All Your Money Are Belong To Us
By Greg L | 4 November 2008 | US Congress | 19 Comments
Congressman Jim Moran (D-8th District) sums up one of the major themes of this election:
Transcript:
Now in the last seven years we have had the highest corporate profit ever in American history. Highest corporate profit! We’ve had the highest productivity! The American worker has produced more per person at any time, but it hasn’t been shared, and that’s the problem because we have been guided by a republican administration who believes in this simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it and they have an antipathy towards the means of redistributing wealth. (emphasis added)
The Democrat Philosophy: “All Your Money Are Belong To Us.”
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.
19 Comments
Views: 832
Loading ...
If Jim Moron needs more money, he just borrows it
from his “friends”.
Yeah, Jimmy is a piece of work. I can see where the socialism theme is really starting to gather steam. I’m very pissed at the Bush Administration, Congress and the whole housing industry/Wall Street bunch for the subprime loan scam. Lesson learned. Congress is too close to big business through campaign contributions and bribes. Term limits are the only way to break the cycle. It’s time that career politicians were forced to seek real employment, the kind in which one must produce.
WOW! So let me get this straight….if a person gets a good education and works his/her way up the corporate ladder and acquires a good income as a result, he/she is somehow now responsible for “redistributing” some of that income to people who have not “EARNED” it (just because they have less)? Are you kidding me? RIDICULOUS! That is socialism.
Another thing….who will be tracking those people on welfare to ensure that they are not “living” on welfare for the long haul and are “actively” striving to get an education and job so as to get off welfare? Who will do this? I am all for helping people in a jam (anyone can lose a job, etc.). However, I am not an advocate of providing income to those who can clearly work (multiple jobs if need be) but choose to live off the backs of others instead. These programs must be monitored and time limits should be implemented.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/illegal-immigration-costs-georgia-16/story.aspx?guid=%7B7BE91685-08C8-4040-8CF3-AA842589D49F%7D&dist=hppr
“Illegal Immigration Costs Georgia $1.6 Billion Annually”
This is just ONE state people! Imagine the costs if amnesty is granted!
This is exactly what the libs want. They want to encourage everyone to not work hard, to not take risks, and so everyone is in a consistent state of misery. Why work hard when the libs will just take all your money, more in taxes, more to pay for gase and energy, more to pay for food, etc.
Recall the old Soviet Union, people had to wait for bath tissue. Do you think those people were happy? Hell no. Yet, that is what the libs want us to turn into. They want pissed off people who will no motovation to work or live.
The Patriot,
The “Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act” signed into law by President in 1996 imposed lifetime benefit limits and stricter standards.
These changed resulted in a great number of people “going on disability” or taking advantage of the benefits offered to unmarried women for their dependent children.
Patriot,
if a person got a good education and worked their way up the ladder - should they not pay the same percentage tax as I do?
Cindy McCain has an effective tax rate of 26% - me 28%.
So, I am not asking her to pay more than me percentage wise, just the same as me. And McCain wants to lower capital gains taxes to 7.5% - well, most of us have wages - them rich people, they have capital gains.
Pat.Hearve…them rich people, they have capital gains. What a profound statement. I think that is categorized as tough titty.
Most of the capital gains are not from rich people, you own a house–you have capital gains. How does Cindy McCain have an effective tax rate lower than yours? Maybe we ought to have no ceiling on government taxes so those “rich folks” ($120K, $150K, $200K, or $250K depending on what week we listen to the Obama/Biden campaign) should pay 80 or 90% of their earnings to get an “effective tax rate”? That is great incentive.
You must have been mistreated in your life I guess.
Pat,
How much do you think Cindy pays in taxes? Do you think she pays more than you do? I can’t recall the exact numbers but I believe the top 10% of earners pay almost 70% of income taxes. I’d say those that do not earn large incomes are getting a pretty fair shake.
Look at Cindy McCains taxes (this is also what Warren Buffet talks about). she pays 26% of her income in taxes.
How much did you pay? Who said that they should pay 80 to 90% in taxes? Not me - but they should pay the same as I do with my much lower income. They can structure there income at the company - deferred compensation plans, dividends, and capital gains. Me - I have wages.
Did you feel the same about Mrs. John Kerry, the heir to the Heinz fortune? Probably not. Yep, I pay taxes for social security that under the law I cannot get because I am a retired Federal employee. Is that fair either? I am sure that Warren Buffet figures out all of his deductions and adds a percentage because he thinks it isn’t fair? Not on your life.
Over time, there have been targeted tax incentives so that the more wealthy people will “share the wealth”. So they take advantage of them. What happens when you take the incentives away? Who is really hurt in the end? Also, many of the recent tax “cuts” phase out when you reach certain levels, even the exemptions.
Try doing a percentage of how much of the Federal government is funded by these “rich people” versus what others pay. 26% of many millions beats my percentage of thousands. They are better off not because of the tax code but because they have reached a level of income either through work or luck or just birth. But it isn’t because of the tax percentages, they simply start at a higher level. So the only way to make sure that they don’t take home more than any one else is to tax them at 80% of their income if that is your measure. Then they will be paying for only 90-99% of the Federal government.
Yes, I do feel the same about kerry-heinz, and clinton, and gates, and bush, and joe gibbs.
I pay a tax rate of 28% in taxes - 28 cents of every dollar I make.
Cindy McCain pays 26 cents of every dollar - John McCain - 33 cents of every dollar. I would like to pay 26 cents - just like cindy. I pay more of my hard earned dollars. http://www.johnmccain.com/mccainfinancial/
Our tax system was not designed that everyone pays the same amount.
You should listen to Warren Buffet - he pays 17% - 17 cents of every dollar he makes, but his receptionist pays 30 cents of every dollar she makes - http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/06/warren-buffet-p.html
PWC Resident - My capital gain on my house is when I sell it - currently, 500K excapes the tax. What the elite are able to do is structure their payments from their company as dividends or capital gains, or they defer compensation - all things that I on a salary am not able to do.
I would like a flat tax (everyone pays the same rate - no loop holes).
McCain proposing to reduce the cap gains tax to 7.5% does not benefit the majority of people.
A PWC Resident said on 4 Nov 2008 at 8:22 pm: Flag comment
Yep, I pay taxes for social security that under the law I cannot get because I am a retired Federal employee.
A mis-tatement of the facts. If you are a Federal retiree and have the qualifying quarters for social security, you CAN receive a SS monthly check albeit at a reduced rate.
Obama told people not to vote based on fear, but they did.
The fear of not being able to pay mortgages, gas bills, what have you.
Now they feel safe because Papa Government will take care of them.
Welcome to the welfare state.
I did not vote for Obama.
Pat, I agree with you about the flat tax. However, liberals have consistently shot down the concept everytime it has been discussed. Frankly, I doubt most of today’s tax and spend Republicans would support it either. The last serious presidential candidate to advocate the flat tax was a Republican - Mr. Forbes.
Anonymous, the SS is reduced up to the level of the Federal retirement. Guess which has a higher amount? A CSRS retireee gets nothing under the penalty. That is why Congress had 300 cosponsors to repeal this but can’t get it to the floor.
And besides, whether it is 100% or reduced, why is there a penalty anyway? Both retirements were earned under separate retirement systems with an even higher contribution for the Federal retirement than SS. There is no income ceiling on when the contributions end.
So it is no misstatement.
Entitlement, according to the Moron above, is such a bad thing when a wage earner or investor wants to keep the money they earn. However, entitlement is a good thing when the masses feel entitled to a portion of another’s earnings simply because they exist. They are “entitled” to health care, house payments, cars and the gas to operatre them.
I understand how the first group IS entitled to keep their own money. My questions is: what entitles the do-nothings to other’s money?