Wealthy people are "evil" - the stupidity of this argument

If higher taxes and standards were the main reason for business failures, you could draw a direct correlation between the number of failures per capita with the states that tax the most and have the highest standards.

I haven't seen evidence of that.

 

Well, as Serfin' USA has pointed out, this statement is probably a bunch of BS. First off, corporate taxes should be eliminated, period. Secondly, higher marginal tax rates on people making over $250,000 is hardly going to affect small business owners. Only about 3% of the entire population makes over that amount, and to claim that they are all small business owners is asinine and you won't find any data to back that up. Personal taxes on people making over $250,000 is not correlated with how businesses are operated or what their profit margins are. Regulations, you have a point there that over-regulated businesses sectors are going to have less of a rate of entry than business sectors that aren't over-regulated. However, you are simply pulling it out of your ass when you say that higher taxes and regulations are the main cause of business failure. The main causes of business failures are the ones that you didn't capitalize as well as stupidity and competition.

 

Don't tell me that businesses don't suffer from higher taxes ok. We own a business and our business does suffer. Not only from higher taxes on our business, but higher taxes on businesses whom we deal with. When a business is able to pass their higher taxes onto their buyers....guess what? They do, and sometimes with the added bonus of having to let some of their employees go. And then eventually because of the additional cost of buying our material...we may have to have some lay-offs as well. So, please....don't tell me what does and does not effect businesses.

Also, our latest new great penalty is HEALTH INSURANCE costs....our healthcare costs have gone up 40% over the last year alone. We are being punished for providing our employees with health insurance. We already have regulation up the ass in our business (medical supplier)...we just got notice that more will be added, due to this piece of sh*t Obamacare.

 

First off, settle down. Secondly, you clearly don't understand the difference between personal taxes and corporate taxes. One of the first things I said was that corporate taxes should be gotten rid of.

What new taxes or regulations have been passed that have increased your healthcare costs by 40%? How many employees do you have? Employers with less than 50 people don't even have to pay penalties, so which regulations are you talking about, specifically because I don't know of any regulations that punish employers for providing health insurance.

 

Maybe in your fantasy land.

No, middle class folk don't pay FICA.

So many cons don't have a freaking clue.

 

Easy.

You simply make sure the richest "earn" it and not the poorer/middle classes. You raise taxes on the poorer and middle classes and lower them on the rich. You finance the tax cuts with trillions of debt and then say we can't afford SS or other programs that help out the middle classes. Then you don't increase the minimum wage so it steadily decreases in relative value, and you gut the power of unions so places like Wal-mart can pay their workers dirt while the owners become multi-billionaires, pick conservative courts cut back on OT laws so less people get OT, cut back on the relative size of college grants and interest rates, stuff like that. The middle class incomes then stagnate, and company profits and stock markets soar, and you have the bulk of the growth of income and wealth going to the richest.

Like this:



And you use your conservative dominated financial press convince enough of the sheep that "trickle down" is good for them.

 

According to the Bible, if you're lucky, even a poor person will spend eternity in the giant bejeweled golden cube. So why worry about earthly riches and poverty? Go for the jackpot!

 

Wow, and look at the modern empire of ease and luxury we have built with those attitudes. Even now, during the big recession, no one goes hungry. No one even misses a phone call or an e-mail. It's ridiculous. And liberals say they need more free money. For what? We have it made!

 

In what convoluted universe can income and wealth grow most for someone who is not rich???

 

In the convuluted universe where average working people make a decent living wage for their work.

 

Actually, you do have hungry people in America. On a per capita basis, America has more homeless people than most of its peers. Wealth disparity is also considerably worse here than in most of the First World.

 

Whether or not rich people are "evil" is completely irrelevant to the debate between socialist policies v/s capitalist policies.

 

I can't imagine why. Neither of my parents ever worked and the government provided everything. We had it made. I'm not sure why any hungry or homeless person would refuse to sign up for those programs. But how much more can be done beyond having them in the first place?

 

Average people live like kings in America. What are you guys complaining about exactly? We live lives of ease and luxury. We are pampered, even the poor. And you whine that it isn't decent? Why? Because people have to work? That's what it sounds like to me.

 

Another person without a clue.

 

The discussion is relevant because the left dishonestly characterizes the rich as the people who take from the middle class when, in fact, the rich create the middle class by creating businesses and hiring them in the first place. That the rich have built our modern world of ease and luxury proves that they are benevolent.

 

Thanks for this compelling response.

 

Worthy for the post it responded to.

 

You could point to some hungry people and tell me why they can't get food stamps or crazy checks from the government. Just give me a hypothetical person who will be allowed to starve and not hooked up to a program.

 

The idea is to have working people not needing food stamps or crazy checks.

 

That doesn't make it relevant.

 

What do you call an argument against an argument that has never been posited? What is this, some sort of Fox & Friends panel 'debate'?

 

Not really. It proves that spreading the wealth somewhat is essential to a decent standard of living in a society.

Most of what we can credit as the ease at which we live comes from high quality infrastructures paid via taxes.

 

If that is the case, the rich have been doing a (*)(*)(*)(*) poor job over much of the past 30 years, despite all these trillions in tax cuts we've squandered on them.

 

There are various reasons, but a large part of it is the lack of funding for mental health.

A lot of homeless people are mentally ill, so they end up falling out of the system, so to speak.

Quite a few them most likely need to be committed.