Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (168501)	8/9/2011 12:07:09 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 544141

Auction them off and eat them. Use fat ones like Gingrich and Christy as liposuction biodiesel reserves, first. Neighbor kid just got $2600 for a steer at the fair. Surely we can raise more than that for one of the Kochs.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (168501)	8/9/2011 12:17:46 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 544141

I got to speak to Da Rat, if he hadn't responded to you I wouldn't have looked at the BS assertion you made and wouldn't be breaking my personal anti-troll pledge. In addition, wealth is unevenly distributed, with the wealthiest 25% of US households owning 87% [2] of the wealth in the United States, which was $54.2 trillion in 2009 en.wikipedia.org

To: Brumar89 who wrote (168501)	8/9/2011 12:25:04 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 544141

Let me ask you .... if you could tax away all the wealth of all the 'rich' people, however you define them .... what would do next yr? Asking that question is like asking, "If you could wave a wand and make members of the opposition party disappear, what would you do?" Neither thing is going to happen. The question is absurd. The Civil War was begun because people in the South assumed that Lincoln was going to end slavery. He never said that he would do that in any speech before or after he was elected. In fact, he never said it in any election campaign that he was involved in, including the one immediately before 1860, in 1858 against Douglass for the Senate. It was Douglass's followers who claimed that he said it or intended it, not Lincoln. Ever. In fact, Lincoln explicitly denied the intention to end slavery. Nevertheless, Southerners assumed that he would do so, and acted on their assumptions rather than the facts. They ended up destroying slavery themselves, and destroying the South for several generations. This is what acting on delusions can do. You are doing the same thing with taxes then that Southerners did with slavery then. You are misrepresenting anyone's intention. Raising tax rates back to where they were in the Clinton administration is far, far from "taxing away all the wealth of all the 'rich' people," yet you and others continue to describe it as such. Wealthy people did very well under the Clinton administration. More wealthy people did well then than under the Bush administration, I would wager, given the way the Bush Boomlet dissolved. And more people in general did well.