82 Percent of the Wealth Generated Last Year 'Went to the Richest 1 Percent of the Global Population

I am glad you decided my premise is irrelevant. That doesn't change the fact that you live better than most of the world and anything you would expect others to give up would have to come from you as well. What percentage are you willing to give up?

 

I can spare a few bullets.

 

10% of my income and 40% of my estate. But only if I was assured the system in place actually worked.

 

YES, I'M MAD AS HELL WITH CAPITALISM AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANY MORE!! I'm moving to the USSR today!!!


[Edit: uh, er, I temporarily FORGOT that socialism/communism is a miserable failure, and I felt really really stupid when I called that travel agent a few minutes ago and spouted "GIVE ME 2 TICKETS TO THE GLORIOUS USSR YOU CAPITALIST PIG!"....that b-word who answered the phone sarcastically replied "well, Mr. Communist lover, could I suggest a trip to Venezuela, instead"...dang her smart ass. Obviously Venezuela is out (I want to eat, etc.), so I'm stuck living the good life here in America - crap!]

 

Violence....(the left's solution to almost everything.)

 

Instead of forcibly taking money from those that create (you obviously want to forcibly* take, via gov't, more and more money from successful job-creators), I'd suggest that you help the world more than you are currently doing by starting the next Amazon, or Microsoft, or Apple, etc., and then give the billions that your happy customers voluntarily gave you to the poor people.

*(Taxation is taking money from people by force, if necessary.)

 

How would you suggest the Fed only manage the inflation rate?

 

Are you in the US?

 

Wow just like the Trump tax cuts.

 

nope. Canada.

 

No actually you are confusing tax on income and tax on wealth. For some reason despite the supposed tax bite a larger and larger share of America's total wealth ends up in the hands of the truly rich. Means to make it simple that hugh amounts of gained wealth somehow manage to avoid being income or being taxed.

 

Oh!. I would love for my taxes to go down to the numbers you mentioned. Where I live, we have the highest taxes, but also have a homeless problem. Giving money to our government to help the poor doesn't seem to be working.

 

How so?

 

In Venezuela the troops make sure eeryone gets the same share. And that's the important thing - right?

 

Who said: "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun"?

 

I'm looking at student loan payment arrangements that would 'repay' more than twice the principal. That's indicative where much of today's wealth is - in credit, in interest and fees. That's government-approved loan sharking with Congress setting the interest rate.

 

Yeah, they promise free **** from the rich and tax the **** out of those that aren't.
A few hundred grand a year is a bump on the ass of "the rich", but they are the ones that end up eviscerated by the tax code

 

I must have misinterpreted the question. I wasn't referring to my income taxes, I was responding to how much I would willing contribute to a process of narrowing the wealth gap. Thats over and above my citizenship obligations to pay taxes.

And like I qualified, I would have to be convinced that the program was effective. I don't buy lip service, of either kind.

 

Honest question, can you name the organisations or people that are in the one percent? I want to do some innvestigation on whho thosse 1% support politically. There shouldn't be many.

 

I see. So what is stopping you? There are plenty of worthy charities and how they allocate funds is made public. My point is that those wanting to take more from the rich are in the same position, but draw the line at their level of income. It is easy to tell others what they should do.

 

You confuse charity with a global wealth redistribution program. Motivation entirely different. Ya miss that?

 

Communism? How funny.

Violent revolution? Your words not mine, nor my intention either. How you arrive at these conclusions from my above post is simply bewildering.

For the record, I have no interest or affiliation with any political parties or ideologies. Never have done, never will. I have not so much as read a political manifesto, let along a pamphlet. I find the entire subject dismal - and arguments of right v left, Trot v Marxist, Conservative v Liberal, Fascist v Anarchism (etc etc) to be intentionally dichotomous and self delusional. Worse, they facilitate schizophrenic thinking.

But I'm with you on redistribution of wealth? It's a fact that wealth has been redistributed from the many to the few - that's how 8 men own the combined wealth of half the world. You don't find this obscene?

Would you care to explain in more detail you ideological objection to the dismantling of neoliberal economics that favours the 1% to the detriment of everyone else? I'm interested in your objections, especially as I'm pretty sure you are not a member of the elite billionaire boys club (which I could understand) and wish to understand your perception and psychology on this?

 

Of course not.
I find it inaccurate.

 

Really?

Your proof is a a paper of a Washington think-tank dreamed up by prominent US businessmen - principally Alfred Sloan Jr of General Motors and Farish at Standard Oil plus a few more (but see below), to agitate for lower taxes?

Sloan and Farish are prominently discussed in Charles Higham's Trading With the Enemy for being part of many US multinationals for their willingness to help supply Hitler and his Nazis throughout WWII with critical war materiel. Farish's Standard Oil supplied diesel oil to Nazi U-boats. Sloan used to visit Hitler and Goebbels in Berlin, and assisted the Nazis war production through the joint GM-Opel board on which he sat throughout the war. Both funded the ultra right, KKK leaning, Liberty Lobby. In light of this isn't it unsurprising that the Tax Foundation lobbied for restraining government spending to finance war expenditure during that same period.

To be perfectly honest you couldn't have chosen a worse outfit for your "common knowledge" comment. Take a bow.

 

Actually, you are correct. The first origin is the species itself and from there it branches into every aspect of life.