Thread: America Has The Richest Poor In The World

Originally Posted by red states rule

OK so don't comment on how much has been spent to fight poverty and the end results - go back to class warfare

Stop with the misleading terminology... "class warfare". Trying to bring the poor and middle class UP, isn't what you and so many Conservatives imply. Yet, there is a point in all of this where fairness matters greatly. Serving the TOP few percent and lavishing wealth upon those at the top, isn't the only answer for America. We should know this by now.

Please tell me how making the rich poorer will help to make the poor richer

At what point, do the "rich" become "poor"? And no, it isn't my goal to push them to that point... but to encourage other Americans to see/regard the middle class and poor as JUST AS IMPORTANT to the health of this nation as the wealthy.

As far as I know, that plan has never worked anywhere it has been tried

What plan? That silly mental construct you suggested above? Bottom line with me and my view on this, is that we cannot focus all regard and honor upon those with the greatest of wealth. In fact, I think the only people at the top of the economic food chain worth revering at all... are those whose ways and investments benefit this nation's people in the most direct ways.

I know it is offensive to some, but I'm not going to praise MONEY itself nor see it as a particularly "good" thing, just because I see a LOT of it associated with someone's name; I'm not impressed by that. I care that the NAME associated with whatever "money" leads or points to outcomes which help people to live decent lives and make society better as a whole.

Sound a bit 'socialist'? It may be... but I've WATCHED CLOSELY over the years, as we ran HEAD-FIRST into an economic wall in 2008; a time that came after some of the lowest taxes and deregulation of the financial industry associated with this nation's history. I also know that a robust middle class (which the most wealthy seem to disregard and/or despise) is the virtual economic backbone of this nation. It is wrong and unhelpful to EXPLOIT those people as much as they have been by the wealthy and that is being addressed in this era; thank goodness.

My view is that it is BEST to educate the many (invest in the people) and LIFT as many as possible from the level of basic survival. No, not all must/will be "wealthy"... but that ALL will do better and that will be better for society.

This notion of setting things up in America so that they wealthy get richer and richer... has likely reached the limits of its true efficacy for this nation. The evidence of that is all around us, even in or faces. Again, there is nothing wrong with wealth per se, but how that wealth is used to affect society as a whole must be checked and balanced period.

Originally Posted by Johnny-C

Look at AMERICA's track record... nothing we see before us, is solely the fault of ONE particular ideology. Even so, I do believe/think that we need significantly LESS of those things Conservatives are pushing for and more of a social approach where larger numbers of Americans benefit from what this nation produces.

We know well enough, that pushing the wealth up to the TOP isn't the best or only solution.

See, he was right the first time. Americans currently benefit from what's produced. Every single American. So, where does your whine go? Where would junkies and deadbeats get support if not from what America produces? Not from working and not from non-productive liberals.

Lets see,

the top 1% earn about 21% of the income yet pay 40% of all Federal income taxes collected

It is not uncommon that the top 1% pay about 50% of their income in taxes to the local, state, and federal government

So how much more do you want from them?

Meanwhile the bottom 50% pay a measly 3% of all federal income taxes

and many of those people pay ZERO federal income taxes and even get a "refund" of taxes they did not pay

When you punish achievement you get less achievement

When you pay people to stay poor and dependent on government the people stay poor and dependent on government

Originally Posted by red states rule

Lets see,

the top 1% earn about 21% of the income yet pay 40% of all Federal income taxes collected

It is not uncommon that the top 1% pay about 50% of their income in taxes to the local, state, and federal government

So how much more do you want from them?

Meanwhile the bottom 50% pay a measly 3% of all federal income taxes

and many of those people pay ZERO federal income taxes and even get a "refund" of taxes they did not pay

When you punish achievement you get less achievement

When you pay people to stay poor and dependent on government the people stay poor and dependent on government

In general, we disagree. We'll see where it goes in the coming years.

Originally Posted by Johnny-C

In general, we disagree. We'll see where it goes in the coming years.

I accept your unconditional surrender

I understand your liberal compassion gets in the way of basic economic principals

Originally Posted by PatrickT

See, he was right the first time. Americans currently benefit from what's produced. Every single American. So, where does your whine go? Where would junkies and deadbeats get support if not from what America produces? Not from working and not from non-productive liberals.

You aren't as "right" as you think you are. If those on the Right were so correct, we'd see things being a LOT better off in America now. After all, it isn't as though we haven't tried abject capitalism as a national philosophy and tilted the playing field in favor of those who are most wealthy.

Still, things are changing right before our eyes, and it is very interesting (at least).

Originally Posted by Johnny-C

You aren't as "right" as you think you are. If those on the Right were so correct, we'd see things being a LOT better off in America now. After all, it isn't as though we haven't tried abject capitalism as a national philosophy and tilted the playing field in favor of those who are most wealthy.

Still, things are changing right before our eyes, and it is very interesting (at least).

Last I checked Dems ran Congress and the WH for 2 years, and Dems still have the Senate and the WH

When you look at the numbers, Bush's recession was alot better then the Obama recovery we are told we are in

Yes things are changing right before our eyes - but not for the better

Originally Posted by red states rule

I accept your unconditional surrender

I understand your liberal compassion gets in the way of basic economic principals

As long as I'm able to vote, you should not assume I am surrendering. My Liberal ways are what I encourage and contribute with as an American. You may not agree with that or like it... but I am a part of this society just as you happen to be.

I would dispute the whole premise of your statement.

I know people on government benefits in Australia that can afford all those things and pay off a house at the same time, considering house prices between Australia and The United States, it makes your statement seem even more off base.

Originally Posted by red states rule

Last I checked Dems ran Congress and the WH for 2 years, and Dems still have the Senate and the WH

When you look at the numbers, Bush's recession was alot better then the Obama recovery we are told we are in

Yes things are changing right before our eyes - but not for the better

Things DO indeed change, and the pendulum of political influence and power surely swings to/fro.

We'll see what comes of things as the years pass.