Free Countries don't Trap Rich People like Rats and Make them Stay

Phil Mickelson, golf pro and tax rape victim, decided that he had enough of socialist California and faced a massive backlash from the lazy scum of our society who figure that a rich person has a moral obligation to pay the highest taxes possible and has no right to move, or seek other forms of tax relief.

I just don't understand this raw, unbridled hatred for freedom that leftists have when it comes to protecting your property from Government confiscation and redistribution. It boggles my mind that anyone can be so hateful and jealous as to hate on someone for not wanting to live in a social democratic (*)(*)(*)(*) hole like California.

I just don't get it. All the time the left claims they are not socialist, they are not communist, but they are constantly engaging in the same populist rhetoric and legal/economic behavior that Hugo Chavez engages in. How am I not supposed to believe that you aren't a socialist when you and Hugo Chavez both talk about the need to tax the rich at 70-90% tax rates and use the force of law to lock a rich person down and prevent them from moving where ever the hell they want to in order to seek tax relief.

There is no moral justification for confiscatory taxation.(taxation above 50% of income).

Nations who engage in confiscatory taxation are not FREE NATIONS but are communistic dictatorships of the lowest common denominator retards.

A nation run by a democracy of the lowest common denominator cannot possibly be a free country because the stupids give up other people's freedom quickly and gladly.

I mean really, what is it about moving away in order to prevent excessive and tyrannical confiscation of private property by the little people of the world such a moral crime to the left??

 

Spare us the hyperbolic BS. Everybody needs to pay their way, and their share.

 

There is no pre set "fair share" that is made up bull shyte. No one owes you a god (*)(*)(*)(*) share of anything.

I don't understand where you think you have the right to think like this. No one owes you anything.

 

"There is no moral justification for confiscatory taxation.(taxation above 50% of income).


There is no 'moral' justification or issue about any taxation.

Why the arbitrary 50%- why is 49% okay but 51% is confiscatory?

Just stuff and nonsense.

All taxes are both arbitrary and resented by those who have to pay them. But there is nothing inherently moral or not moral about rich paying more- or less than anyone else.

Personally- I think we should tax based upon wealth, not income. But then those with more wealth would complain about how unfair that was.

 

Taxation is punishment. You inflict taxation on wealth in order to make people sorry for ever thinking they could live a better quality of life than most other people. It is based on hatred, not on a need for revenue.

 

Do you really consider this fair?

ST. GALLEN, Switzerland — A Swiss court has slapped a wealthy speeder with a chalet-sized fine — a full $290,000.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34752334/ns/world_news-weird_news/?GT1=43001

Why should someone who breaks a rule be fined more then other people. The law is the same, the infraction was the same, its basically punishing someone for having more money. That is inherently wrong.

 

You never will understand the concept of the uneven playing field created by the rich because, well, you just don't wanna.

 

There is no uneven playing field. You just want to punish the thoroughbreds of our society for being faster/stronger/naturally more gifted than the old plow horses that belong not on the track, but in a glue factory.

American society was designed to be a brutal, unforgiving meritocracy. You are (*)(*)(*)(*)ing with the very design and role of Government in US.

 

Don't most on the right use Switzerland as an example of greatness? I might be wrong.

 

The fact that you are even alive right now proves that America was never a meritocracy.

 

lol, no one could have a different view than you unless they're rich and evil. gosh you're sheltered

 

More states of 'escapees' are going to go to what NJ has---an "Exit Tax"

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=16010

They are going to penalize them to the hilt for leaving (selling property et al) as a '1 last time' tax...how absolutely disgusting!!

 

Where is this magic "fair share" calculating machine you speak of?

 

That says it all.

I think rich people have a moral duty to avoid paying taxes, giving that the taxes they pay go to such depraved barbarities as locking nonviolent people in cages, sending SWAT teams to raid small business owners in service of big corporations, and blowing up foreign children.

 

Man alive!....who exactly is the hater here?

 

Who's trapping rich people? Last time I checked, they were more able to move than the common man.

 

Well as previously posted, those land owners leaving NJ are 'raped' one last time b4 leaving.

For the others, not yet Exit Taxed by their states, they will be publicly ridiculed as Mickelson was so done...btw, since Tiger woods left CA, he has saved $100 M in taxes per this mornings report...

 

I'm sure Mickelson is crying all the way to the bank.

 

Class envy much?

 

It's not that. It's just that I tend to sympathize little with the wealthy.

If they want to change their living arrangement, they have the money to do so. It may not always be convenient, but it's at least a possibility.

Most of us live from paycheck to paycheck. There aren't a whole lot of "options" involved with that.

It's not just here either. The second oldest division in society is class. The only one older is gender.

There's an old saying that goes, "There's a rule for the rich and a rule for the rest." It's as old as Hammurabi's Law.

So, while I'm not someone who believes rich people are evil, I still recognize that they don't have it so bad. In fact, the wealthy tend to have it much easier in America than in most other wealthy nations.

 

And 'who' are making them rich?! The shlocks like you who watch them on TV and put them on a pedestal.

The American ppl are getting what they deserve from worshiping the cult of personality..if 'we the ppl' wouldn't subsidize them, they wouldnt be making a fortune knocking a ball around vs. 'us' who are actually manufacturing products!

"We" have created these Frankensteins!!

 

Thats all uppity liberals with an overly inflated sense of social worth have.

 

Who're you trying to kid, dude? There's no such thing as meritocracy, ESPECIALLY in this country. George Bush and John Kerry are my primary examples of the non-existence of meritocracy in this country, and there are millions of others just like them who don't merit squat.

 

Why does that make it ethical to aggress against him. If a person is physically strong, is it okay for me to hit him?

If I were rich, I'd do whatever I reasonably could to avoid paying taxes, because I would consider it unjust to allow my money to go the various immoral projects funded by the state. It's not so much about keeping your money to buy another gold-plated Lamborghini. It's about ensuring it doesn't go to the state. In fact, I'd rather it be stolen by a common street thug.

 

Even 50% is too much. No one should pay half their income in taxes. I don't care how much you make. Even 40% for billionaires is steep to me. Too steep, really.