medicineman
New Member
Well you pretty much summed it up you ole nazi you. Yes I am for the above and against the super rich, Capping income could be achieved through taxation. If the tax was 105% of a given number, the rich would be forced to give their excess money to charity. Where we have major differences is where to draw the line with rich. I'm guessing a million dollars of achieved wealth would qualify, excluding their primary residence. The numbers could be worked out. There is no need for someone to be a billionaire while fellow citizens are losing their homes or don't have one or are starving and homeless. The new paradigm is wealth without control leading to kings and serfs. I'm pretty sure that you put yourself in the king category, while I am pretty much in the serf category, The real struggle is a class struggle, no-one seems to want to address it.1. Wrong-O, fish-breath. I'm not against you at all ... only your ideas.
2. You're not a commie? LMAO! You continually speak out against "the rich." You speak out against our capitalistic system. You are anti-economic liberty and privacy. You support the progressive income tax and want to make it even more progressive. You are anti-business, anti-"boss" and pro-union. You want to raise the minimum wage and provide a "living wage" to everyone regardless of production. You are envious, jealous and downright mean spirited toward anyone who has achieved above the norm. You are for leveling the playing field to the point of putting a cap on income. You continually advocate using the gun of government to extract, by force, the earnings of the productive, to give the unearned to those who do not produce.
3. Who says? Joe Biden and Anita Hill? Talk about the politics of destruction!
No, Med ... I'm not against you, I am against your very dangerous ideas.
Vi