Diversity of Everything but Thought

Lola has reading comprehension problems.

My view hasn't changed. I just found a way to describe it, and to show you how close you are to mine.

The 'right' advocates equity in taxation on the theory that a rising tide lifts all boats and taxing the rich ultimately hurts the poor.

But take taxes. John Kerry campaigned on a platform of rolling back President Bush's tax cuts on one hand, imposing additional taxes on the richest Americans on the other

Quote:

The 'right' advocates equity in taxation on the theory that a rising tide lifts all boats and taxing the rich ultimately hurts the poor.

Given the fact that this has been proven to be a false theory (we live in an inflationary world, so trickle down doesn't work) shouldn't you go about either choosing a new theory, or just admit that you favor the rich over the poor? Cycloptichorn

I admit I favor those able who are productive over those able who are parasites.

Foxfyre wrote:

But take taxes. John Kerry campaigned on a platform of rolling back President Bush's tax cuts on one hand, imposing additional taxes on the richest Americans on the other

Nope, what he proposed was actually to roll back Bush's tax cuts for the richest Americans - end. ...

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:

The 'right' advocates equity in taxation on the theory that a rising tide lifts all boats and taxing the rich ultimately hurts the poor.

Given the fact that this has been proven to be a false theory (we live in an inflationary world, so trickle down doesn't work) shouldn't you go about either choosing a new theory, or just admit that you favor the rich over the poor? Cycloptichorn

Your characterization of the consequences of what the right advocates is false. The consequences of what the right advocates are not trickle down economics as the left claims. Instead those consequences are circulate all around economics. Inflation doesn't change that for any one group more than any other.

I admit I favor those able who are productive over those able who are parasites. I call the former adamsites and the latter castroites. Also I favor providing the poor the education they require to get richer. To paraphrase a wise man, for God's sake, don't keep the poor poor by only giving them fish, teach them to fish!

Do you really need me to hunt the data down for you? Because I'd be more than happy to.

They are not false. Under any trickle-down theory, 'rising tide' theory, or as I call it, Voodoo Economics, the gap inbetween the rich and poor has risen, dramatically so in some cases. Under more sane economic theories, it has not risen as much or has contracted.
I care zero for the disgusting, pernicious envy politics that dwells on gaps between poor and rich rather than real opportunity to prosper. I know that I, a longtime member of the 15% tax bracket, continue to increase my material welfare because of people like Dell and Gates and not despite them. I also know that most of those living in the US who are in the zero% tax bracket are materially far better off than those living in countries where reduction of the poor-rich-gap is perceived more important than what people actually possess.

Do you really need me to hunt the data down for you? Because I'd be more than happy to.
I need you, or anyone, to show me that the poor are materially worse off in the US where the poor-rich-gap is large than in countries where that gap is smaller.

The fact, FACT, is that voodoo economics make the rich richer and the poor, poorer. All this bullsh!t about a rising tide is exactly that.
If reduction of your pernicious envy be your goal, then it is "bullsh!t." If increase in the poor's material well being be your goal then it is not "bullsh!t."

Quote:

I admit I favor those able who are productive over those able who are parasites.

And for some reason, you assume that the rich are productive? I see it the other way around; many of the rich are parasites, who have found ways to manipulate things so that they do no work and live off of the sweat of those beneath them, who are in fact quite productive.
I don't assume the rich are productive; I know the rich are productive. Even the so-called rich parasites, a small minority of the rich, do far more for the poor than the army of castroites (i.e., self-righteous pernicious enviers) allegedly seeking to improve the condition of the poor. I know that the investments and purchases of the rich (whether parasites or not) provide greater opportunities for the rest of us to improve our material well being than all the demagoguery of the castroites.

Cycloptichorn

Even the so-called rich parasites, a small minority of the rich, do far more for the poor than the army of self-righteous pernicious enviers allegedly seeking to improve the condition of the poor.

... I don't know what your definition of "able" is ican, but I suspect it's fairly narrowly defined. Do you mean physically able? I hope you'll tell me I'm wrong about my hunch.

Quote:

Even the so-called rich parasites, a small minority of the rich, do far more for the poor than the army of self-righteous pernicious enviers allegedly seeking to improve the condition of the poor.

This is categorically untrue. I challenge you to show evidence of this.
I challenge you to show that a large poor-rich-gap harms the well being of the poor, while a small poor-rich-gap helps the well being of the poor. In Cuba, a castroite utopia, this gap is small! Need I say more?

Also, you seem to have fallen into the trap of believing that just because the poor have stuff that they are better off than people with less stuff. This is also untrue, and a major problem with our society today; the acquisition of goods isn't near the same thing as living a quality life, and giving poor people a bunch of plastic crap to keep them from revolting doesn't excuse the way the rich take the lions' share, and then some, of the monetary resources of the nation.
What else do you think the poor are deprived besides stuff that prevents many from living a quality life? I know what I think is the answer! It's hope. It's hope that they can live more useful lives. It's hope that both they and their children can get a decent education. It's hope that they can somehow escape the trap of welfare-ghettos that politicians, desperate to maintain their constituencies of incumbence, have established to destroy incentive to seek better.

Cycloptichorn