There you go. The typical 1% apologist excuse. See, the middle class didn't see its share of the nation's income and wealth go to the 1% starting in 1981 because of the Reagan "trickle down" policies designed to make the richest richer: You see, what really happened according the to 1% apologists is that the bottom 90% became junkies, sluts and thugs, starting around 1981. It's just a massive coinky dinky.
That is why we need to reverse "trickle down". We've "stolen" enough from the middle classes to give to the richest. Just the top 1% getting 20% of the nation's income and having about 40% of the nation's wealth, doubled since the Reagan "trickle down" revolution, is enough, don't you think?
I don't know what you're talking about. In my experience, everyone, and I mean everyone, only has themselves to blame for where they are at in life.
The goal of capitalism is to create goods and services to create a profit for the owners of the business. The workers are only assets to the capitalist which they use in order to gain marginal income. A capitalist maximizes their profits solely, the only check on them is government and the consent of the worker. When the capitalist takes too much leaving little for the worker, one of two things always happens. The first is a peaceful resolution to the problem. The government steps in to redistribute wealth. This is how nations survive capitalism. The second is revolution. This is how capitalism, fuedalism, mercantilism, communism and all the other forms of economies end up if the balance is skewed too far towards the few. So take your pick. Taxes or revolution.
Brilliant declaration. Too bad it is wrong in its in-applicability to the current state of affairs in modern developed nations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_tax_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_welfare
No idea what you are waxing in circles about. Workers are capitalists with their pensions, IRA's and other investments. Heck, even my own mortgage is held by a frugal relative who said, "Hey, pay me the interest instead of a bank. You save origination fees and I will get a better return than I am now."
wealth distribution as practiced under the Republicans is stealing from the poor and giving it to the wealthy we need further reform such as those done under FDR and can re-commence here:
So you figures the bottom 90% of Americans just got lazy starting in 1981, and that is why so more and more of the nation's income and wealth went from the middle classes to the richest, and the fact that was when we got the Reagan "trickle down" revolution designed to make the rich richer is just a big coinky dinky? You need to believe in a lot of amazing coincidences to be a conservative.
This is very true and and since I am a banker and have graduated in Economics I know there is big disparity in the distribution of the wealth of nation. It is also true that the top 2 % pay a smaller percentage of tax from their incomes than the poor. They lobby with government and fund elections campaigns
What you're not getting is that corporations do not pay taxes. Only people pay taxes. So, the money that gets paid in taxes came from what human/humans? Same with corporate welfare, who received the money/tax break. My guess is you condone welfare, which goes to people, so why would you appose corporate welfare? It mainly goes to consumers, workers and 401k's?
People who buy products and services in the form of higher prices. Prove it goes mainly to consumers, workers and 401ks as opposed the wealthiest, who own the vast bulk of equities.
You prove I'm wrong. There is an invisible hand that prices and wages combined with small investors play a sizable role in compared to the rich equity holders. Those taxes could just as easily lower prices and increase wages in market forces.
Sorry, I have no obligation to prove your unsupported, baseless claims are wrong. The fact you cannot back up your claims tells me all I need to know, thanks.
now go to Google and check out foreign tax shelters which readily prove your post to be completely wrong
Your statement: Prove it goes mainly to consumers, workers and 401ks as opposed the wealthiest, who own the vast bulk of equities. You are arguing that my assertion is wrong in that the corporate tax more affects consumers, workers and 401k's. Imo, prices are the most effected by the corporate tax than any other of there elements. But, certainly combined, these would trump a few top equity holders. Again, prove I'm wrong and you are right. - - - Updated - - - And this proves me wrong, how?
No, I am asking you to prove your statement: "It [corporate welfare] mainly goes to consumers, workers and 401k's" Again, sorry, I have no obligation to prove your unsupported, baseless claims are wrong. The fact you cannot back up your claims tells me all I need to know, thanks.
Why are there more junkies and thugs now than pre-1980? Could it be because you've been siphoning off his wealth ever since?
The wealthy have been siphoning it from the middle and lower classes since the '80s (and before) and they've been doing it legislatively, through the tax code, through the State Department and through the SEC. Seen a trade deal you haven't liked lately? Seen a merger or LBO that's been good for the consumer lately?
