Redistribution of Wealth

[Ted]

Got this in an email today. Thought it was kind of funny.

I actually had a waiter the other day that wanted to talk politics. He was pretty liberal and wasn't satisfied with my moderate replies. I'll have to go back and use this one on him.


Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read "Vote Obama, I need the money."   I laughed. Once in the restaurant my server had on a "Obama 08" tie, and again I laughed as he had given away his political preference -- just imagine the coincidence.

When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept.  He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need -- the homeless guy outside.  The server angrily stormed from my sight.

I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I've decided he could use the money more.  The homeless guy was grateful.

At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient "deserved" money more.

[westkoast]

Seriously what cracks me up about this whole 'redistribution of wealth' and all the socialism talk lately....
 
1)  People act as if wealth is not re-distributed right now.  Has everyone lost their flippin minds?  I didn't realize Barack Obama was the first politician to ever tax the American people.    EVERYONE in this country has money taxed from their pay check that ends up being distributed all around the country.  When I fill up gas I am taxed on my gas so that roads can get repaired in the state of California.  Even roads I don't use.  When you get taxed money goes to welfare.  They go to social programs that help battered women, pregnant teenagers, the homeless, and even go to helping politicians run campaigns.   I am paying into social security right now and most likely won't see a social security check when I hit that oh so special number in the 60s (I can't say a specific number cuz who knows if the retirement age with be 68 when I'm close)  They are taking my 'wealth' and re-distributing it to others.    Seriously there is no one on this board that was around when there was no taxes.  Both republicans and dems alike re-distribute wealth all the flippin time.

2)  I never EVER EVER EVER want to hear Sarah Palin or a Sarah Palin supporter utter the words 'socialism' for the simple fact that the "battling of the oil companies" that Sarah Palin like to tout is the very definition of what she's preaching against.  Now what does this sound like to you...EVERYONE in the state of Alaska gets a 3,000 dollar check based on sharing a natural resource that doesn't specifically belong to them.  Isn't that sharing the wealth?  In this case in the form of oil and currency.

[jemagee]

I never EVER EVER EVER want to hear Sarah Palin

Stop the sentence right there and you've got my feelings on it.

[Reality]

Lets bring those multibillionaire waiter and waitresses down!

Drill baby!  Drill drill drill!

[Derek Bodner]

1)  People act as if wealth is not re-distributed right now.  Has everyone lost their flippin minds?  I didn't realize Barack Obama was the first politician to ever tax the American people.    EVERYONE in this country has money taxed from their pay check that ends up being distributed all around the country.  When I fill up gas I am taxed on my gas so that roads can get repaired in the state of California.  Even roads I don't use.  When you get taxed money goes to welfare.  They go to social programs that help battered women, pregnant teenagers, the homeless, and even go to helping politicians run campaigns.   I am paying into social security right now and most likely won't see a social security check when I hit that oh so special number in the 60s (I can't say a specific number cuz who knows if the retirement age with be 68 when I'm close)  They are taking my 'wealth' and re-distributing it to others.    Seriously there is no one on this board that was around when there was no taxes.  Both republicans and dems alike re-distribute wealth all the flippin time.

This "redistribution of the wealth" and socialism is only brought up because Obama slipped and used that phrase rather than typically used tax plan jargon.  It sounds bad.  When you realize that you have to actually fund the government, and it's not really redistributing the wealth as much as it is differing opinions on how to fund the government.  McCain's throwing out words like "small government", but I've seen his propositions, and he's not a small government republican.

A progressive tax plan is NOT redistributing the wealth.  It's merits can be argued, but it's a different concept.

[Derek Bodner]

And, since McCain's not proposing a small government, he has to be against progressive taxes, right?

Not really.  Back in 2000 McCain openly supported a progressive tax plan.

During the 2000 campaign, on MSNBC's ?Hardball, a young woman asked him why her father, a doctor, should be "penalized" by being "in a huge tax bracket." McCain replied that "wealthy people can afford more" and that "the very wealthy, because they can afford tax lawyers and all kinds of loopholes, really don't pay nearly as much as you think they do."

Palin campaigning against socialism is also funny.  go find an Alaskan sales tax or income tax.  Oh, they don't have any?  so where do they get their money?

Levies on oil companies.

Redistributing the wealth.

A direct quote from Palin earlier this year:

"we're set up, unlike other states in the union, where it's collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs."

the republican party is desperate.  Obama mispoke in a casual conversation, they saw an opportunity to exploit it, and they're attacking it without much to back it up, and without looking into their past actions/positions.

[Reality]

^^ now that's some realOwnage.  Take notes, WoWkoast.

Also, during the debate, McBain tried to say how anti earmark he was and how porky earmake Obama was.  McBain went on to say how he would save the country from overspending.  Obam responded by quoting a stat that said of the countries entire debt, the earmarks accounted for only one half of one percent (0.5) of the budget.  99.5% was blown on other stuff.  Bama agreed the earmarks for frivolous things needed to be stopped, but kept it in perspective. 

I doubt either one of them will stop the bogus earmarks, but it was classic Repug move by McBain to try to twist the stats.

[westkoast]

^^ now that's some realOwnage.  Take notes, WoWkoast.

Also, during the debate, McBain tried to say how anti earmark he was and how porky earmake Obama was.  McBain went on to say how he would save the country from overspending.  Obam responded by quoting a stat that said of the countries entire debt, the earmarks accounted for only one half of one percent (0.5) of the budget.  99.5% was blown on other stuff.  Bama agreed the earmarks for frivolous things needed to be stopped, but kept it in perspective. 

I doubt either one of them will stop the bogus earmarks, but it was classic Repug move by McBain to try to twist the stats.

Hay tard-o....part of what DB was saying, I already said.  The whole thing about Alaska re-distributing wealth to all people from a resource they don't own is  socialism was in my post.  Now I know you avoid my posts in fear I am owning you again but try reading my post again.  Treat it like a box score.

Dems get a lot of crap for 'taxing and spending' but isn't that better then spending with out taxing?  People in this country don't really understand taxes on it's most basic level I don't think.  They hear taxes and get scared.  From talks I've had with people about this issue I get the feeling that they think you just cut taxes real easy and their quality of life will only improve.  They don't take into mind the big picture.  That is the problem I have with the republican mentality.  It is very self centered and tends to not look at the bigger picture in large populated areas.

With that said I don't like to get taxed.  No one does.  The rich, the poor, the middle, the old, the young, etc.  Would I like to have more money in my pocket?  Sure.  Do I understand that not all tax money is wasted and benefits the community and society as a whole when pumped into the RIGHT programs?  Sure do.

[Ted]

UH GUYS . . . 

It was a joke. No need to go all "Oprah on a ham" on me. 

[westkoast]

UH GUYS . . . 

It was a joke. No need to go all "Oprah on a ham" on me. 

That stuff wasn't directed at you Ted, I should have been more clear.

[Reality]

^^ now that's some realOwnage.  Take notes, WoWkoast.

Also, during the debate, McBain tried to say how anti earmark he was and how porky earmake Obama was.  McBain went on to say how he would save the country from overspending.  Obam responded by quoting a stat that said of the countries entire debt, the earmarks accounted for only one half of one percent (0.5) of the budget.  99.5% was blown on other stuff.  Bama agreed the earmarks for frivolous things needed to be stopped, but kept it in perspective. 

I doubt either one of them will stop the bogus earmarks, but it was classic Repug move by McBain to try to twist the stats.

Corkykoast,
I was referring to your endorsement for a faux owned by Senator EltonWoW and showing you another example of a RealOwned, like you've recieved from me as many times as the sand of the sea.
Not this thread. 

[westkoast]

^^ now that's some realOwnage.  Take notes, WoWkoast.

Also, during the debate, McBain tried to say how anti earmark he was and how porky earmake Obama was.  McBain went on to say how he would save the country from overspending.  Obam responded by quoting a stat that said of the countries entire debt, the earmarks accounted for only one half of one percent (0.5) of the budget.  99.5% was blown on other stuff.  Bama agreed the earmarks for frivolous things needed to be stopped, but kept it in perspective. 

I doubt either one of them will stop the bogus earmarks, but it was classic Repug move by McBain to try to twist the stats.

Corkykoast,
I was referring to your endorsement for a faux owned by Senator EltonWoW and showing you another example of a RealOwned, like you've recieved from me as many times as the sand of the sea.
Not this thread. 

Until Sarah Palin runs away from the podium because of DB's comments I don't think we can compare the two Reality.  Clearly you were subscribing to 'cut and run' tactics 

[Joe Vancil]

Well, I've taken a look at both Obama's plans and McCain's plans for taxes.

You know what?  They're the freakin' same for me.  This according to the commercial Obama had out, that, when you go to the web site, DOESN'T have the nice little calculator he showed in his commercial.  In fact the site pretty much said that the commercial was misleading.

What I *DO* know is that it doesn't matter which party I get - my taxes will go up.  It says "0," for change, but if anyone believes that, I'll be glad to give you my decrease if you're willing to pay for my increase.

Now the estate tax - which affects my family farm - is something different entirely.  And looking at it on the site *SUCKED*, because it didn't give me the basic information I needed.  McCain voted for lowering this tax;  Obama voted against it.

"Redistribution of wealth" isn't the appropriate term;  it's re-distribution of the tax burden.  And therein lies the problem...

...because I do not believe government is being responsible with the taxes that I *DO* pay.  My tax does *NOT* need to go up, and in fact, no one's does;  GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY needs to go up.  Eliminate waste.  And that includes waste that isn't lumped in with just "earmarks."  Programs and jobs that are effectively obsolete.  Increased aid to foreign countries that effectively do little for us.  Congressional "fact-finding" missions to...well...pretty much ANYWHERE.  (If my consituents want me to see something, THEY can pay to send me.  Make me answer to them, and you'll see a lot fewer of Congressmen doing stuff like that.)

Cut the welfare for people who are UNWILLING, rather than unable, to work.  Better yet - if they're UNWILLING to work, put that money into vocational training.

You see, there's one thing that the Republicans do have right - at least in slogan - SMALLER FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.  I want the polticians passing the rules that impact me close enough that they have to answer to me for what they choose.  I want them just inside choking range.

You know why I'm opposed to government health care?  Because of the waste that will be generated.  Prove to me that you can run our country on a balanced budget, and THEN we'll talk about raising my taxes to cover health care.  Prove to me you can run an effective intelligence department, that doesn't tell us garbage about WMD in Iraq that we can't find.

That's right;  I'm against government health care for the same reason I'm upset at our intelligence department:  I believe there are too many fools in places of power, and I don't trust them to do a good job.  The majority of the country thinks Congress is doing a TERRIBLE job - and I agree - so why in the world do we want them to pick up a new task when they haven't proven they can finish any of the old ones?

Federal response to Katrina - a failure.  Federal ability to wage war in Iraq - failure.  Federal ability to stabilize the stock market - failure.  Federal ability to catch the most-wanted terrorist - failure.  Federal ability to balance the budget - failure.  Federal ability to follow their own rules regarding wire-taps - failure.  WHAT WAS THE LAST THING OUR GOVERNMENT DID *RIGHT*?  Take your pick - Democratic or Republican president, Democratic or Republican Congress.

Clinton/Republican Congress handed the government a budget surplus.  We didn't decrease the National Debt.  WE SPENT THE SURPLUS, AND THEN SOME.

Our federal government is IRRESPONSIBLE with money.  And I don't know about you, but I don't want them taking ANY more money from ANYBODY - rich or poor - until they can prove responsible with what they're currently getting.  NOT ONE RED CENT MORE.  Just like any person who is ultimately responsible for another's conduct - like a parent to a child - I think we have to tell McCain and Obama both - NO MORE NEW TAXES, NO READJUSTING THEM.  Prove yourself first, and then we'll talk.

And we need to send the new President an entirely new Congress, while we're at it.  Vote against every incumbent - McCain and Obama included.  Make the big business buy themselves an entirely new Congress.  Teach them that they have to be afraid of us - the voters.

Let's face it - the number one issue in this election is going to be the economy.  I maintain that that should NOT be the number one issue.  The number one issue SHOULD BE the CORRUPTION AND WASTE IN WASHINGTON.

Of course, NEITHER candidate is talking about that one.

[jemagee]

You know what?  They're the freakin' same for me.  This according to the commercial Obama had out, that, when you go to the web site, DOESN'T have the nice little calculator he showed in his commercial.  In fact the site pretty much said that the commercial was misleading.

Welcome the national politics (at least to me) the rhetoric sounds different but at the core it's usually quite similar

[JoMal]

Couple of points.

1. Before we consider redistributing the wealth, if I have to take a drug test to EARN the money in the first place, people on welfare should have to take a drug test to ensure they are not using while not working and paying for their drugs with welfare.

2. The Obama/McCain tax plans actually do pretty much what each candidate says they will, but not to the extremes their opponents claim. While Obama's plans would tax the wealthier people, it would not put much of a dent in their lifestyles, to say the least. McCain's would benefit the big companies and I am sure some of that money would open up some economic doors. However, no one who understands how capitalism works could possibly believe only a fraction of that money would drop out of the pockets of the CEO's.

3. The bailout of the banking industry was pure socialism. McCain was gung ho for the bailout. IE - McCain is a Socialist, and since he is a socialist, he is also a documented hypocrite, among other issues. He should never have gone that route. It makes him look desparate and worse, shady.

4. Obama, if elected, will lean towards a liberal, socialist-type of agenda, and big business will foot the bill. Since big business has caused the financial crises going on here and the rest of the world, who in their right mind would support more of the same, which essentially is allowing big business to continue running the economy unchecked, instead of having big business foot the bill now and stop what they are doing.

Frankly, anyone who actually supports the traditional, and completely failed, system that has been in place the last eight years has a serious problem with differentiating between getting their teeth kicked in by the people currently in charge, and chosing a candidate who will, instead, stomp on their balls for four more years.

For those who prefer this to continue, that is called masochism and I suggest you hire a professional to satisfy your prurient needs elsewhere without involving politics and the rest of us who would prefer to have the kicking and stomping stop.