I just added that dickhead to my ignore list and he wasnt even talking to me. reading this thread reminds me why i usually stay away from P&N.
Aaaaaaand welcome to the ignore list, Kinev. I'm not even going to dignify that pile of false analogies, non-sequiturs, and outright deception (e.g., the conservatives give more absolute dollars, but it's mostly to their own churches, and that study doesn't track the actual benefit to the needy...) with the point by point deconstruction it's begging for. This is so amateur it feels like I wasted my time even replying...
Math? I was talking about the tax system. You're going off the deep end by ranting about raping the wealthy by redistributing their entire net worth.As a demonstration, let's do a little math from your own figures. From Table 1 in your own link, we'll allow that 1% to keep the same 2.3mil as the top 20%, which gives us 16500k to play with. With that money, lets just give it to the bottom 40%. That'll make it 413k per, which is a bit much, so instead let's make the bottom 40% as wealthy as the 40-60percentile, or 80k apiece *40, which rather substantially improves their fiscal situation and leaves us with 13340k. With that, let's make the 40-60percentile as rich as the 60-80, 68k to 236k, again a vast improvement, leaving ~10000k or 10million on the table. Let's just give that to the 60-80percentile, which is about 500k apiece, no chump change. Just look at how much every else's situation improves by heavily taxing the 1% with zero change to the 20%.
But then again, this is simple math, which you'll predictable become too dumb to understand all of a sudden. It also goes without saying that Svnla isn't even pretending to be far too dumb to understand any of that post, but will no doubt keep mouthing off about it regardless.
White knighting? Seriously? I'm saying that simply putting a large tax on the wealthy won't fix our problems. That's well known.And here you are, putting a guilt & fear trip on people who've done decently well, white knighting for the ultra wealthy.
It's also unremarkable that you didn't even read your own link well enough to realize that it confirms what I offered about wealth & income shifting to the tippy top. It's bad enough that what seems like an exaggeration from Bernie Sanders turns out to be the truth-
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-sanders-says-99-percent-new-income-going-to/
White knighting? Seriously? I'm saying that simply putting a large tax on the wealthy won't fix our problems. That's well known.
What a "liberal" attitude you have Jhhnn. 'Take their money but don't touch mine!' All while I am saying that we need to pitch in as well because simply taxing the rich won't work.
Any more questions, folks? Ask yourself who is truly grounded and making a reasonable argument here. Hint: It ain't Jhhnn, and it surely isn't AgentUnhinged.
Tax increases alone aren't enough as well. Washington needs to reign in spending at the same time.
Annual health care spending in the US in 2014 was 3.8 trillion. Your plan is already in the hole based on 2014 spending, let alone what the spending is now.$15.5 Trillion personal income in the United States.
A whooping ~$7 Trillion spent, 57% increase in spending... but the budget would be balanced. Deficits are not solved by gutting government, eliminating safety nets, and crushing the American people. We can provide ALL they need from us to stabilize and secure their financial futures so long as we are willing to invest in it. "Reign in spending" is a blueprint for harming our people, you would not help them.
- 24% Tax to provide ~3.7 Trillion in Basic Income.
- 13% Tax to provide ~2 Trillion in Health Care costs.
- 8% Tax to provide ~1.2 Trillion for the remaining Federal Budget.
Fixing today's problems begins by correcting WHAT we are spending money on, not the spending itself.
In fact, to follow my blue print our spending is necessarily going to increase a lot.
Tax increases need to start at the top and when the top 20% control @ 88% of the wealth in this country (and I'm including the 1% in that figure) it's pretty clear who needs to take the hit. The 1% alone aren't enough.
Tax increases alone aren't enough as well. Washington needs to reign in spending at the same time. If we start paying more taxes and the deficits don't decrease drastically at the same time then there's no point in increasing taxes in the first place.
Erm, OK. Who are you arguing against, Jhhnn? I'm not arguing for tax cuts for the elite. Are you so confused by my responses that your talking points memo has no clue how to respond? Because your response makes no sense whatsoever.Quite the contrary. The point is that more spending is for services & benefits that Americans need & want. That's particularly true for all the people & places the job creators have been dumping for decades,small town America. & former manufacturing centers.
"Your services are no longer required" applies to broad swaths of America. It's not like tax cuts for the financial elite will alleviate those issues.
Speaking of "conservative" guys and "assistance"...
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...r-cuts-to-housing-aid-except-for-subsidy-that
"President Trump's budget proposal would cut funding for housing aid except for a federal subsidy paid to private landlords, The Washington Post reported Tuesday.
Trump stands to benefit personally from such a subsidy. He owns a 4 percent stake in Starrett City, the largest subsidized housing project in the country. Between January 2016 and April 2017, Trump made at least $5 million from the complex, according to the Post."
Clearly the liberals are at fault here.
Math? I was talking about the tax system. You're going off the deep end by ranting about raping the wealthy by redistributing their entire net worth.
You're an absolute moron that has no grounding in reality. But that's about what I expect of douches like you..
Tax increases need to start at the top and when the top 20% control @ 88% of the wealth in this country (and I'm including the 1% in that figure) it's pretty clear who needs to take the hit. The 1% alone aren't enough.
Tax increases alone aren't enough as well. Washington needs to reign in spending at the same time. If we start paying more taxes and the deficits don't decrease drastically at the same time then there's no point in increasing taxes in the first place.
lol. Your "math" involves calculations of stupidity that lack any sort of reality whatsoever. But, please, do continue on that tack. Prove to P&N that you're an utter and complete moron with no sense whatsoever of reality. I already know it, but it doesn't hurt that you reinforce it.The tax system also involves math, which was used to show why you were wrong. It's hardly my fault low iq/edu degenerates love to play too dumb to even understand arithmetic when it's not in their self-interest:
lol. Your "math" involves calculations of stupidity that lack any sort of reality whatsoever. But, please, do continue on that tack. Prove to P&N that you're an utter and complete moron with no sense whatsoever of reality. I already know it, but it doesn't hurt that you reinforce it.
You seem to be in a competition with Svnla as to who can be the most trashy & worthless degenerate. I think he has the lead but work on those cutesy LOL's in between the mouthing off and you'll get there.
Funny how you could not provide any evidence or fact to dispute your opponent but pull the same bullshit line over and over again. Me worthless? Yet I was able to shame and humiliate you in public multiple times over and over again. So you are less than worthless. Troll harder bitch.
I am sure your comeback line will be the same old crap of grouping me with other posters.
Hey, still nothing about your accusations of other posters? Still nothing, still a nothing bitch.
Meh, Sven there isn't even worth replying to. I don't know why, but I hardly ever use the ignore function, and when I do it's always on the weaker ones like him. The guy must have a tiny penis; just check out that illiterate tryhard sig block of his!
Ah, small penis insult. How original and refreshing.
How is my engrish? Bite me.
How is my sig? Suck on it. Can't do a thing about my sig, too bad. Whine more, bitches. That's all you are capable of.
Erm, OK. Who are you arguing against, Jhhnn? I'm not arguing for tax cuts for the elite. Are you so confused by my responses that your talking points memo has no clue how to respond? Because your response makes no sense whatsoever.
I just added that dickhead to my ignore list and he wasnt even talking to me. reading this thread reminds me why i usually stay away from P&N.
You just triggered him, don't take it personally.What exactly was so offensive? [honest question]