There is only one way to eliminate the growing wealth disparity in America

[ThomWV]

Tax the rich.

Next question?

[bdamomma]

1. yes exactly.

[drm604]

2. K&R

There's really nothing to add to this. You've hit the nail squarely on the head.

[Cetacea]

3. Yes, but I have a question

Can it be retroactive as well?

Happy Holidays

[Fireweed247]

26. yes, retroactive!

And let's take back the bailout (handout), shut down KBR (found to be poisoning the troops and forcing people into slavery to do their work for them in Iraq) and confiscate their $$, find the money they 'lost' in Iraq, find the missing trillions that Rumsfeld announced on 9/10/01....and put that money into real national health care which would go a long way toward helping people in poverty and preventing financial ruin for many.

[T Wolf]

4. Eliminate the wealthY. If they will not give up the thing that makes them rich,

there is only one other recourse.

As the bumper sticker says, "Eat the rich."

[HughBeaumont]

5. NOW. Not in 2010, NOW.

This country needs the money NOW. This is an emergency situation. Therefore, it demands emergency-like actions.

It's called "paying their fair share", something they haven't been doing in 40 years. Gravy train is over. It's time for them to pay the price for their hoarding and looting.

[Xenotime]

7. Well said. Now I hope Obama will listen.

[lonestarnot]

12. Right DAMN NOW!

[Warpy]

6. That's only part of it

Taking back all the funds they've looted over the past 40 years needs to be recirculated at the bottom, first rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure and then providing seed money for new industry.

The silly dogma of free trade without fair trade has to be abandoned. Don't expect the old industries to come back in their old form, the machinery was mostly sold for scrap decades ago. New industries will have to be based on renewable energy to be competitive long term.

The Pentagon has to go on a diet. We can't keep lavishing our wealth on them to support Empire. We're tapped out and they need to have their mission redefined as one of defense, not conquest.

It can be done. However, socking it to the looters is one of the first steps that needs to be taken.

[Donnachaidh]

8. also break up the huge corporations

And take away corporate *personhood*.

They are NOT *people*, and the rights they claim via the 14th amendment should be stripped from them. And if they fight the stripping, make it RETROACTIVE, so that any court case found in their favour utilizing the 14th amendment will become null and void.

Then let the attorneys go after them for all their crimes against the working class and the world.

[Doremus]

35. Agreed. Start enforcing anti-trust laws again!

[valerief]

9. I prefer the old-fashioned way: Eat the Rich. nt

[pipi_k]

29. Feed them

to the hungry...solve two problems at once.


:7

[valerief]

30. Brilliant! Make the rich Soylent Green! They could be ground into feed for

cattle. No, too big a chance to contract Mad Cow.

[lumberjack_jeff]

10. No, there's also more pay for the poor and working class.

Higher minimum wage, labor friendly public policy. It's a viable alternative.

Wealth concentration is a significant problem, but there is more than one way to solve it.

[Trillo]

27. Don't forget that employees are and have been paid based upon time.

While the incomes of the uber-wealthy can be mathematically analyzed by time using hindsight, their incomes don't seem based upon it in advance.

[dysfunctional press]

11. couldn't we just eat them instead?

:shrug:

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

13. I was hoping the answer was "Kill all the lawyers".

Dare to dream, sez I.

[Romulox]

25. Right. Because corporations will start treating you right--once all the lawyers are gone!

:eyes:

[bobbolink]

34. Yup, all cancer-causing pollution will DISAPPEAR of it's own accord...

And doctors will no longer make negligent life-threatening errors.

ETC.

:eyes: is right..... amazing the knee-jerk reactions sans real thought.

[quispquake]

14. Another way...

Is tax the churches too...Any churches want to push a political agenda? Tax 'em...Megachurch megamillionaires? Tax 'em...

[closeupready]

15. They are going to HAVE to do this - I mean there is no choice.

It's either that or continue borrowing and bankrupting the US. Or hyperinflating our way out of debt, which is still a tax increase, but it's a flat tax. Meaning the poor pay relatively more than the rich.

[Juche]

16. That and unions

If we had a strong union movement then we wouldn't have seen about 85% of the economic growth of the last 30 years go to the wealthiest 5%. Unions would've fought back.

Progressive taxes & unions will get us back on track to a middle class country with real financial security.

[leftofthedial]

17. Taxing the rich is off the table.

Justice for rich criminals is off the table.

Helping common people in these hard economic times is off the table.

Change is off the table.

[Danascot]

18. Maybe two ...

Another couple of years of this and "eat the rich" will seem like a viable option.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

19. Maybe this is an ignorant question, but.........

what would stop the rich, who own the majority of the means of production, from passing that tax burden onto the plebs like me? I know if my boss had his taxes raised he'd either cut our pay or take away our health benefits. Private sector folks would get screwed.

[HughBeaumont]

20. Taxes are for maintenance, not prosperity.

"They'll kill the middle class outta spite" is a common meme among the right wing, who are against taxing the rich. It's a bunch of bullmalarkey.

Read this thread for starters.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

22. I agree with you, in theory, that's how its supposed to work.....

and I'm all for Obama's tax plan, have been since he introduced it. But, while not necessarily disagreeing w/ ThomWV's point, I just don't see a process that'll make it work.

My point is that the wealthy hold the majority of the cards, and if they want to screw the lower and middle classes, they'll find a way to do it. They hold most of the money, most of the sway on government officials. In short, if you don't have cash, you have no influence. The head is rotten, and the body is dying a slow death because of it.

"They'll kill the middle class outta spite" Shit. They've already done that.

[HughBeaumont]

36. The wealthy can't lay all of America off.

Sooner or later, they're going to need this little thing called "business" (despite what the Laffers and Hannitys of the world tell you), which will give them more than what the tax savings under the Repukes ever got them. The wealthy will still be wealthy no matter WHAT the economy is doing; that's not the issue.

In Republican presidencies, where the economy does worse because rich people hoard, not hire; they get their little lotteries in the form of tax breaks, which paves the way for wealth inequality. Democratic presidencies mark the times of repair (this one being no exception) and Keynesian policies; in other words, new businesses, new industries, new opportunities. There's more incentive to capitalize on opportunity (green living, for one) and expand existing businesses rather than keep it all to themselves and get taxed.

Let's face it: not even the wealthy want a depression. They don't really have many options left to get their products out the door and I don't believe for one second they would purposely try to destroy their businesses. All of America being laid off isn't good for business, nor is paying them what the Chinese make since they'd never be able to afford the products.

In other words, they're greedy, but not stupid. Corporations are also still bound by the laws of supply and demand. Demand gets ruined when prices are raised (which would be silly to do when the top corporate tax rate only goes up 3%) or workers don't earn enough.

[natrat]

41. seems like someone pulling the strings wants a depression,that or they just want to steal everything

[JuniperLea]

21. Career of Evil... in homage to your avitar... and a study of the greed that got us here...

I plot your rubric scarab,
I steal your satellite
I want your wife to be my
Baby tonight, baby tonight

I choose to steal what you chose to show
And you know I will not apologize
You're mine for the taking
I'm making a career of evil

Pay me I'll be your surgeon
I'd like to pick your brain
Capture you inject you
Leave you kneeling in the rain
Kneeling in the rain

I choose to steal what you chose to show
And you know I will not apologize
You're mine for the taking
I'm making a career of evil

I'd like your blue eyed horseshoe,
I'd like your emerald horny toad
I'd like to do it to your daughter on a dirt road

And then I'd spend your ransom money,
But still I'd keep your sheep
I'd peel the mask you're wearing,
And then rob you of your sleep
Rob you of your sleep

I choose to steal what you chose to show
And you know I will not apologize
You're mine for the taking
I'm making a career of evil

[CrownPrinceBandar]

23. Yup...... but they make it sound more fun.....

How are ya June?

[JuniperLea]

24. Doing well...

When I ignore my 401k, my IRA, and my upside-down mortgage that is:)

I choose to ignore what Bush chose to destroy:)

Edited to say: I hear Buck Dharma hurt his shoulder... I hope he's on the mend!

[CrownPrinceBandar]

31. Glad to hear you're well, despite the $$ stuff..........

I hope Buck's on the mend too. I'd love to see them play again soon.

[hfojvt]

28. actually there would be a disincentive to do that

Cutting benefits can get him, say, another $1,000,000 in income. However, if that extra income is gonna be taxed at, say, 70% like it was in the 1970s, then why bother? Why cut benefits for just another $300,000? Particularly if he hates paying taxes, the last thing he wants to do is send another $700,000 to the fu$%ing Feds. He'd rather let the workers have it than the government.

[anaxarchos]

32. What stops them from doing it now?

If the circumstances for "passing that tax burden onto the plebs" exists, it exists whether the "tax burden" increases on not. This is the same argument as taxing higher prices. The rich don't need an excuse. If they did, then the opposite would also be true. Reducing the "tax burden" would yield higher pay, or the exact opposite of what has happened since Reagan.

[Juche]

37. That is why you also need unions

With a strong union movement business leaders will be less willing to threaten their employees with taking away their pay and benefits.

As far as higher taxes, taxes apply to expenses after deductions. If you increase tax deductions for things like healthcare, energy investment, domestic job creation, etc while also raising the tax rates on corporate profits you offer incentives for employers to do and offer those things.

[Taverner]

33. Eat the rich

They've spent all their lives eating the finest free range organic foods and toning their bodies at health clubs...

At worst we could stew their meat

[Orwellian_Ghost]

38. Next question(s)

Offshore accounts too?

Also the sheltered investments?

Where's the political entity interested in that?

What's the plan?

Starter questions.

[Toucano]

39. Excuse me?

Could you repeat that?

I am a little hard of hearing to the obvious. :)

[natrat]

40. got news for you ,with people like reid and pelosi in charge it will get worse not better