Class warfare!! let's lynch the 1%!!!

WCS wrote:
Someone who makes $67,000/year USD is a 1 percenter.

The issue is that people blame their bad life on someone else and they take it out on those that make more money than them because they are easy targets.

What kind of horse shit is this?  ~7 billion people in the world and if you make 67k you are one of 7 million people in the world that make that kind of money?

Id think that if you took the populations of California and Texas (~60 million), you could find 7 million people in those states alone that make 67k.

SpartanStu wrote:

What kind of horse shit is this?  ~7 billion people in the world and if you make 67k you are one of 7 million people in the world that make that kind of money?

Id think that if you took the populations of California and Texas (~60 million), you could find 7 million people in those states alone that make 67k.

1000/100=1

Yeah, and if you made $67,000 in let's say Gaylord, Michigan your household would live pretty comfortably. But if you lived in DC, NYC, SF, etc. your household wouldn't live that comfortably at all on $67k.

Comparing salaries among different regions is not a great way to compare quality of life among various regions.

Dolph Ziggler wrote:

1000/100=1

I better get some glasses...I couldnt count the correct amount of zeros off the calculator. (face palm)

Giant Moose wrote:Yeah, and if you made $67,000 in let's say Gaylord, Michigan your household would live pretty comfortably. But if you lived in DC, NYC, SF, etc. your household wouldn't live that comfortably at all on $67k.

Comparing salaries among different regions is not a great way to compare quality of life among various regions.

Comparing salaries from anywhere is dumb. Annual income can be a small portion of a wealthy individual's total net worth.

Salaries are for working fools.

Punisher98 wrote:

Wow a silver spoon? Lol hysterical.

Sorry chief but my parents were both public school teachers so I was very much middle class. I worked full time throughout high school and college to afford anything extra I wanted.

It seems after reading the rest of your post though that sweeping generalizations are more your style so I am probably wasting my breath here.

Not sweeping generalizations, sweeping statistically accurate facts.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/record-20-households-food-stamps-2013

The amount of tax dollars spent on food for supposedly "poor" people has tripled in the last 10 years. I suppose you think this is a good thing?

tTito wrote:

Not sweeping generalizations, sweeping statistically accurate facts.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/record-20-households-food-stamps-2013

The amount of tax dollars spent on food for supposedly "poor" people has tripled in the last 10 years. I suppose you think this is a good thing?

I liked the part of the article about how they all got knocked up for the purpose of food stamps.

Let's not forget all the frauds who are sucking Social Security dry:

http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/

Looks like the medicare recipients have both the food and the disability reciepients beat. Almost 50 million people, let's find out how much that costs.

http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/

Dang, only 450 Billion per year. What is that $9,000 per year each of the 50 million receiving it? And it's being expanded under ObamaCare?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/11/11/obamacare-health-care-obama-medicaid-avik-roy-column/3489067/

My response to all this class hate:

"I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear." -MLK

TrueGreenSpartan wrote:My response to all this class hate:

"I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear."  -MLK

It's redistribution of wealth. If you want to call it hate, then it's Liberal politicians hating the working people in this Country and converting two centuries of capitalism into a socialistic republic. The wealthy are protected and it's the middle class that loses.

tTito wrote:

It's redistribution of wealth. If you want to call it hate, then it's Liberal politicians hating the working people in this Country and converting two centuries of capitalism into a socialistic republic. The wealthy are protected and it's the middle class that loses.

Historically, we have some of the lowest taxes on the rich since the great depression.  America has NEVER been 'true' Capitalism.  Don't be that naive.

EDIT: Also, with history in mind, the greatest times of economic prosperity for the country as a whole are directly related to when Taxes on the richest were the highest just for clarity's sake. I'm not arguing for more or less taxes but have the facts correct before you go spreading more hate.

TrueGreenSpartan wrote:

Historically, we have some of the lowest taxes on the rich since the great depression.  America has NEVER been 'true' Capitalism.  Don't be that naive.  

Yeah, well, I said the wealthy are protected and I didn't say we have true capitalistic society. Nice reading comprehension.

Edit: Stop spreading illiteracy

tTito wrote: I didn't say we have true capitalistic society. Nice reading comprehension.

tTito wrote:converting two centuries of capitalism into a socialistic republic

Wait what?  

You are one angry man tTito you need a hug man 

TrueGreenSpartan wrote:

Historically, we have some of the lowest taxes on the rich since the great depression.  America has NEVER been 'true' Capitalism.  Don't be that naive.

EDIT: Also, with history in mind, the greatest times of economic prosperity for the country as a whole are directly related to when Taxes on the richest were the highest just for clarity's sake. I'm not arguing for more or less taxes but have the facts correct before you go spreading more hate.

Yeah well this is why this thread is scary. In the new world order, the UN will be coming after our income at a high percentage.

Sure we can look at the U.S. in a vacuum, but that isn't the goal of the globalist socialists. One day we could all wake up and not have a pot to pee in.

LoneWolfSparty wrote:

Yeah well this is why this thread is scary. In the new world order, the UN will be coming after our income at a high percentage.

Sure we can look at the U.S. in a vacuum, but that isn't the goal of the globalist socialists. One day we could all wake up and not have a pot to pee in.

 

EDIT: where's the tincap smiley when needed?

LoneWolfSparty wrote:

Yeah well this is why this thread is scary. In the new world order, the UN will be coming after our income at a high percentage.

Sure we can look at the U.S. in a vacuum, but that isn't the goal of the globalist socialists. One day we could all wake up and not have a pot to pee in.

The scary part is that you believe this.

http://www.cato.org/blog/another-un-push-global-taxation

Go ahead and ignore it. But when it happens you'll be considered rich!

TrueGreenSpartan wrote:




Wait what?  

You are one angry man tTito you need a hug man 

Oh, so we already have a socialistic government. Got it. Congratulations on your success.

Anyone who can't see what is happening is blind.

We already know that we are 17 trillion in debt. It is impossible to climb out of it. Therefore it will only grow larger. At what point does the bottom fall out? 50 trillion? 100 trillion?

Edit: I wish I could take a pie in the sky attitude about the whole thing, but I have children.

I work in city planning. We have a extreme right wing wako group here that often comes to us with concerns about UN agenda 21.

tTito, you should read up on it, I'm sure you'd agree with them that it's the beginning of the end. :tinfoulcapsmiley:

TrueGreenSpartan wrote:I work in city planning.  We have a extreme right wing wako group here that often comes to us with concerns about UN agenda 21.  

tTito, you should read up on it, I'm sure you'd agree with them that it's the beginning of the end. :tinfoulcapsmiley:

I'm not as concerned about the UN as the debt.

tTito wrote:

Oh, so we already have a socialistic government. Got it. Congratulations on your success.

Anyone who can't see what is happening is blind.

Duh. If the definition you like for socialism is taxing to supply goods for the betterment of all people, we've had a socialist government since the Constitutional Convention of 1787-87.

Social Security is F'd, I don't think there's any getting around that. But why am I supposed to be upset that people are drawing the benefits they paid into? Why am I supposed to be upset about any of this? Unless I can't pay my bills or live comfortably? The unproductive labels like "nutjob" and "wako" originate from this exact level of totally humorless dialog.

tTito wrote:We already know that we are 17 trillion in debt. It is impossible to climb out of it. Therefore it will only grow larger. At what point does the bottom fall out? 50 trillion? 100 trillion?

Edit: I wish I could take a pie in the sky attitude about the whole thing, but I have children.

Now we're on National Debt?  Here's the funny thing about National Debt: 17 trillion sounds scary (and honestly it's a big number) but the only thing backing it up is the good standing of the US because our currency is no longer on the gold standard.

If we defaulted the whole world would economically collapse with us. Because of this, America is basically to big to fail and the countries that hold the largest share of the debt, China, Japan etc. know this.

Worst case scenario, the US simply accepts HUGE inflation, prints the money to pay the debt and starts over. We're still the World Super power.

Dolph Ziggler wrote:Social Security is F'd, I don't think there's any getting around that. But why am I supposed to be upset that people are drawing the benefits they paid into? Why am I supposed to be upset about any of this? Unless I can't pay my bills or live comfortably? The unproductive labels like "nutjob" and "wako" originate from this exact level of totally humorless dialog.

What isn't accounted for in your post is that 1/3 of the people who are collecting are "disabled" and not retired. That number is growing all the time. You are probably young enough that when it all goes away, you will not have paid $500,000 into the system with nothing in return like me.

tTito wrote:

What isn't accounted for in your post is that 1/3 of the people who are collecting are "disabled" and not retired. That number is growing all the time. You are probably young enough that when it all goes away, you will not have paid $500,000 into the system with nothing in return like me.

It doesn't help that the government has offset some of the above National Debt by 'borrowing' from SS  

 

TrueGreenSpartan wrote:

Now we're on National Debt?  Here's the funny thing about National Debt: 17 trillion sounds scary (and honestly it's a big number) but the only thing backing it up is the good standing of the US because our currency is no longer on the gold standard.

If we defaulted the whole world would economically collapse with us.  Because of this, America is basically to big to fail and the countries that hold the largest share of the debt, China, Japan etc. know this.

Worst case scenario, the US simply accepts HUGE inflation, prints the money to pay the debt and starts over.  We're still the World Super power.

We always have been on the National debt ( I can do this too   ). The debt is why I am opposed to expanding entitlements exponentially. We can't afford it. We don't feel it now. Our grandchildren are the ones who are going to feel it. I don't want to accept huge inflation, I don't want the stock market to crash and watch everything I've worked for evaporate right before I'm ready to retire.

tTito wrote:

What isn't accounted for in your post is that 1/3 of the people who are collecting are "disabled" and not retired. That number is growing all the time. You are probably young enough that when it all goes away, you will not have paid $500,000 into the system with nothing in return like me.

20% does not equal 1/3.


[size=32]http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/chartbooks/fast_facts/2011/fast_facts11.html[/size]

tTito wrote:

What isn't accounted for in your post is that 1/3 of the people who are collecting are "disabled" and not retired. That number is growing all the time. You are probably young enough that when it all goes away, you will not have paid $500,000 into the system with nothing in return like me.

So I guess it's same to assume that you won't ever be drawing social security if you have the option right? Give me a break

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
20% does not equal 1/3.


[size=32]http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/chartbooks/fast_facts/2011/fast_facts11.html[/size]

As long as it makes his argument look better, he doesn't seem to mind.

I'm sure an article about impending doom from Brietbart or some other Conservative source is coming next.

Punisher98 wrote:

So I guess it's same to assume that you won't ever be drawing social security if you have the option right? Give me a break

Why can't you guys read what it says and not what you want it to say? I won't be getting anything because it will be gone. If it's there you're GD right I'll take as much as I can. Lord knows I put enough in. I'll have to live to 200 to get back what I put in already.

tTito wrote:

Why can't you guys read what it says and not what you want it to say? I won't be getting anything because it will be gone. If it's there you're GD right I'll take as much as I can. Lord knows I put enough in. I'll have to live to 200 to get back what I put in already.

Is that anything like you reading that I had a little help from my folks for school and turning that into me having a "silver spoon in my mouth?"

tTito wrote:

Why can't you guys read what it says and not what you want it to say? I won't be getting anything because it will be gone. If it's there you're GD right I'll take as much as I can. Lord knows I put enough in. I'll have to live to 200 to get back what I put in already.

there needs to be a new paradigm. unemployment (and employment) will continue to get worse for the vast majority as more production moves away. there are lots of opportunities out there, if you can find a market. far too many people can't afford anything beyond necessities, and it's killing us. keeping wages low to the point the working poor need food stamps to make ends meet will be the death of this country, not the deficit.

as for comparing US citizens to third-world countries, yes we are relatively rich, in that even most of the US poor have inside plumbing and electricity, and a real house to live in versus a tin-roof shack. i don't think the answer is to make the poor here live like poor indians or africans. there's a reason they have no hope and a worthless economy, without a strong middle-class they have no chance.

and for the record bee, i haven't heard anyone say we should lynch the 1%.

Turf1 wrote:

there needs to be a new paradigm. unemployment (and employment) will continue to get worse for the vast majority as more production moves away. there are lots of opportunities out there, if you can find a market. far too many people can't afford anything beyond necessities, and it's killing us. keeping wages low to the point the working poor need food stamps to make ends meet will be the death of this country, not the deficit.

as for comparing US citizens to third-world countries, yes we are relatively rich, in that even most of the US poor have inside plumbing and electricity, and a real house to live in versus a tin-roof shack. i don't think the answer is to make the poor here live like poor indians or africans. there's a reason they have no hope and a worthless economy, without a strong middle-class they have no chance.

and for the record bee, i haven't heard anyone say we should lynch the 1%.

I agree with your thoughts on unemployment. This should have been fixed by now. Obama is touting his economic policies as trickle up, but those types of policies don't do anything but hurt the upper middle class and wealthy...and don't do anything to support the poor. He believes that by hurting the well to do, that somehow those not fortunate will magically do better. Instead, his policies make the poor more dependent on government aid.

The economic policies that are proven to work to support the poor are the policies that uplift everyone. By increasing production across the country throughout every tax bracket, everyone benefits, especially the poor.

Unfortunately, people rather see people with higher income levels suffer, than see the poor have opportunities for better lives.

tTito wrote:

Me elite? You're the one who professes to have been born with a silver spoon in his mouth. I work my ass off for everythng I have, which is still isn't by any means elite. There are so many women in this Country cranking out babies for the sole purpose of receiving state assistance, and so many dudes who knock them up and then refuse to work or support them, it's pathetic. You may admire that culture, but I believe it's driving this Country into the ground.

What's your solution to poverty? Kill them? Idiot

Tanfan! wrote:


What's your solution to poverty? Kill them?  Idiot

No no no. Just buy enough guns so you can protect yourself from them when they inevitably have to resort to a life of crime just to stay alive.

Duh.

Makes sense. OP is a youngin raised on shit like Two and a Half Men.

Tanfan! wrote:


What's your solution to poverty? Kill them?  Idiot