Congress Gets Richer

[SiriuslyLong]

Hava-gava-kasha writes,

"Its absolutely not "posturing". Its something Democrats support and Republicans vehemently
oppose. As i have proven in a number of instances facts are hard things for you to sometimes acknowledge."

It is posturing. You said it yourself - no one like to pay taxes. You yourself hire a tax accountant to help you reduce your tax burden through loopholes.

It's demogogeury. Period. It's a tool used to GET VOTES from the sheeple. Even the famed liberal Bill Gates said it isn't enough to dent the debt we've rung up all to get politicians (Democrats and Republiceans) elected.

Here's an interesting clip - Ron Paul and Michael Moore, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hF8gQfGEvsc

Now before you try to put words in anyones mouth, there are only certain aspects of this that I am interested in.

We've had this discussion, no?

[SiriuslyLong]

HEY dummy. I WROTE the "no wonder why the Republicans are trying to protect the top 1%. lol.
It wasnt part of the article. It was MY commentary.
For the third time. You said I omit "the comments about Democratic Senators."

There was NOTHING posted in the link about Dems or Republican Senators and their wealth statistics.

Republicans overwhelmingly oppose taxing the top !% and Democrats overwhelmingly support it.
That is just a simple fact so i really dont understand your defensiveness.

The point of the thread is that it is getting increasingly difficult to be elected in this country without having
personal and corporate wealth behind you. The Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court is one of the reasons
this is so.

The article was not quoted appropriately. You selected one part that fit your ideology and posted. You excluded much of the article. I find that disingenuous. Call me crazy.

[SiriuslyLong]

Would you believe John Maynard Keynes wrote this,

"Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security but [also] at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth. Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become "profiteers," who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflationism has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds and the real value of the currency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery. Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose."

[SiriuslyLong]

And to conclude:

Dr. Peterson is the Burrows T. Lundy Professor of Philosophy of Business at Campbell College, Buies Creek, North Carolina.

. . . there is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of Society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.

So observed John Maynard Keynes, member of the British delegation to the Paris Peace Conference, in his book, The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919). Within four years, a vicious hyper inflation had thoroughly debauched the mark, overturned the existing basis of German society and prepared the way for a Hitlerian Götterdämmerung.
Lord Keynes’ observation is not without irony. Later Keynes was himself to become enraptured with the idea of inflationism—to become, it would appear from the record, the most powerful if inadvertent ad*vocate of that creed in the Twen*tieth Century.

What is inflationism? I see it as a social mirage, the modern-day ver*sion of the ancient search for the philosopher’s stone that would transmute lead into gold (or "stone into bread," as Keynes put it in 1943), the hope for a social per*petual motion machine, the wish come true of King Midas for all he touched to turn into gold (only to find he could then neither eat nor drink).

Inflationism, in today’s terms, is deficit-spending, deliberate credit expansion on a national scale, a public policy fallacy of monumental proportions, of creating too much money that chases too few goods. It rests on the "money illusion," a widespread confusion between in*come as a flow of money and income as a flow of goods and services—a confusion between "money" and wealth. As Adam Smith observed in his The Wealth of Nations (1776):

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/inflationism/

Maybe this is the cause of income inequality? Maybe the answer is not confiscating earnings from the rich and redistributing those earning to the poor. Maybe the problem is our monetary and fiscal policy??

[Havakasha]

The article was not quoted appropriately. You selected one part that fit your ideology and posted. You excluded much of the article. I find that disingenuous. Call me crazy.

Wrong again. The rest of the article refers to different subjects. Here below is the entire article. You are crazy. lol. NOWHERE IS THERE ANY COMMENT ON "DEMOCRAT SENATORS"AND THEIR
RESPECTIVE WEALTH. YOU OWE ME AN APOLOGY. THANKS.

You really do enjoy changing the subject huh? Can you start a new thread on keynes. Thanks

“Members of Congress had a collective net worth of more than $2 billion in 2010, a nearly 25 percent increase over the 2008 total, according to a Roll Call analysis of Members' financial disclosure forms,” Roll Call writes. “Nearly 90 percent of that increase is concentrated in the 50 richest Members of Congress.” Among the richest, Reps. Mike McCaul (worth at least $294 million) and Darrell Issa (at least $295 million).


Here is the other part of the article having NOTHING to do with the above thread.
“Republicans may be trying to focus their messaging on jobs and the economy — and hammering President Barack Obama for campaigning — but they still have time for some red meat base-baiting on the House floor,” Roll Call reports. “To wit: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (Va.) decision to bring to the floor a measure that ‘reaffirms ‘In God We Trust’ as the official motto of the United States and supports and encourages the public display of the national motto in all public buildings, public schools, and other government institutions,’ according to the resolution, sponsored by Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.).”
“A Newsweek investigation found about five dozen of the most fiscally conservative Republicans ‘trying to gobble up the very largesse they publicly disown, in the time-honored, budget-busting tradition of bringing home the bacon for local constituents,’” PoliticalWire notes.
Browse: congress

[Havakasha]

One persons policy belief is another person "posturing". I know its hard for you to believe but lots of people truly find it a moral issue (as well as an economic one) that the top 1% pay so little in taxes, and think its destabilizing for our countries economy. No one ever said that this one policypresciption would solve our debt issues. Thats a straw horse and its a technique you use quite a lot in your arguments.

The fact that you fight so hard on this issue yet say its not important reveal the inherent contradiction in your core beliefs. Your trying to pretend once again you dont care (like with climate change) when you OBVIOUSLY do.

P.S. I dont hire an accountant to look for loopholes. I hire an accountant to help with my math and
to fill out the many forms. Its not something my brain does well. Have you heard about the difference between right brain and left brain? Do some research.
You dont know my taxes. You are simply speculating. But i do appreciate that you have an obsession about me and my money. lmfao.

[SiriuslyLong]

One persons policy belief is another person "posturing". I know its hard for you to believe but lots of people truly find it a moral issue (as well as an economic one) that the top 1% pay so little in taxes, and think its destabilizing for our countries economy. No one ever said that this one policypresciption would solve our debt issues. Thats a straw horse and its a technique you use quite a lot in your arguments.

The fact that you fight so hard on this issue yet say its not important reveal the inherent contradiction in your core beliefs. Your trying to pretend once again you dont care (like with climate change) when you OBVIOUSLY do.

P.S. I dont hire an accountant to look for loopholes. I hire an accountant to help with my math and
to fill out the many forms. Its not something my brain does well. Have you heard about the difference between right brain and left brain? Do some research.
You dont know my taxes. You are simply speculating. But i do appreciate that you have an obsession about me and my money. lmfao.

You are an ideologue of worst kind, and I highly doubt you need an accountant to "check your math". Nice that you blame your brain lol. Try trying. Stop being so disingenuous.

What would you know about "moral"? Looking at others and passing judgement. Wanting what is theirs.... My parents raised me to mind my own business and not pass judgement on others. If I would say something like, "they need to pay more taxes" they would reply, "that's stinking thinking son, you need to worry about what you need to do not about them."

The top 1% don't pay "so little" - maybe you do have a point about your ability to do math... - the top 1% pay something like 37% of all income taxes.

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

Let's be real here for once. You selectively quoted an article without a link or the full article. It's a fact. It exists. Kudos for not editing it and adding the link though.

[Havakasha]

SiriuslyAngry. Im not being disenguous. Im being 100% truthful. If you think i have problems you should see my girlfriend when it comes to taxes. But can you please stop your obsession with my money and my accountant (he is really a very honest and decent man). Thanks.

"my parents raised me to mind my own business and not pass judgement on others." That is hysterical. I have read all your post here for the past 2 years and you CONSTANTLY pass judgement on people. Especially liberals. You obviously didnt learn your parents lessons. "YOU ARE AN IDEOLOGUE OF THE WORST KIND". NO JUDGEMENT INTENDED HUH? LMFAO.

"wanting what is theirs". NO JUDGEMENT AGAIN huh" Wow.

Once again your using statistics about the wealthy and their taxes to mislead people, much as you did when discussing how manypeople dont pay any federal income taxes. The fact is that most wealthy are in favor of Warren Buffets proposals because they
understand that they have benefitted inordinately from recent tax policies and understand their is a need to redress that.



For the fourth time. I DID NOT leave out anything about "Democratic Senators" and their wealth as you said. SHOW ME WHERE IN THE ARTICLE THAT I DID. YOU OWE ME AN APOLOGY, BUT OBVIOUSLY I AM NOT GOING TO GET IT.

[SiriuslyLong]

SiriuslyAngry. Im not being disenguous. Im being 100% truthful. If you think i have problems you should see my girlfriend when it comes to taxes. But can you please stop your obsession with my money and my accountant (he is really a very honest and decent man). Thanks.

"my parents raised me to mind my own business and not pass judgement on others." That is hysterical. I have read all your post here for the past 2 years and you CONSTANTLY pass judgement on people. Especially liberals. You obviously didnt learn your parents lessons. "YOU ARE AN IDEOLOGUE OF THE WORST KIND". NO JUDGEMENT INTENDED HUH? LMFAO.

"wanting what is theirs". NO JUDGEMENT AGAIN huh" Wow.

Once again your using statistics about the wealthy and their taxes to mislead people, much as you did when discussing how manypeople dont pay any federal income taxes. The fact is that most wealthy are in favor of Warren Buffets proposals because they
understand that they have benefitted inordinately from recent tax policies and understand their is a need to redress that.



For the fourth time. I DID NOT leave out anything about "Democratic Senators" and their wealth as you said. SHOW ME WHERE IN THE ARTICLE THAT I DID. YOU OWE ME AN APOLOGY, BUT OBVIOUSLY I AM NOT GOING TO GET IT.

Apology? LMFAO.

Nice spin on it though, have to give you credit. There is no passing of judgment in this discussion. I know the facts. There is direct interaction. You are what you are - a highly partisan, liberal, card carrying democrat who will not entertain positions outside your party line. That is the definition of "ideologue". Anyway....

Please simply acknowledge that you didn't provide a link, nor did you post the entire article. Bet you can't?

Oh yes, statistics. A terrible thing. They don't mislead people, people like you do.

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

[Havakasha]

I didnt provide a link in the first post. Much like you havent provided links from time to time. Nothing sinister intended. i provided it in my later post to demonstrate that you were wrong that
I was hiding something. I WAS NOT. So please stop trying to make a mountain out of a proceduralpoint and address the fact that you lied about what I "left" out.
And definitely no "spin". I bet you cant apologize and or admit that you posted that I left out a part of the link which referred to "Democratic Senators and their wealth". I did not and your a liar. Plain and simple. FOR the fifth time show me where i didl.
Obviously you cant.

Again, I didnt as you said LEAVE OUT anything referring to "DEMOCRATIC SENATORS and their wealth" YOU LIED when you said I did. I provided the entire article and you were wrong. Yes you should apologize but the SiriuslyAngry in you wont allow you to admit you were wrong. Just like you werent able to admit that you were wrong about Peter Schiff and wrong about Climate change.


Your angry judgements about how you define me are clearly inaccurate as i have many times taken positions which disagree with people on the wings of my party.

Your statistics are right wing talking points meant to mislead people. You miss the point entirely as you often do.We have been over and over how the right wing talking point on the 47% who dontpay any federal income tax is misleading. i can provide it again if you so wish.
Of course the wealthy pay a higher % taxes. Do you think they shouldnt? But it has nothing to do with the fact that in the past ten years they have benefitted inordinately. There is a reason that income dispartiy is increasing. Do youreally believe that isnt a problem for this country?

The fact is that the majority of millionaires KNOW that they have gotten a very good deal these past years and that is why theyare in favor of Buffetts proposals.