Without the 1%, the 99% would all be Clyde. They are the ones who provide the capital and leadership that create the industries that provide the jobs that enable the occupiers to play with their ipads, ipods, and other toys created by that horrid one percenter, the late Steve Jobs.
Well, now it’s 3–2 in favor of randayn. (Is that a play on Ayn Rand?) Nearly every single person in the 1% group started out NOT in the 1% group but got into it by succeeding, either through very hard work or through genius and inspiration or likely through a combination of both. They often formed companies that started out with one employee (themselves) and grew phenomenally, employing thousands in jobs that previously didn’t exist. Very simply put, these people were not born with a silver spoon in their mouths, but busted butt to get what they have. This is the essence of a free society and the alternative is to let some brainless, highly bribable yahoos in Washington decide who the winners and losers are going to be and, know for a fact, there still will be winners, just not the deserving ones.
Even the hedge funders add to the economy. Do you think they just gather money and not spend it? People not spending is a major reason there has been no appreciable increase in the economy. Just because some of the people inherited their wealth does not give others the right to take it away from them. A lot of those are still creating jobs because of the businesses they inherited. I am so sick of people who want to take from someone else because they are too lazy to take care of themselves.
Paying taxes is not “taking away from someone else because they are too lazy to take care of themselves”. We will not have a society without government and government will not exist without revenue (taxes). If you want to see what a society without government looks like, take a look at Somalia. In the meantime, it is perfectly legitimate to have a discussion about what government should do, and how it should be funded. I believe support of the government should be a shared sacrifice. If one person’s share of the tax burden means he will have to choose between paying his rent or keeping his electricity turned on. and another person’s share means he can only afford five weeks in Europe instead of six this year, the sacrifice is not shared. The share of taxes being paid by the top 1% has been declining while the share paid by the poor and middle class has been rising, and that is not fair.
randayn about 13 years ago
Without the 1%, the 99% would all be Clyde. They are the ones who provide the capital and leadership that create the industries that provide the jobs that enable the occupiers to play with their ipads, ipods, and other toys created by that horrid one percenter, the late Steve Jobs.
MelvinLott about 13 years ago
looks like we’re split 2 – 2!
ossiningaling about 13 years ago
I’d throw in my vote but I’m almost finished reading the funnies and need to get to work. In fact, I’m 99% there.
RwB1 about 13 years ago
Well, now it’s 3–2 in favor of randayn. (Is that a play on Ayn Rand?) Nearly every single person in the 1% group started out NOT in the 1% group but got into it by succeeding, either through very hard work or through genius and inspiration or likely through a combination of both. They often formed companies that started out with one employee (themselves) and grew phenomenally, employing thousands in jobs that previously didn’t exist. Very simply put, these people were not born with a silver spoon in their mouths, but busted butt to get what they have. This is the essence of a free society and the alternative is to let some brainless, highly bribable yahoos in Washington decide who the winners and losers are going to be and, know for a fact, there still will be winners, just not the deserving ones.
Stephen Gilberg about 13 years ago
Make it 4-2.…J.B.? Seems to be a rich guy thing to go by your middle name. (See also Charles Montgomery Burns.)
jnash97 about 13 years ago
Make it 5-2.
Why should you be vilified and punished for being successful?
HareBall about 13 years ago
Even the hedge funders add to the economy. Do you think they just gather money and not spend it? People not spending is a major reason there has been no appreciable increase in the economy. Just because some of the people inherited their wealth does not give others the right to take it away from them. A lot of those are still creating jobs because of the businesses they inherited. I am so sick of people who want to take from someone else because they are too lazy to take care of themselves.
bnavarro about 13 years ago
Paying taxes is not “taking away from someone else because they are too lazy to take care of themselves”. We will not have a society without government and government will not exist without revenue (taxes). If you want to see what a society without government looks like, take a look at Somalia. In the meantime, it is perfectly legitimate to have a discussion about what government should do, and how it should be funded. I believe support of the government should be a shared sacrifice. If one person’s share of the tax burden means he will have to choose between paying his rent or keeping his electricity turned on. and another person’s share means he can only afford five weeks in Europe instead of six this year, the sacrifice is not shared. The share of taxes being paid by the top 1% has been declining while the share paid by the poor and middle class has been rising, and that is not fair.
connie about 13 years ago
Randayn, you certainly have bought all the brainwashing. You might do a little research and find out the truth.