these were the brackets set up by Bush and Congress and extended by Obama and Congress.
Humor him, he is caught up in the rhetoric!
I know. That's the most racist rhetorical ploy people use. So when White people vote for White candidates, do they see them as their "savior" or "messiah"?
Funny, hand-to-mouthers in the upper lower, lower-middle and middle would label people who think like you (seeking some equity in the tax structure) as communists, socialists, anti-capitalists and worse.
QueEx
Humor him, he is caught up in the rhetoric!
You must be joking. I have rarely seen you answer any inquiry with anything beside rhetoric. You run from direct discussion based on data. But that is how those who advance your pattern of politics tend to be. Utopia at any cost, with reality being the first casualty.
And to Que, how would you define Equity in the tax structure. Why shouldn't those who use the services be the ones who pay for them. Why force others to foot the bill? Why should one be free in thier choices, but be able to force others to fund those choices? How is not like me running up a bill I think is fair, then making somebody else pay for it ?
I completely agree which is why the wealthy should pay more because they actually gain more from the system than the poor or working class and that has been even more pronounced in the last 10-12 years with the tax structure as it is.
Post your evidence.
Wasn't you that I had a long discussion when GW was in office about the economy in a thread called "The US Economy"? You were continually defending the bullshit data and claimed Black folk were worse off under Clinton than GW, and you refused to respond to the quote I posted about Cheney making the comment that he said Reagan proved that deficits didn't matter.
But they also have more to lose, and have made the investments (or have purchased the right politicians). The rich do not use public schools, nor do they use a disprportionate amount of emergency services, nor do they use the roads without paying for them via gas taxes. The military does not protect them more than us, nor do police (that is a political function, too).
Soooooo, back to my previous query. Please answer this time. Thanks.
So where are the fucking jobs!
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Rkgx1C_S6ls" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
source: Forbes
The rich keep getting richer even when economic growth is puny. Even those making over $100,000 a year can afford to be called relatively well off. One reason the rich keep getting richer is that the rate of corporate profits keeps rising at a much faster rate than wages. Another reason is that CEOS are being treated in a royal fashion compared to middle management and plain blue collar employees.
The Chairman of Merck, a giant drug company, not doing all that magnificently, was paid $17 million last year, a period during which his company laid off considerable employees. You know that bank that was downgraded today– Bank of America; its chairman was paid $10 million, and that’s being paid for in part by the laying off of 30,000 workers.
I recall the late Peter Drucker predicting to me– and I wrote it– that middle management in American industry was going to rise up in revolt. I knew instinctively he was wrong– because all they wanted was that chance to get to the $17 million a year.
I’ve written that Harvard economist Ken Rogoff is predicting “serious social unrest,” and I’ve got a gut feeling we’re going to gradually see some of that as the homeless numbers and the unemployed numbers and the returning veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan find they have sacrificed for nothing.
That’s why deflation- not inflation– is the enemy. That’s why hope for salvation from Uncle Sam is a dying dream. That’s why the rich may continue to get richer and afford luxuries. But, the nation is ailing, and there is a worry in my gut of a creeping depression, a severe contraction in the wake of wealth inequality, disorderly financial markets, threats of insolvency to banks again.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Rkgx1C_S6ls" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
source: Forbes
The rich keep getting richer even when economic growth is puny. Even those making over $100,000 a year can afford to be called relatively well off. One reason the rich keep getting richer is that the rate of corporate profits keeps rising at a much faster rate than wages. Another reason is that CEOS are being treated in a royal fashion compared to middle management and plain blue collar employees.
The Chairman of Merck, a giant drug company, not doing all that magnificently, was paid $17 million last year, a period during which his company laid off considerable employees. You know that bank that was downgraded today– Bank of America; its chairman was paid $10 million, and that’s being paid for in part by the laying off of 30,000 workers.
I recall the late Peter Drucker predicting to me– and I wrote it– that middle management in American industry was going to rise up in revolt. I knew instinctively he was wrong– because all they wanted was that chance to get to the $17 million a year.
I’ve written that Harvard economist Ken Rogoff is predicting “serious social unrest,” and I’ve got a gut feeling we’re going to gradually see some of that as the homeless numbers and the unemployed numbers and the returning veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan find they have sacrificed for nothing.
That’s why deflation- not inflation– is the enemy. That’s why hope for salvation from Uncle Sam is a dying dream. That’s why the rich may continue to get richer and afford luxuries. But, the nation is ailing, and there is a worry in my gut of a creeping depression, a severe contraction in the wake of wealth inequality, disorderly financial markets, threats of insolvency to banks again.
This could be a separate thread!
Jamie Foxx Calls Obama 'Our Lord And Savior' During Soul Train Awards 2012 Show
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/mkPa8v5p5mY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
This could be a separate thread. No Lamarr, this is the real savior. His blood at Republican communion.
<iframe src="http://tv.ibtimes.com/embed/5770" width="660" height="367" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>
source: The Washington Times
Reagan's 'blood' auction called off
An auction for a vial allegedly containing President Reagan's blood has been called off, according to officials at his presidential foundation who had fought to halt the sale.
Instead, the vial will be donated to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation, officials said Thursday.
The consignor, who bought the vial at another auction back in February for $3,550, agreed to call off the auction and donate the vial instead. The donor wishes to remain anonymous, the Reagan Foundation said.
In a statement released by the foundation, the consignor said canceling the auction was the right move after learning of the foundation's stance.
"I am a serious collector of presidential memorabilia, and have donated to museums before, and thought from the provenance supplied at the auction where I purchased that the Reagan Foundation had no interest in the item," the statement said.
But having now learned of the foundation's interest, the person said the decision to donate the vial concludes the matter.
Bidding at the website of PFC Auctions, which was holding the auction, had reached $30,086 for the vial, which was advertised as containing a sample of Reagan's blood taking after the 1981 assassination attempt.
<iframe src="http://tv.ibtimes.com/embed/5770" width="660" height="367" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>
source: The Washington Times
Reagan's 'blood' auction called off
An auction for a vial allegedly containing President Reagan's blood has been called off, according to officials at his presidential foundation who had fought to halt the sale.
Instead, the vial will be donated to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation, officials said Thursday.
The consignor, who bought the vial at another auction back in February for $3,550, agreed to call off the auction and donate the vial instead. The donor wishes to remain anonymous, the Reagan Foundation said.
In a statement released by the foundation, the consignor said canceling the auction was the right move after learning of the foundation's stance.
"I am a serious collector of presidential memorabilia, and have donated to museums before, and thought from the provenance supplied at the auction where I purchased that the Reagan Foundation had no interest in the item," the statement said.
But having now learned of the foundation's interest, the person said the decision to donate the vial concludes the matter.
Bidding at the website of PFC Auctions, which was holding the auction, had reached $30,086 for the vial, which was advertised as containing a sample of Reagan's blood taking after the 1981 assassination attempt.
Last edited:
Similar threads
