A reminder for Liberals about the rich.

If you have a dictionary, look up the word "Liberty." It's defined as:

"The freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control. "

But the far-Left political-economic mantra is:

"Use oppressive government law to aggressively tax the all business and the wealthy."

Do you see a disconnect between these two concepts?

One the one hand you have an ideology defined by supporting freedom from authoritarianism, on the other hand you have an ideology that embraces using government oppression to achieve goals. We might have to raise taxes, on everyone, after we reduce spending by over a trillion dollars, if we want to pay down our debt. But we need to share the responsibility, rather than arbitrarily assigning responsibility to a vague upper tax bracket.

When did freedom from government become embrace of government authoritarianism?

 

Hint: supporting unconstitutional government, massive abuses of power and socialist-like programs isn't Liberty-supporting.

 

The difference I see is one is a definition from a dictionary, the other is your opinion of what the far left mantra is.

 

So the far left does not want to aggressively tax business and the wealthy?



Whoa.

Someone should actually tell the far left.

 

The far left? You mean communists and Socialists? There aren't many I know of in the US.

Anyway, I'm not sure how slightly raising taxes when they're at such a low point is "aggressively taxing all the businesses and wealthy."

 

Silly money is an illusion supported ONLY BY THE GOVERNMENT you seek to "rip off" but not requiring the rich to pay their fair share. The only reason the government issues currency and THEN TAXES is to maintain some transparency. IMO the government should just issue what it is going to spend first, and then release extra currency into the economy.

Now if you're wealthy say thank you to the government for letting all those dollars get into your pockets and give your fair share back, because when the government fails them dollars will ONLY be good to light your cigars.

 

The hard left in this country, aka "progressives" are at the core socialists and Marxists.
They are opposed to Liberty. They're statists. It's that simple.
All the hype from them to the contrary is just BS.

 

And the hard right in this country are caste-ists who prop up a system for those that have and everyone else. Setting up a prison/military industry based economy.

 

Shouldn't your side be working on:
1) Locking people up because they don't have all their papers with them
2) Stopping the gays from marrying
3) A Constitutional Amendment banning flag burning
4) Locking people up for smoking marijuana
5) Intervening on peoples' personal reproductive choices

 

Joe Six-Pack seems to be making an elementary mistake. Unless someone abolished the democratic electoral system when I wasn't looking, the government of the United States is neither arbitrary nor despotic. Certainly there have been large variations in whether Republicans or Democrats control the House, the Senate or the White House over the past 30 years, so I don't see who Joe is pointing to as a consistent culprit unless it is both the Republicans and the Democrats.

As for business and wealthy individuals being taxed, the nominal rate has risen (though not sharply) over the past 3 decades while the real rate (after loopholes and off-shore tax havens are taken into account) has actually dropped substantially). It has been the middle class who have borne an increasing share of the tax burden at a time when middle class jobs are being eroded by globalisation.

Since 1979, the top 17% of Americans have gained in real wealth and the top 0.5% have had big gains in real wealth: in the same time period, the aggregate of the other 83% have experienced NO GROWTH in real wealth (the sum of all assets minus the sum of liabilities, adjusted for inflation). If Joe Six Pack was correct in his OP post, this could not have happened; therefore, Joe Six Pack is obviously wrong. The case is closed.

 

Have you given thought to the idea that progressive taxation combined with an inflating Government has created a dynamic where only the extremely wealthy have a virtually guaranteed way to continue to grow their money: their influence in Congress assures the inside track to continued money-making schemes; the rest of us (and I am extremely high income, but not in the class about which I'm speaking) have to fight for contracts and work/etc.

I believe that what you want is probably close to the same thing I want: I want maximized opportunity for all people (then the people themselves have to take advantage, and not whine/be lazy/expect handouts/etc). However, I see many with your resentment of "the rich" actually condoning policies which damage people like me, who aren't in that class, even though my income is very high.

So how do we go about fixing this without damaging the wrong people?

 

Straw Man thread fail.

 

The extreme left is the socialist camp. Would you deny they want what I said they want?

 

The farther left you go, the more socialist you become.

Is there any disputing that? If so, speak up.

 

Even if this was true, low taxes with low government investment in society also creates a society where only a few are wealthy and have opportunity- and everyone else is a serf, just like America before the new deal.

 

The Left is willing to be "anti-Liberal" to find quick fixes to complex problems.

 

That's what I thought.

 

When people becomes rich stealing to the others, you can steal to this ones. Who steals to a thief one hundred years of forgiveness.

Ah, and you're wrong. Many far-left don't want what you've said. And I've seen more authoritarism in the right than in the left.

 

Good post. This is exactly why I think liberals need a new name since they are much more authoritarian today than they are actually liberal. As of now, I mostly just refer to them as leftists.

 

No one is stealing anything. This is the most dishonest argument consistently made by people on your side.

Besides, even by your own logic this doesn't make any sense. Aren't you guys always telling us how using the death penalty makes you no better than the murderer? How is "stealing from a thief" any different?

 

Making a voluntary agreement to trade of labor for goods or services is not stealing.

There is a roughly equal amount of authoritarianism on the "extreme" of either spectrum.

The far-left do want to use government force to accomplish ideological goals.

 

When government authority, which you at least get to vote on, and which at least theoretically has to abide by constitutional restrictions, became preferable to the excesses of the corporate powers. There's nothing but the government that can protect a person from billionaires that can buy your whole life.

It's the same reason people supported the monarchs of Russia during the Bolshevik revolution. Sure, the monarchs were pretty objectionable just in their existence, but they made a pretty good living presenting themselves as the peoples' protectors against the industrial powers.

Someone is always going to be trying to put themselves in charge. If it isn't democratically-appointed representation, it's going to be corporate-appointed bureaucrats. It's not a great choice, but it's a pretty easy one.

 

A corporation wouldn't exist without the State immunities that make it possible.

Again, point the finger at government, if anywhere. Different States have different corporate Laws.

There is a big difference between a local, elected committee and Central Government.

 

Read what I said, Where did I say what you imply that I said.

 

Would you deny my original statement concerning your statements