Where does "class warfare" stop?

so you are for and against giving money to people that did nothing to earn it?

No, but I'm for military, public infrastructure, high risk research, and providing healthcare to those who cannot afford it. There's a big deficit.

Hell, my initial post said the only class warfare I'm for is the estate tax. And the pitchfork mob has taken it to mean I want to take all your money and give it away. Because a tax increase is always all or nothing.
 
Should we just burn it so nobody gets it? Because they didn't "earn" it either.

We have a ton of other expenditures and a large defecit that does not involve giving out checks. And income is earned unlike inheritance.
 
No, but I'm for military, public infrastructure, high risk research, and providing healthcare to those who cannot afford it. There's a big deficit.

Hell, my initial post said the only class warfare I'm for is the estate tax. And the pitchfork mob has taken it to mean I want to take all your money and give it away. Because a tax increase is always all or nothing.

I know what you mean. This country, whether warranted or not, has a huge issue with joe america getting a free lunch.
 
We have a ton of other expenditures and a large defecit that does not involve giving out checks. And income is earned unlike inheritance.

As far as any tax is "fair", when the estate tax is compared to sales tax, corporate tax, income tax, etc.. it has the lowest argument for what is "fair" because it was not earned by the individual receiving it. The person who earned it is dead. Whatever the individual has earned has no reflection on inheritance. And I'm not recommending taking all of it, but if you're asking me if I care whether an individual receieve $2.5M or $2M for being born into the right family, I don't. I'd rather see that than 15 people making $40k bring in an equivalent of $32k. To close that gap.

What does that have to do with the bold?
 
ok. so to be perfectly clear: America is afraid their money is being stolen to give joe lunch.

This is why I don't think social programs will work here.

where won't they work? I believe the US has a couple that are going fine for those involved with them. Heck some states are getting bonuses for signing up more people
 
As far as any tax is "fair", when the estate tax is compared to sales tax, corporate tax, income tax, etc.. it has the lowest argument for what is "fair" because it was not earned by the individual receiving it. The person who earned it is dead. .

The person who earned it is the ONLY rightful authority on who should get it.

Second maybe to the progressive income tax, the estate tax is THE most egregious tax there is on the property rights of the individual.
 
where won't they work? I believe the US has a couple that are going fine for those involved with them. Heck some states are getting bonuses for signing up more people

I have less of an issue with paying taxes than most of you - but when backing social programs - I think the only way you can get people to swallow it is when all (or at least most people) are paying taxes. This is not the case in beautifully broken taxation system - so everyone feels like they are personally paying for someone else - which definitely isn't the case...but more so than in other countries.
 
I understand there will always be a segment that does not pay in. That's going to happen anywhere but I don't think a 50/50 split on payers/non-payers can work in any system. Add in the fact that this becomes a generational thing and it looks worse.
 
That's what I mean. It works, more or less, in Canada - because a much larger percentage pay into it. There's much less paranoia of govt stealing...which im sure doesn't mean they neglect to hold govt accountable. There's just less fear of govt stealing.
 
That's what I mean. It works, more or less, in Canada - because a much larger percentage pay into it. There's much less paranoia of govt stealing...which im sure doesn't mean they neglect to hold govt accountable. There's just less fear of govt stealing.

our gov't also doesn't have the best reputation as money managers
 
That's what I mean. It works, more or less, in Canada - because a much larger percentage pay into it. There's much less paranoia of govt stealing...which im sure doesn't mean they neglect to hold govt accountable. There's just less fear of govt stealing.

Canada also has 1/10th the population of the US.
 
With all due respect, Weezy, I don't think you
understand the issue very well.

73074068.jpg
 
No, but I'm for military, public infrastructure, high risk research, and providing healthcare to those who cannot afford it. There's a big deficit.

Hell, my initial post said the only class warfare I'm for is the estate tax. And the pitchfork mob has taken it to mean I want to take all your money and give it away. Because a tax increase is always all or nothing.

Pretty much yeah. They always start a tax increase as pertaining to some remote small slice of America.
 
Concerning the OP's original question: The correlation between grades and money is not a good example. I've heard Glenn Beck (you're a Nazi) make this argument before. Grades aren't used to fund our national needs. Money is used for the benefit of our country. That money must come from somewhere. If no one exchanges grades, class will go on.

I am not a punish the rich liberal. But it's the famous Pareto 80/20 rule in effect. Pareto's Principle can be applied to almost every situation one can imagine, even taxation. We can't stop it from happening, it's human natureand it will continue for eternity.

I agree with the OP's idea, but this is a bad metaphor.
 

VN Store



Back
Top