UI benefits are bad because they aren't "paid for". Tax cuts for the rich are good even though they aren't "paid for".

[Ban Hammer 13,735]

Middle America is poor, but for reasons discussed in the other thread now closed, they are not aware of it. I understand the wealthy wanting to pay no taxes and #### the country for their own gain. What I don't get is the little guys cough cough that are relatively poor versus their equivalents in Canada, Australia, Europe etc sticking up for them. Once again had these people traveled and actually seen their equivalents rather than listen to Rush, they'd wake up.

Don't know about you but if I was a laborer, I'd rather earn the $5k to $10k a month they earn in AUS than the $2K they get here.

middle america as in the central part of the usa? just like every other part of the usa, we have poor, we have middle class, and we have the well to do.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

By language you mean personal attacks?

No. The language of the topic under discussion, rather than just regurgitating talking points.

[Heracles 417]

middle america as in the central part of the usa? just like every other part of the usa, we have poor, we have middle class, and we have the well to do.

Middle class is sinking like the titanic and going the way of the dodo. In reality, the US is transforming into a 2nd/3rd world country; where the few rich hold the majority of the wealth and the rest are poor. You seem to be cheering this on. Unless you have $50 million to your name and up, I wouldn't be cheering anything. Heck, you guys already idolize sport and entertainers like the second world.

Central America has been hit hardest by this. I have seen various states first-hand and are shocked at conditions Americans live in. Not something you see in AUS period.

This is what it comes down to, would you prefer for the US to return to the heydays [without the segregation] of the 50's and 60's, when the wealthy paid 90% in tax and the highest percentage of Americans were middle class and well off? Or would you prefer to continue on the course of 5% owning the majority of the wealth, with the rest living in trailers or ghettos. Ghettos for the minorities, trailers for the Caucasians.

[^_^ 5,021]

Middle class is sinking like the titanic and going the way of the dodo. In reality, the US is transforming into a 2nd/3rd world country; where the few rich hold the majority of the wealth and the rest are poor.

Which would simply be a reversion to mean. That is how America has been for much of its history.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

No. The language of the topic under discussion, rather than just regurgitating talking points.

Right, so then when you feel someone is not bringing something new to the argument its okay to attack them personally?

Edited July 14, 2010 by Sousuke

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Right, so then when feel someone is not bringing something new to the argument its okay to attack them personally?

You are missing a pronoun, and being presumptuous.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

You are missing a pronoun, and being presumptuous.

That's what the edit button is for.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

That's what the edit button is for.

You are still presuming the attack was personal.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Wealth - anything that has utility and is capable of being exchanged or appropriated.

Redistribute - reallocate, distribute anew.

In your example someone provides wealth to a financial institution with the promise of interest. The institution distributes the wealth to others through loans with interest payments attached.

By definition every economy in the world requires the passing of wealth between hands. I believe that is what El Buscador is getting at.

It's funny that Bill would accuse me of regurgitating talking points when he's the one who brought up 'wealth redistribution.' I doubt Bill actually learned anything remotely what he's arguing in college, but rather picked it up from Right Wing media sources and then has used such talking points as a substitute for understanding the basic principles of economics. And FWIW, my Free Enterprise class in High School was taught by a Milton Friedman disciple. In fact, we were 'indoctrinated' with propaganda films of Miltion Friedman telling us the utopian promises of the free market.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

It's funny that Bill would accuse me of regurgitating talking points when he's the one who brought up 'wealth redistribution.' I doubt Bill actually learned anything remotely what he's arguing in college, but rather picked it up from Right Wing media sources and then has used such talking points as a substitute for understanding the basic principles of economics. And FWIW, my Free Enterprise class in High School was taught by a Milton Friedman disciple. In fact, we were 'indoctrinated' with propaganda films of Miltion Friedman telling us the utopian promises of the free market.

The world would be better with less disciples, and more critical thinkers.

[SMR 368]

Wealth - anything that has utility and is capable of being exchanged or appropriated.

Redistribute - reallocate, distribute anew.

In your example someone provides wealth to a financial institution with the promise of interest. The institution distributes the wealth to others through loans with interest payments attached.

By definition every economy in the world requires the passing of wealth between hands. I believe that is what El Buscador is getting at.

Define wealth how you want. My point is that without a business to work at, the worker has nothing. His labor is an unaccessible potential. Naturally, he can stay home and work to fulfill his needs without the business and no one is stopping him. He can quit his job at any time if he thinks he can do better on his own.

The government is different in two critical ways. One: the resources it takes from people have a high liquidity and are something that people could easily use themselves without government intervention. Two: you aren't free to try to go it alone. The government will hunt you down and lock you up.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

from Bill's favorite site, Wikipedia:

In the United States at the end of 2001, 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth and the top 1% owned 38%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth.^[14]

According to this 2006 study by the Federal Reserve System, from 1989 to 2004, the distribution in the United States had been changing with indications there was a greater concentration of wealth held by the top 10% and top 1% of the population, at the expense of the bottom 50% of the population.[1]

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The world would be better with less disciples, and more critical thinkers.

It's ironic to hang on to such a Right Wing talking point as 'redistribution of wealth' and still aspire to the above statement.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Define wealth how you want. My point is that without a business to work at, the worker has nothing. His labor is an unaccessible potential. Naturally, he can stay home and work to fulfill his needs without the business and no one is stopping him. He can quit his job at any time if he thinks he can do better on his own.

The government is different in two critical ways. One: the resources it takes from people have a high liquidity and are something that people could easily use themselves without government intervention. Two: you aren't free to try to go it alone. The government will hunt you down and lock you up.

Without a government there is no functioning economy.

[Nikita2Charles 32]

I agree with you, but Republican fanatics will start to call you a Socialist. Every year we are producing less and less, we are outsourcing more and more, so with simple basic economic, How can you grow and generate revenues and taxes when corporations are moving production overseas and at time their headquater to avoid paying their fare share of taxes.

I guess as long as you are already Rich, more power to yah, forget about the people, in some places like 3rd world countries you get revolution when people finally get tired of it, so i guess we have to haven't reach the point of a 3rd world nation to reach that breaking point, until then, Rack up as much $$$$$$$$$ you can from squeezing the middle class.

Middle class is sinking like the titanic and going the way of the dodo. In reality, the US is transforming into a 2nd/3rd world country; where the few rich hold the majority of the wealth and the rest are poor. You seem to be cheering this on. Unless you have $50 million to your name and up, I wouldn't be cheering anything. Heck, you guys already idolize sport and entertainers like the second world.

Central America has been hit hardest by this. I have seen various states first-hand and are shocked at conditions Americans live in. Not something you see in AUS period.

This is what it comes down to, would you prefer for the US to return to the heydays [without the segregation] of the 50's and 60's, when the wealthy paid 90% in tax and the highest percentage of Americans were middle class and well off? Or would you prefer to continue on the course of 5% owning the majority of the wealth, with the rest living in trailers or ghettos. Ghettos for the minorities, trailers for the Caucasians.