Liberals, I'm Curious. How much money is enough? What's the max?

So now you want to end the income tax? Rotsa ruck there buddy.

And that´s all we are arguing here

 

Maybe they don't want to be perfect! Just good maybe?!?

 

I think some entertainers did, they couldn´t just take their income in less taxable forms. (Though Bob Hope took a lot of payment in Real Estate deals, and so ended up owning half of Hollywood)

 

No, AU, read my post carefully. I referred to 92% of their income.

And BTW, payment in R.E., gold, cars, or carrots is still income and would be taxable today. It is called "bartering". Was it different then? I don't know.

 

I think actual payment would be, but discounting an expected price might not. And Hope made lots of those deals in the 1930ś, so maybe I´m wrong. I dunno, the idea that adroit bookkeeping saved everybody is probably more towards the end of that period than the beginning. At first it was just grin and pay and thank god there was enough left for champagne but then time went on and some rich people knew accountants in prison.

 

But digest my first line, particularly the words in bold type.

 

OP,

More dollars are redistributed upward than downward in our current economic system, evidently you don't know how that is being accomplished or even how our system functions. Study up! Ignorance isn't all what your crowd makes it out to be.

 

If I´m rich I can buy a BIG needle

 

OIC

OK, and there were still some rich people in the US then.

OTOH As I recall most European nations had even higher rates, and Singapore was still a nest of pirates in those days, wasn´t it?

 

Well nobody has an excuse. AOC ‘splained it.

What’s optimal? Money isn’t finite. Why not fix it so those with less can create more rather than take from those who already made theirs? The amount of money a rich person has doesn’t effect me except that I can come up with ways to trade my goods or services for some of it. What affects me is regulation and other roadblocks from government.

Touché
I felt my position was clear but I’ll spell it out. No, if that’s Warrens idea I think it’s silly. I base my opinion on this thing called principle. Someone’s wealth or income is subjective. I don’t have the right to deprive anyone of what they have. If that’s how things work the U.N. should tax all of us at 98% because us having so much isn’t optimum for the third world. Scale of operation doesn’t determine these things for me. Wanting to panhandle $200 from you so I can buy a bigger tv to the U.N. example are equivalent to me.

So because I’m dead the state should get my antique clock I want a nephew to have because I can’t take it with me? I shouldn’t have a say in what happens to my possessions at death? What an odd argument.

For clarification are you saying the implementation of estate tax caused the crash of ‘29?

 

Too many people don't know enough. They cannot define enough. They cannot even describe enough. They wouldn't know enough if they had it.

I'd like to ask the person who deleted the above statement the last time I posted it if they can define enough. Can you describe enough? Do you know enough?

 

Maybe you should reply to someone who's not in the 1% the liberals are always crying about with that kind of dumb comment.

 

Shame you didn't try a numbers critique! You could have analysed the net social wage data...

 

And by the end of LBJ's reign of terror, the economy was a shambles which Nixon tried to fix with all the usual leftist shibboleths, wage and price controls to curtail rampant inflation for instance all of which were soon enough abandoned, thank God since they didn't solve the problem just camouflaged it and by the end of the lackluster and not infrequently destructive Carter presidency the Misery index was averaging double digits.

 

Imagine if they had tried the stupidity of monetarism...

 

Your better off listening to Elisabeth.

When you create money you create inflation.

We agree on this one. Just checking.

If you want your nephew to have it give it to him. You'd get more pleasure out of it that way.

No, the opposite.
When you ignore history you are destined to relive it.
When the crash comes you're going to lose all that money anyway.

 

What was dumb about it?

 

Liberals are the only ones talking about confiscation so that's why the thread is addressed to them. I don't know why they would come up with such a stupid idea but hey, that's for them to explain.

 

More RW "fake news" and lies. Let's see you quote ONE LIBERAL ON THIS FORUM who has advocated "confiscation" like what you're claiming. In fact, you can expand that to include Congress if you like. Go ahead. Find that "stupid person". Quote one or you remain a source of RW BS.

 

What's it your definition of monetarism?

 

My definition? I didn't define it. Look to the likes of Friedman.

 

Hey dictator...I quoted Commie Bill DeBlasio of NYC. Is he not a liberal?

Did you forget you did on this thread? Would you like for me to quote you?

https://nypost.com/2019/01/10/de-blasio-theres-plenty-of-money-in-nyc-its-just-in-the-wrong-hands/
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/socialism-vs-capitalism-and-the-real-dictators-among-us
https://gsiexchange.com/americans-overwhelmingly-support-wealth-confiscation/

 

DeBlasio? Quote him or link to a reliable source.
Me? Are you really so dreadfully unable to distinguish obvious sarcasm from honesty? LOL!!!!!

 

Your posts? No, there's no way to distinguish anything.

 

LOL!!!! I thought you had evidence of liberals calling for "confiscation". Fact is you have nothing. You made it up. It's part of "fake news". Repeat it enough times and soon Trump's base will believe it's fact, even though it's a lie. And you have exactly what I knew you had: N O T H I N G.