godzilla Posted January 11, 2025 Author Report Posted January 11, 2025 (edited) 14 hours ago, User said: A typo? How do you get 1.5 typo? You would have to mistake a 5 for a zero and insert a . in there. Give me a break. This is your argument, you said 10... so where do you get that from? Yes, you did: "the "felon in chief" and GOP's MO is to renew the Trump tax cuts that will add another $10T to the national debt. that $10T going directly into the pockets of the richest Americans." That 40% rate cut was for corporations. A corporation is a business entity, not a rich person. Good thing we have a Constitutional Republic of a United States with a Bill of Rights. You never answered my question on what is better, you having 20K more or 1K more... I will take that as your conceding that point to me. Wealth is not static. Why is this concept so hard for leftists? whats the number? whats the number? correct me... give me the number. i could be very wrong. so correct me. are you being hesitant because... its a number in the trillions? and its not paid for but just lopped on to the national debt? yes, corporations are immortal beings that live forever. let me tell you about my experience having made all of my money from a corporation. note that i am a Canadian but i know the US system has similar perks. I OR MY FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE NOT PAID PERSONAL TAX IN 25 YEARS. taxed at source is slavery. there are so many write offs and loop holes available for those who derive their sustenance from a corporation and i don't have to do anything... my accountant does it. for example: 1) write offs. my breathing is a write off. i try and write off everything. my accountant is the gate keeper here. taxed at source stiffs get NO write offs. 2) I CONTROL final income. at the moment as far as the CRA is concerned, i'm dirt poor. i get all of the perks of being poor. and i split the income with wives, children, the house cleaner, the gardener, the dog... they all work for me, we're all poor living in a multi million dollar house driving exotic cars that the company owns and gets write offs for depreciation. secondary properties i only have to rent out to a friend for one night and they are a business that loses money! i can spread my income over a greater time period! sweet! taxed at source stiffs do NOT get to arrange how income gets dispersed and they do NOT get write offs for depreciation. 3) all of my investments are owned by my corporation, of course, and so subject to taxation of the capital gains percentage at the business tax rate and later dispersed to myself in a way that eliminates any personal tax implications. i could go on! so my effective tax rate is traditionally under 10%. thats 7% lower than the lowest tax rate for taxed at source stiffs. and i'm a little guy in this scheme! its a big fckin game. Feds push back in John Risley's multimillion-dollar tax battle can i suggest that you and many "conservatives" have the concept of "socialist" and "conservative" taxation absolutely ass backwards? don't worry its very common. a "socialist" tax system is a progressive tax system where the MORE money an individual makes then the MORE tax they pay as a percentage of their income (personal income for example). a "conservative" tax system is a regressive tax system where the LESS money an individual makes then the MORE tax they pay as a percentage of their income (sales tax for example). "conservative" governments always go after the progressive tax regime in a way that benefits the wealthy. thats their MO. "conservative" ideology places emphasis on the responsibility of the individual and the "conservative" story is that a head tax is the most appropriate tax system. this conveniently favours the richest individuals just like its designed to do. "socialist" governments do the opposite. "socialist" ideologies emphasis that its a society between borders and that everything in the end is owned by everybody. that everyone has a stake and that everyone is a share holder in the GDP. otherwise there is no reason to be a member of the society that can suddenly draft you to take a bullet in defence of that system. the basic economics is always going to be happier societies. when wealth distribution is off the charts then lean on the progressive tax system. return wealth to build infrastructure, public spaces and bring up the lifestyle of everyone. this CREATES markets because more people have disposable income. its not the income of the rich that sits in precious metals, equities or empty real estate. if wealth distribution gets too tight and GDP drops significantly then start rewarding the movers and shakers again to spark wealth creation. this is how the hole cake gets bigger. Edited January 11, 2025 by godzilla 1 Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 4 minutes ago, godzilla said: whats the number? whats the number? correct me... give me the number. i could be very wrong. so correct me. are you being hesitant because... its a number in the trillions? and its not paid for but just lopped on to the national debt? LOL. It is fun watching you guys on the left melt your brains when your nonsense is challenged. 5 minutes ago, godzilla said: yes, corporations are immortal beings that live forever. let me tell you about my experience having made all of my money from a corporation. note that i am a Canadian but i know the US system has similar perks. OK, tell me your experience and how that specifically applies in US tax law. 15 minutes ago, godzilla said: so my effective tax rate is traditionally under 10%. thats 7% lower than the lowest tax rate for taxed at source stiffs. and i'm a little guy in this scheme! its a big fckin game. So, what does any of this have to do with your ignorance about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act or wealth? Quote
godzilla Posted January 11, 2025 Author Report Posted January 11, 2025 (edited) 10 minutes ago, User said: LOL. It is fun watching you guys on the left melt your brains when your nonsense is challenged. OK, tell me your experience and how that specifically applies in US tax law. So, what does any of this have to do with your ignorance about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act or wealth? whats the number? Edited January 11, 2025 by godzilla Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 4 minutes ago, godzilla said: whats the number? You claimed that the number was 10T in this thread... so where did you get that number from? Quote
godzilla Posted January 11, 2025 Author Report Posted January 11, 2025 1 minute ago, User said: You claimed that the number was 10T in this thread... so where did you get that number from? was i wrong? i was probably wrong... so please correct me. whats the number? Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 Just now, godzilla said: was i wrong? i was probably wrong... so please correct me. whats the number? It is your number. Where did you get it from? Did you just make it up and lie? Quote
godzilla Posted January 11, 2025 Author Report Posted January 11, 2025 (edited) 10 minutes ago, User said: It is your number. Where did you get it from? Did you just make it up and lie? are you suffering from Cognitive dissonance? i was wrong. i don't know where i got the number now. i don't know what the number is. i haven't even bothered to look. because it doesn't matter. its a number that you are afraid to give to me. because its still a huge number that is just getting lopped onto the federal debt. i'll go back and edit all of my posts with the right number. but the argument stands. whats the number? Edited January 11, 2025 by godzilla Quote
Aristides Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 Historically, the major causes of revolutions have been due to huge disparities in wealth, not ideology. 1 1 Quote
godzilla Posted January 11, 2025 Author Report Posted January 11, 2025 Just now, Aristides said: Historically, the major causes of revolutions have been due to huge disparities in wealth, not ideology. exactly. its the ideology. the fabricated belief system. the failed religion. that gets a society to that place. Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 1 minute ago, godzilla said: are you suffering from Cognitive dissonance? i was wrong. i don't know where i got the number now. i don't know what the number is. i haven't even bothered to look. LOL. So, you started a thread centered on a number you just made up. That doesn't make you wrong, it makes you someone who didn't care at all about being honest. 1 Quote
godzilla Posted January 11, 2025 Author Report Posted January 11, 2025 (edited) 1 minute ago, User said: LOL. So, you started a thread centered on a number you just made up. That doesn't make you wrong, it makes you someone who didn't care at all about being honest. no. i thought that was the number. is it not the number? you don't know? the post is not centered on the number. the number doesn't matter unless its a meaningless number. what is the number? Edited January 11, 2025 by godzilla Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 1 minute ago, godzilla said: no. i thought that was the number. is it not the number? you don't know? Thought it was the number... based on what? 2 minutes ago, godzilla said: the post is not centered on the number. the number doesn't matter unless its a meaningless number. You just keep being dishonest. The thread is literally titled: "Trump about to rip off the US public for $10T... again!" Quote
godzilla Posted January 11, 2025 Author Report Posted January 11, 2025 3 minutes ago, User said: Thought it was the number... based on what? You just keep being dishonest. The thread is literally titled: "Trump about to rip off the US public for $10T... again!" i'll adjust the number in the thread name. just give me the number. you're much smarter than i. what is the number? Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 1 minute ago, godzilla said: i'll adjust the number in the thread name. just give me the number. you're much smarter than i. what is the number? This is your thread. Why did you create a thread based on a number you knew you had no clue was right? Quote
Aristides Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 (edited) Here's a number, actually more than one number. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/10/08/top-1-of-us-households-hold-15-times-more-wealth-than-bottom-50-combined/ Edited January 11, 2025 by Aristides Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 13 minutes ago, Aristides said: Here's a number, actually more than one number. And? What is your point? Quote
Aristides Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 37 minutes ago, godzilla said: exactly. its the ideology. the fabricated belief system. the failed religion. that gets a society to that place. Poor people don't have the luxury of indulging in ideology, they are too busy dealing with being poor. 1 minute ago, User said: And? What is your point? I'd ask you the same question. Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 Just now, Aristides said: I'd ask you the same question. I didn't post about wealth, you did. Quote
Aristides Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 2 minutes ago, User said: I didn't post about wealth, you did. Then why are you posting on this topic? The French and Russian revolutions were caused by massive inequities in wealth, Countries that look after all their people don't have revolutions. Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 Just now, Aristides said: Then why are you posting on this topic? The French and Russian revolutions were caused by massive inequities in wealth, Countries that look after all their people don't have revolutions. Why are you here on this forum posting at all? Those revolutions were not only about inequality of wealth, and as I have pointed out already, inequality of wealth is meaningless without more context. Did you miss all those comments I made on that here already? Quote
godzilla Posted January 11, 2025 Author Report Posted January 11, 2025 (edited) 38 minutes ago, User said: This is your thread. Why did you create a thread based on a number you knew you had no clue was right? ask yourself the question. why won't YOU give the the thread the accurate number? we know the answer. because the exact number doesn't matter if its a significant number at all. the rich are getting richer and the poor more poor. thats what you've bought into. drivin by your emotional response to the threats of Woke Culture. Edited January 11, 2025 by godzilla Quote
Aristides Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 4 minutes ago, User said: Why are you here on this forum posting at all? Those revolutions were not only about inequality of wealth, and as I have pointed out already, inequality of wealth is meaningless without more context. Did you miss all those comments I made on that here already? The context was people were starving while the rich were living high. The gap between the rich and the rest of society is compounding. Are you really that thick or just being obtuse because you can't come up with anything else? Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 5 minutes ago, godzilla said: ask yourself the question. why won't YOU give the the thread the accurate number? Because I don't like engaging with dishonest people until they own up to what they did. Why did you create a thread with a number you knew you had no idea was accurate or not? 6 minutes ago, godzilla said: the rich are getting richer and the poor more poor. That is not true at all. 1 minute ago, Aristides said: The context was people were starving while the rich were living high. The gap between the rich and the rest of society is compounding. Are you really that thick or just being obtuse because you can't come up with anything else? Good thing no one is starving here. We have tons of safety net programs to help people. Quote
godzilla Posted January 11, 2025 Author Report Posted January 11, 2025 6 minutes ago, User said: Why are you here on this forum posting at all? Those revolutions were not only about inequality of wealth, and as I have pointed out already, inequality of wealth is meaningless without more context. Did you miss all those comments I made on that here already? well, do illuminate us how inequality of wealth is meaningless in THIS context. Quote
User Posted January 11, 2025 Report Posted January 11, 2025 2 minutes ago, godzilla said: well, do illuminate us how inequality of wealth is meaningless in THIS context. I already have. You ignored me both times I made the same point and asked you the same question. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.