American Millionaires: 1,400 Paid No U.S. Income Taxes In 2009

[SoSpectacular]

I've been hearing lots more stories lately of people with college degrees STILL not being able to find work.

 

And that's coming from my dad's co-workers at his workplace, whose kids are out there trying to make it big

 

But yeah, if you're going for your degree, good luck, but don't expect being able to squeeze your way in that easily unless you have connections

[Urbanfortitude]

I've been hearing lots more stories lately of people with college degrees STILL not being able to find work.

 

And that's coming from my dad's co-workers at his workplace, whose kids are out there trying to make it big

 

But yeah, if you're going for your degree, good luck, but don't expect being able to squeeze your way in that easily unless you have connections

 

The degree don't mean much of anything these days. It might get you bumped up the list over other people but it certainly doesn't make too much difference. You're absolutely right its connections as well as experience that gets the job. I can't tell you how many times as tech I've worked with guys who supposedly have these certifications, or a degree and don't seem to know how to do an Ipconfig.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

It's natural inequality until you've got CEOs making $54 million a year and brothers on the street who struggle to get a job as a busboy making $15k.

 

That's not natural, and that's not right. It's not something that I intend to "accept" either.

 

Really??? What's not natural about it??? You just admitted right there that it's not "natural" to you because of the discrepancy in pay. Well life isn't fair and that's the way it is. That's the problem. Folks want to dictate to others what they should and shouldn't be able to earn in a capitalist society nonetheless. Those hardworking busboys may work hard, but they don't know a thing about business or anything else for that matter. They just do as they're told and can barely do that, so why should they be paid more for incompetence? Hard work huh??

 

We have folks who come to clean our windows in my office sent by the building and they're so incompetent that they can't even clean windows without breaking them, not once, but twice. I mean really, why should hard working people with the education level of a 2nd grader be earning big bucks just because a CEO, who has the knowledge and know-how to run a company successfully, makes 100 times more than them?? I see no reason to pay that window washer more just because he's working hard when he's costing his company money breaking windows.

 

Pity doesn't earn you anything in this world and neither does hard work alone. You need hard work, smarts, skills and a little luck to go anywhere and some folks have more of that than others and there is nothing that can change that.

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[checkmatechamp13]

Really??? What's not natural about it??? You just admitted right there that it's not "natural" to you because of the discrepancy in pay. Well life isn't fair and that's the way it is. That's the problem. Folks want to dictate to others what they should and shouldn't be able to earn in a capitalist society nonetheless. Those hardworking busboys may work hard, but they don't know a thing about business or anything else for that matter. They just do as they're told and can barely do that, so why should they be paid more for incompetence? Hard work huh??

 

We have folks who come to clean our windows in my office sent by the building and they're so incompetent that they can't even clean windows without breaking them, not once, but twice. I mean really, why should hard working people with the education level of a 2nd grader be earning big bucks just because a CEO, who has the knowledge and know-how to run a company successfully, makes 100 times more than them?? I see no reason to pay that window washer more just because he's working hard when he's costing his company money breaking windows.

 

Pity doesn't earn you anything in this world and neither does hard work alone. You need hard work, smarts, skills and a little luck to go anywhere and some folks have more of that than others and there is nothing that can change that.

 

So then if you should accept that life isn't fair, a billionaire should accept that he has to pay more taxes to support services he won't be benefitting from.

 

And that means "working professionals" should be content with their high tax rates simply because "life isn't fair".

[SubwayGuy]

so would the clowns who keep defending the rich argue that monarchies are "natural" and it's right for kings to keep all the money in the kingdom and give every peasant in their kingdom a piece of bread and the equivalent of one cent a day? I mean "inequalities exist" right? Even though all men and women who are American citizens are supposed to be EQUAL under the law...hey I think I remember reading something like that on the Supreme Court one time.

 

I mean after all, if the poor people don't like it they should do something about it...like get an education in being a king so that they can dictate how much money they pay themselves, right? Even though they can't afford an education. Even though the cost of schooling goes up every year. Even though there can only be one king. Hey the poor people should all kill each other trying to be the king. Meanwhile the real king, all he has to do is be born to the right parents. But such inequalities exist in society, you know.

 

Hey I know something the poor people could do about it. They could kill the rich, and take everything from them.. Not like that hasn't happened before.

 

When you allow the seeds of discontent to grow and spread and prosper you create the grounds for very bloody, very messy revolutions.

 

Or do you REALLY think misguidedly that all the countries in Africa and the Middle East trying to overthrow their oppressors are really doing so over religious ideology???

 

IT IS NOT GOOD ECONOMICS to allow one small elitist group of people to dominate policy and profit at everyone's expense. A healthy, well compensated middle class is the key to a successful economy. That's not "jealousy" as you call it. I think rich people are stupid and shallow, and unoriginal. With all their money, all they ever do is buy cars, yachts, jets, houses, vacations, golf club memberships, and fancy interior decor. I could not be LESS jealous of them.

 

However I don't want to see this country die out and become second fiddle to f*cking China that shit hole of a commie country that it is (which by the way is most "capitalist" of all by your definitions since there the rich keep everything and EVERYONE else is poor), so I'd like to see smart tax policy that actually makes the rich pay a price since they have gotten off BLAMELESS so far for EVERYTHING that has gone wrong. But yet "welfare" is the reason this country is broke right? keep drinking that kool aid...

[SubwayGuy]

Really??? What's not natural about it??? You just admitted right there that it's not "natural" to you because of the discrepancy in pay. Well life isn't fair and that's the way it is. That's the problem. Folks want to dictate to others what they should and shouldn't be able to earn in a capitalist society nonetheless. Those hardworking busboys may work hard, but they don't know a thing about business or anything else for that matter. They just do as they're told and can barely do that, so why should they be paid more for incompetence? Hard work huh??

 

If anything, this recession should have shown you that the a$$ holes sitting in ivory towers making the big money corporate decisions DON'T know what the f*ck they're doing.

 

"Why should they be paid more for incompetence?"

 

You mean like how investment banks and hedge funds, in spring 2009, when the stock market dropped by nearly 50% from the previous year, were taking home record pay and bonuses???

 

You have more double standards than anyone else I've ever seen on here. Seems you just want the rich to be happy and content and f*ck everyone else, even though you ARE everyone else...you're just too dumb to realize it. Keep dreaming that you'll get rich buddy. It will cost you far more in time, years, and happiness than you'll ever think. I used to think I could aim for that too, and then reality sets in and I chose to pursue a life that makes me happy instead, instead of just chasing after money and profits. It's a small f*cking club, and we're not in it. If you think a six figure salary makes you one of the "rich" it doesn't.

 

The rich don't care what you think. If Rupert Murdoch or Mike Bloomberg or Lloyd Blankfein read your posts, they would laugh at your stupidity...laugh all the way to the bank.

[R32 3348]

Really??? What's not natural about it??? You just admitted right there that it's not "natural" to you because of the discrepancy in pay. Well life isn't fair and that's the way it is. That's the problem. Folks want to dictate to others what they should and shouldn't be able to earn in a capitalist society nonetheless. Those hardworking busboys may work hard, but they don't know a thing about business or anything else for that matter. They just do as they're told and can barely do that, so why should they be paid more for incompetence? Hard work huh??

 

We have folks who come to clean our windows in my office sent by the building and they're so incompetent that they can't even clean windows without breaking them, not once, but twice. I mean really, why should hard working people with the education level of a 2nd grader be earning big bucks just because a CEO, who has the knowledge and know-how to run a company successfully, makes 100 times more than them?? I see no reason to pay that window washer more just because he's working hard when he's costing his company money breaking windows.

 

Pity doesn't earn you anything in this world and neither does hard work alone. You need hard work, smarts, skills and a little luck to go anywhere and some folks have more of that than others and there is nothing that can change that.

 

The issue here is strictly with taxes. If I work my ass off I should pay my fair share; an equal share of my total income as someone who's much richer than I am. There's a difference between equality and fairness; you can't just brush off unequal tax codes that allow some rich people to get around paying taxes with "life isn't fair". You don't see people looking back to the days of racial inequality, where people were on different societal levels by law, and just dismissing it as "oh well, life isn't fair".

 

If you're talking strictly about merit, then sure, to some extent what you say is true. If someone worked hard their entire life and stayed in school and got that MBA then they deserve to be CEO of a big company, while that high school dropout can't get a job other than cleaning tables at some restaurant. But that's hardly always the case. In an age where a BA/BS is going to be the new High School Diploma by the time I graduate from college, a fancy degree really doesn't even mean that much anymore now that everyone's starting to get one. Where you get in life is really based more on what circumstances you're born into and what opportunities you're given as you grow up. Sure there are busboys who don't give a damn about their job but there are also those busboys with bachelor's degrees who can't get a job because they don't have any experience and no other employer is willing to give them that kind of experience. So while we do agree on that point I'm just saying that you do still need some level of equality (which the current tax structure, for example, doesn't provide) to accurately see how far merit/luck/hard work will get you in this society.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

If anything, this recession should have shown you that the a$$ holes sitting in ivory towers making the big money corporate decisions DON'T know what the f*ck they're doing.

 

"Why should they be paid more for incompetence?"

 

You mean like how investment banks and hedge funds, in spring 2009, when the stock market dropped by nearly 50% from the previous year, were taking home record pay and bonuses???

 

You have more double standards than anyone else I've ever seen on here. Seems you just want the rich to be happy and content and f*ck everyone else, even though you ARE everyone else...you're just too dumb to realize it. Keep dreaming that you'll get rich buddy. It will cost you far more in time, years, and happiness than you'll ever think. I used to think I could aim for that too, and then reality sets in and I chose to pursue a life that makes me happy instead, instead of just chasing after money and profits. It's a small f*cking club, and we're not in it. If you think a six figure salary makes you one of the "rich" it doesn't.

 

The rich don't care what you think. If Rupert Murdoch or Mike Bloomberg or Lloyd Blankfein read your posts, they would laugh at your stupidity...laugh all the way to the bank.

 

How many times do I have to say that I believe in LOW TAXES FOR ALL? The poor folks pay next to nothing in taxes, so they're irrelevant. ALL includes the rich so naturally I would argue against taxes being raised on them as well, just like I've said REPEATEDLY that I do NOT support raising taxes on the middle class, so I don't know what double standard you're talking about.

 

The double standard I see is you and MHV9218 in particular wanting to get "revenge" on the rich because they're earning a substantial amount more than others instead of being satisfied with what you have. I am not envious of the rich, nor do I feel the need to try to put myself on their level because I am not them, BUT the difference between you and I is that I don't look for revenge because they earn more than me or get away with paying less taxes. ANY working professional (middle class or rich) who can get away with giving less of their money to the government I applaud, because the system is a fraud and our so called tax dollars are wasted by the very same people you want to give all away to.

 

So to recap: you think busboys are dumb servants, you think window cleaners are incompetent and unintelligent, and you think that Lloyd Bankfein deserves every cent.

 

You have some screwed up morals my man, keep living in your imaginary world now.

 

No, the twisted world you live in has those who earn more being punished for doing so and being made to pay a sh*t load in taxes to make things "even" for those who don't earn as much. I grew up in a middle class family and have busted my @ss for everything that I've received. Have I had a few doors opened for me along the way? I must certainly have, but I would never sit back and say "Oh, I wish I was like so and so". I'm very happy where I am financially and I could a rats' @ss about what others make because that's their money, not mine and they don't owe me or anyone else jack sh*t. I believe in the saying "More money more problems" and just because someone has more money doesn't mean life is so peachy for them. That's the problem with our society.

 

Those who earn less are envious of those who earn more and so they scream and yell that "Oh, those people can afford it, so automatically they should pay more", as if they're some how indebted to those who earn less. Really??? NO. What does what they can afford have to do with it? I can afford certain things also and because I'm a single upper middle class working professional, I'm automatically taxed higher than a family is, which is total BS.

[SubwayGuy]

How many times do I have to say that I believe in LOW TAXES FOR ALL? The poor folks pay next to nothing in taxes, so they're irrelevant. ALL includes the rich so naturally I would argue against taxes being raised on them as well, just like I've said REPEATEDLY that I do NOT support raising taxes on the middle class, so I don't know what double standard you're talking about.

 

The double standard I see is you and MHV9218 in particular wanting to get "revenge" on the rich because they're earning a substantial amount more than others instead of being satisfied with what you have. I am not envious of the rich, nor do I feel the need to try to put myself on their level because I am not them, BUT the difference between you and I is that I don't look for revenge because they earn more than me or get away with paying less taxes. ANY working professional (middle class or rich) who can get away with giving less of their money to the government I applaud, because the system is a fraud and our so called tax dollars are wasted by the very same people you want to give all away to.

 

I've said NOTHING about revenge...yet you continue to make the assinine assumption that if you get rid of all taxes and all government that everything will just be hunky dory.

 

Do you really want to see what happens when there are no cops (paid for with tax dollars)?

 

Do you really want to see what happens with no fire department (paid for with tax dollars)?

 

Do you want to see what happens when all transportation is privatized and run for profit (transit is subsidized with tax dollars)?

 

Or how about when the post office goes belly up, and all mail carriers are privatized and for profit?

 

When food, medication, and other safety sensitive items are no longer subject to inspection?

 

When anyone can get in a car and drive, because there are no licenses, no registrations, and when they get in an accident with you...you're the one out of luck because they are not carrying insurance and no one is requiring them to?

 

You seem to think that all tax dollars go to benefit lazy poor people who don't do anything and that could not be further from the truth.

 

When America is 14 TRILLION dollars (AND GROWING!) in debt, it takes more than cutting spending to run a budgetary surplus (never even mind paying down the debt!) And you want to give tax BREAKS on top of that??? You're out of your skull if you think that's responsible fiscal policy.

 

Where are all the jobs promised by all the tax cuts for the rich the last 35 years??? F*cking China, that's where. It's time to end the great experiment and go back to the way tax policy was in the 50's, because at least history shows that it worked.

 

Digging your heels in because you don't think that's "Fair" to the rich, a group that did not care about what was "fair" to anyone else when they were enriching themselves while the median salary in this nation stayed flat is shortsighted, and it is the kind of thinking that will cause this crisis to get so bad over the next 50 years that there will either be some sort of angry revolution, or will cause our generation to work our asses off until the day we die only to never see the fruits of anything.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I've said NOTHING about revenge...yet you continue to make the assinine assumption that if you get rid of all taxes and all government that everything will just be hunky dory.

 

Do you really want to see what happens when there are no cops (paid for with tax dollars)?

 

Do you really want to see what happens with no fire department (paid for with tax dollars)?

 

Do you want to see what happens when all transportation is privatized and run for profit (transit is subsidized with tax dollars)?

 

Or how about when the post office goes belly up, and all mail carriers are privatized and for profit?

 

When food, medication, and other safety sensitive items are no longer subject to inspection?

 

When anyone can get in a car and drive, because there are no licenses, no registrations, and when they get in an accident with you...you're the one out of luck because they are not carrying insurance and no one is requiring them to?

 

You seem to think that all tax dollars go to benefit lazy poor people who don't do anything and that could not be further from the truth.

 

When America is 14 TRILLION dollars (AND GROWING!) in debt, it takes more than cutting spending to run a budgetary surplus (never even mind paying down the debt!) And you want to give tax BREAKS on top of that??? You're out of your skull if you think that's responsible fiscal policy.

 

Where are all the jobs promised by all the tax cuts for the rich the last 35 years??? F*cking China, that's where. It's time to end the great experiment and go back to the way tax policy was in the 50's, because at least history shows that it worked.

 

Digging your heels in because you don't think that's "Fair" to the rich, a group that did not care about what was "fair" to anyone else when they were enriching themselves while the median salary in this nation stayed flat is shortsighted, and it is the kind of thinking that will cause this crisis to get so bad over the next 50 years that there will either be some sort of angry revolution, or will cause our generation to work our asses off until the day we die only to never see the fruits of anything.

 

Oh yeah? Then what would you call it then??? Punishment?? Your venom just oozes when you speak about the rich. I never said anything about NO TAXES, I said LOW TAXES for the middle class and the rich and if the government used our tax dollars for what it should be for instead of using it for rhetoric and pork we wouldn't be in this mess now. The only thing I do agree with you on is raising the taxes on those who ship out American jobs overseas, especially to China.

[SubwayGuy]

Oh yeah? Then what would you call it then??? Punishment?? Your venom just oozes when you speak about the rich. I never said anything about NO TAXES, I said LOW TAXES for the middle class and the rich and if the government used our tax dollars for what it should be for instead of using it for rhetoric and pork we wouldn't be in this mess now. The only thing I do agree with you on is raising the taxes on those who ship out American jobs overseas, especially to China.

 

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY FOR MORE TAX CUTS WHEN YOU ARE 14 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT????

 

How does allowing the rich to keep more of their money create new or replacement jobs to employ more Americans????

 

The only thing you keep regurgitating is that government is inefficient. Every person on this f*cking planet knows that. But it still doesn't say a damn thing about how you can lower individual taxes and pay for these cuts.

 

And you're not lowering corporate taxes which means companies will CONTINUE to outsource jobs.

 

All companies will do is outsource, raise their prices, and use the proceeds to influence the policy created by our government...which will continue to be inefficient when you allow the rich and corporations to BRIBE them to do what they want!

 

What you don't understand is that money allowed to be kept by the rich is money that is stagnant. It doesn't go anywhere. It gets invested, often overseas. It does not create new jobs or new economic activity. It is the single most wasteful store of economic wealth.

 

Taxing the rich more (but still allowing them to be "rich" and still allowing for SOME - but less - income disparity) is not about revenge. It's about GOOD ECONOMICS and I've said this in every post. The richest of the rich do not SPEND, do not USE, and do not NEED every last dollar they make. They will DEMAND it but it doesn't mean they need it. It sits there. And in sitting there, it does nothing for an economy that has been long overdue for an overhaul.

 

The only reason I bring up the rich having to pay is because YOU keep using the double standard of a busboy claiming he is unfit to make more money but yet when the people who were paid big bucks to prevent a financial crisis were asleep at the switch, and CONTINUED to make big bucks, I don't see you getting upset.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY FOR MORE TAX CUTS WHEN YOU ARE 14 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT????

 

How does allowing the rich to keep more of their money create new or replacement jobs to employ more Americans????

 

The only thing you keep regurgitating is that government is inefficient. Every person on this f*cking planet knows that. But it still doesn't say a damn thing about how you can lower individual taxes and pay for these cuts.

 

And you're not lowering corporate taxes which means companies will CONTINUE to outsource jobs.

 

All companies will do is outsource, raise their prices, and use the proceeds to influence the policy created by our government...which will continue to be inefficient when you allow the rich and corporations to BRIBE them to do what they want!

 

What you don't understand is that money allowed to be kept by the rich is money that is stagnant. It doesn't go anywhere. It gets invested, often overseas. It does not create new jobs or new economic activity. It is the single most wasteful store of economic wealth.

 

Taxing the rich more (but still allowing them to be "rich" and still allowing for SOME - but less - income disparity) is not about revenge. It's about GOOD ECONOMICS and I've said this in every post. The richest of the rich do not SPEND, do not USE, and do not NEED every last dollar they make. They will DEMAND it but it doesn't mean they need it. It sits there. And in sitting there, it does nothing for an economy that has been long overdue for an overhaul.

 

The only reason I bring up the rich having to pay is because YOU keep using the double standard of a busboy claiming he is unfit to make more money but yet when the people who were paid big bucks to prevent a financial crisis were asleep at the switch, and CONTINUED to make big bucks, I don't see you getting upset.

 

Hey listen, I personally would not have bailed out as many companies that the government bailed out. I would've let them fold because their failures were due to their own arrogance and ignorance, as was the case with companies like GM. This nonsense about too big to fail was the problem and taxpayer dollars should not have been spent on these companies.

 

As for lowering taxes, I didn't saw anything about LOWERING taxes. I said I believe in LOW TAXES, but obviously you can't lower them in this environment. However, taxes should NOT be raised on anyone at this point in time, although I would re-do some of the trade agreements to punish those companies who outsource and with higher taxes.

 

Oh and STOP it already with the that doesn't solve the 14 trillion in debt comments. I'm not giving a friggin proposal on everything that needs to be done to get us out of debt. I'm just giving some EXAMPLES of things that could be done to ease the situation. Jesus Christ.

[East New York]

So then if you should accept that life isn't fair, a billionaire should accept that he has to pay more taxes to support services he won't be benefitting from.

 

And that means "working professionals" should be content with their high tax rates simply because "life isn't fair".

 

:tup:

 

Hey listen, I personally would not have bailed out as many companies that the government bailed out. I would've let them fold because their failures were due to their own arrogance and ignorance, as was the case with companies like GM. This nonsense about too big to fail was the problem and taxpayer dollars should not have been spent on these companies.

 

As for lowering taxes, I didn't saw anything about LOWERING taxes. I said I believe in LOW TAXES, but obviously you can't lower them in this environment. However, taxes should NOT be raised on anyone at this point in time, although I would re-do some of the trade agreements to punish those companies who outsource and with higher taxes.

 

Oh and STOP it already with the that doesn't solve the 14 trillion in debt comments. I'm not giving a friggin proposal on everything that needs to be done to get us out of debt. I'm just giving some EXAMPLES of things that could be done to ease the situation. Jesus Christ.

 

Talk about arrogance and ignorance!

 

First of all, the bailouts are loans for the ten millionth time Professor G. Not free taxpayers money! And guess what? Not one company has been late on one yet! The government is making revenue of those bailouts!

 

And, I think you need to further your education on business operations and supply chains. If GM and Chrysler folded, they would have taken nearly 13 dozen companies with them.

 

Alcoa

American Axle

American Steel

 

Etc, etc, etc!

 

You need to go back to history class, and THEN learn a little more about economics, business, business law, supply chains, and few other subjects I can come up with for you.

 

You need two do one of two things.

 

Close your mouth a little more and learn, or go to law school.

 

I tell you one thing. If you EVER become a lawyer, I would not hesitate to hire you.

 

But for right now, I am the judge, and I am banging my gavel!

 

Just stop! The more you talk, the more I want to put all your posts in moderation! Meaning I have to approve them before they are seen by anyone else! But you know I'm not that type.

 

So I ask you nicely. When you loose a case here on the forum, please let it rest. You don't have any facts or data to support 80% of the claims you make on The Forums.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Talk about arrogance and ignorance!

 

First of all, the bailouts are loans for the ten millionth time Professor G. Not free taxpayers money! And guess what? Not one company has been late on one yet! The government is making revenue of those bailouts!

 

And, I think you need to further your education on business operations and supply chains. If GM and Chrysler folded, they would have taken nearly 13 dozen companies with them.

 

Alcoa

American Axle

American Steel

 

Etc, etc, etc! You need to back to history class, and THEN learn a little more about economics, business, business law, supply chains, and few other subjects I can come up with for you.

 

You need two do one of two things.

 

Close your mouth a little more and learn, or go to law school.

 

I tell you one thing. If you EVER become a lawyer, I would not hesitate to hire you.

 

But for right now, I am the judge, and I am banging my gavel!

 

Just stop! The more you talk, the more I want to put all your posts in moderation! Meaning I have to approve them before they are seen by anyone else! But you know I'm not that type.

 

So I ask you nicely. When you loose a case here on the forum, please let it rest. You don't have any facts or data to support 80% of the claims you make on The Forums.

 

I'm aware of that and I'm also aware of the reprecussions that would have occurred, hence why I said that I wouldn't have bailed out as many companies as the gov't bailed out. Clearly some companies had to be bailed out for the reasons you pointed out. As for companies like GM though, they were indeed arrogant. They were losing more and more of the market share to other companies and did nothing to correct the problem until it was basically too late and they had to be bailed out. You can argue about whether or not that is a fact, but that's basically the situation.

[East New York]

I'm aware of that and I'm also aware of the reprecussions that would have occurred, hence why I said that I wouldn't have bailed out as many companies as the gov't bailed out. Clearly some companies had to be bailed out for the reasons you pointed out. As for companies like GM though, they were indeed arrogant. They were losing more and more of the market share to other companies and did nothing to correct the problem until it was basically too late and they had to be bailed out. You can argue about whether or not that is a fact, but that's basically the situation.

 

Arrogant or not, what you are saying is irrelevant. The point is that the bailouts saved millions of jobs across all 50 states! I would not expect you to understand what that means.

 

The overall point of this thread is the exact same principle. The money is an investment into our country and economy. These "lowly" blue collar, and minimum wage earners as you would likely want to put it are what drive our economy. They are the backbone, and always have been.

 

You're like many airline pilots in the good old days. They fly big pretty jets all over the globe, and don't realise their extremely high salary is solely dependant upon the average everyday Joe and Juan Does.

 

If there were no underpaid mechanics and simple cleaners, the plane would not move. Period.

 

Now if you are that pilot, you don't think its fair to take a pay cut to help out the overall operation?

[Roadcruiser1]

Here is the US debt clock. It's important that everyone look at this clock and understand what is going on.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

[R68 Subway Car]

Gotta love left wing logic. So because 1470 ******** did not pay taxes, that means every rich person is like that? Give me a break!

 

Like I have said before, the system should be fixed so that NO ONE, rich or poor, can cheat the system!

[R68 Subway Car]

So we're now going to judge a quarter of a million people based upon the actions of 0.006% of them?

 

just to illistrate my point, lets look at this statement

 

"Muslims are terroists as should be kicked out of the country". That statement is a generilzation. juding and entire group basied on the actions of a few. Are all muslims Bin Ladens? No. Are all rich people Monty Burnses? No.

Exactly. Not everyone in a particular group is a saint and not everyone in a particular group is a villain.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Arrogant or not, what you are saying is irrelevant. The point is that the bailouts saved millions of jobs across all 50 states! I would not expect you to understand what that means.

 

The overall point of this thread is the exact same principle. The money is an investment into our country and economy. These "lowly" blue collar, and minimum wage earners as you would likely want to put it are what drive our economy. They are the backbone, and always have been.

 

You're like many airline pilots in the good old days. They fly big pretty jets all over the globe, and don't realise their extremely high salary is solely dependant upon the average everyday Joe and Juan Does.

 

If there were no underpaid mechanics and simple cleaners, the plane would not move. Period.

 

Now if you are that pilot, you don't think its fair to take a pay cut to help out the overall operation?

 

 

You're giving me conflicting ideas now. On one hand you have folks saying oh we shouldn't have bailed out the banks and the other hand you're saying that we should've bailed out companies like GM, who got into the mess that they did because of arrogance and poor judgment decisions. It is a fact that many of their products were on the decline for years and instead of listening to the consumer they continued to produce the same gas guzzling cars and sent out many products of poor quality. Of course now they've turned themselves around, so yes it's a moot point now that all is well at the moment.

 

My question is where does the bailing out stop at? Of course the bailouts saved jobs, but the question is if we go back into a recession again and so called big companies that can't fail start to go belly up, do we run to rescue these companies again like AIG, Chase and so on and go further and futher into debt should any of these companies go under??

 

I believe in saving blue collar jobs and as many middle class jobs as possible. For some reason you seem to believe that I'm against the middle class and that is not true, esp. since I am a middle class person, regardless of whether or not I'm upper middle class or whatever. The flip side of saving jobs is that you create a situation where these big companies become comfortable with being reckless and expect handouts to support their mismanagement and that we can't have happen either. We actually need to do more to help small businesses because it is the small businesses that make this country work by way of more tax breaks and making loans easier to receive so that folks can start new businesses.

 

I'm sorry, but raising taxes should ALWAYS be a last restort. We should look to reduce spending and cut waste first before raising taxes on anyone. After we've looked at every possibility to reduce spending in a fiscally responsible manner and we still cannot get our debt situation under control, then taxes would have to be raised, but with the economy being the way that it is now taxes shouldn't be raised on anyone. As I've stated before, the tax structure should be reworked so that no one can cheat the system if anything.

 

You also don't get out of debt overnight and the reduction of spending will have to be drastic whether or not you raise taxes on the rich or not.

[Locomotion69]

There is a God, too bad things like this doesn't happen more often.

 

Texas billionaire and philanthropist Charles Wyly, whose family donated millions of dollars to Republican causes and Dallas arts projects, has died after a car accident in western Colorado, authorities said. He was 77.

 

Wyly, who maintained a home near Aspen, Colo., was turning onto a highway near the local airport when his Porsche was hit by a sport utility vehicle Sunday, the Colorado State Patrol said in a statement. Wyly died at Aspen Valley Hospital.

 

"He is among the finest people I have ever known," William Brewer III, Wyly's attorney and long-time friend, said in a statement to The Associated Press. "His contributions in business, philanthropy and civic leadership will forever be remembered."

 

The other driver suffered moderate injuries.

 

In Texas, Wyly and his younger brother, Sam, along with their wives, gave $20 million to help build Dallas' performing arts center. They also donated big, but quietly, to Republican causes: the brothers had said they'd given about $10 million to GOP candidates and causes since the 1970s.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-billionaire-charles-wyly-killed-colo-084619180.html

[checkmatechamp13]

You're giving me conflicting ideas now. On one hand you have folks saying oh we shouldn't have bailed out the banks and the other hand you're saying that we should've bailed out companies like GM, who got into the mess that they did because of arrogance and poor judgment decisions. It is a fact that many of their products were on the decline for years and instead of listening to the consumer they continued to produce the same gas guzzling cars and sent out many products of poor quality. Of course now they've turned themselves around, so yes it's a moot point now that all is well at the moment.

 

 

But the "bailout" was a loan, not a handout. And I'm sure the government included some clause saying that they had to repay it even if they went under (so they couldn't file for bankruptcy)

 

There is a God, too bad things like this doesn't happen more often.

 

 

So let me get this straight. Just because he's rich, that makes him a bad person and he deserved to die. :confused:

[R68 Subway Car]

There is a God, too bad things like this doesn't happen more often.

Texas billionaire and philanthropist Charles Wyly, whose family donated millions of dollars to Republican causes and Dallas arts projects, has died after a car accident in western Colorado, authorities said. He was 77.

 

Wyly, who maintained a home near Aspen, Colo., was turning onto a highway near the local airport when his Porsche was hit by a sport utility vehicle Sunday, the Colorado State Patrol said in a statement. Wyly died at Aspen Valley Hospital.

 

"He is among the finest people I have ever known," William Brewer III, Wyly's attorney and long-time friend, said in a statement to The Associated Press. "His contributions in business, philanthropy and civic leadership will forever be remembered."

 

The other driver suffered moderate injuries.

 

In Texas, Wyly and his younger brother, Sam, along with their wives, gave $20 million to help build Dallas' performing arts center. They also donated big, but quietly, to Republican causes: the brothers had said they'd given about $10 million to GOP candidates and causes since the 1970s.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-billionaire-charles-wyly-killed-colo-084619180.html

Wow. Just Wow. What was said above is nothing short of despicable. I will not comment any further.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

But the "bailout" was a loan, not a handout. And I'm sure the government included some clause saying that they had to repay it even if they went under (so they couldn't file for bankruptcy)

 

And what makes you so sure of that???? :confused: You make a lot of statements like that you know.

 

So let me get this straight. Just because he's rich, that makes him a bad person and he deserved to die. :confused:

 

I've been saying it all along that there are a lot of jealous folks out there and that post just proved my point. The guy donated generously to the arts and in fact many rich folks donate generously to various things...

[checkmatechamp13]

And what makes you so sure of that???? :confused: You make a lot of statements like that you know.

 

I've been saying it all along that there are a lot of jealous folks out there and that post just proved my point. The guy donated generously to the arts and in fact many rich folks donate generously to various things...

 

Well, if there isn't a clause regarding repayment of the loan, there should be. As East NY said, so far they haven't defaulted, so it looks like it was the right decision.

 

In any case, my opinion is that they should pay more in taxes and the wealth gap should be lower. I would support them being somehow forced to pay more in taxes, but I wouldn't support physically harming them in any way. It's not like I'm going to somehow get a cut of the money if the person dies early, and the money's going to go where it goes when the person dies, so them dying early isn't even going to benefit society as a whole.

 

If they die at 50, their heirs will have to pay the inheritance taxes and then they get the money. Whatever amount the rich person intended to go to charity or whatever will go to that charity.

 

If they die at 90, the same exact thing happens.