Socialist Obama Redistribution of Wealth
Find a Conversation
Socialist Obama Redistribution of Wealth
| Tue, 10-28-2008 - 12:18am |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
At least Obama is telling us exactly what his philosophy of government actually.

Pages
Your argument was that taxation was like taking time from people and if you tax the wealthier at higher rates, you are taking more time from them. My point was that because their average hourly wage is higher, that may not be the case and a flat tax, by that logic, would disproportionately affect those that make less.
A flat tax would be the equivalent of taking 1 day a week (or 2...) from everyone.
If the church helps the needy with anything, money, gift cards to the store, etc, then those needy have to report it and they get taxed for it. The church can't do it. It's not considered as a 'gift' it's considered 'income'. Yet if a person gives another person a 'gift' to help them out it's not taxed. Churches used to have poor boxes. Yet if a member of the church wants to anonymously give something in the offering directed towards a needy family, the 'church' can't pass it along. Yet they can announce a special offering to the entire church and have everyone give and it go to that family, yet that family would be a bit embarrassed at that. The government gets far too involved in church business when they're supposed to stay separate.
<>
Probably due to cuts under current administration.
It's federal not state.
The government can't tell a church not to help the needy.
You've confused me with another poster. I've made no denigrating assumptions regarding wealthy people. Most I know are humble, hardworking and charitable. Not to mention extremely smart. I trust them one how best to manage their money as opposed to feeling the need to confiscate and redistribute it for them. I'm not greedy in the sense I think it is my best interest or the interest of society to vote in policy makers who don't have a clear understanding of economics or the constitution.
Again, who was it that made a broad generalization, not to mention a demeaning one about wealthy people and coach purses?
What do supposed that tells you about their familiarity with weathly people? It tells me they haven't any. Except maybe what they've gleaned from the media.
I'm sorry but I have no idea what you're talking about. Was this post meant to be directed at someone else?
Chrissy
mom to Aidan 8/21/03
Grayson Blaine 12/30/07
>>However, those "rich" employers earning over $250,000 every year are not struggling financially.<<
Really? How many do you know? Can you give examples of this? Who told you that? Do you have any idea of the costs to run a business? How long you have to borrow or float to make payroll before being paid by your customer?
>>Rather, Obama's plans would encourage the small business owner to provide health insurance out-of-pocket and retain jobs here, instead of send them overseas.<<
Oh Please. He says this and you just believe it? Tell me how? And especially how when they're going to be paying more in taxes? And since everyone else will too the health care costs will continue to grow at the double digit level making everything less affordable.
>>Employers of big companies are slashing jobs every day now - has nothing to do with Obama.<<
Yes, it has to do with the slowdown of the economy. You don't increase growth by taking away capital through taxation. If it's affecting the larger businesses just imagine what it's going to do to the smaller ones.
Sticking it to the wealthy has the opposite effect of what you think. They simply put their extra funds into safer investment streams. Why shouldn't their risk be rewarded?
Pages