Obama gets gutted, McCain closer to white house

Follow
Oops, something didn't work.

Try again?

Sign In to be begin to follow this thread

What does this mean?
Following an item on Channel 9 allows you to watch for new content and comments that you are interested in. You need to be signed in to Channel 9 to use this feature.

Getting "follow" information

Stop following this thread

Start following this thread

What does this mean?
Following an item on Channel 9 allows you to watch for new content and comments that you are interested in and view them all on your notifications page.

Removing your "follow"

Setting up your "follow"

Did you know you can
sign up for email notifications?
- Subscribe to this feed

reddit

Tweet

evildictaitor I'll live forever, or die trying!

Oct 08, 2008 at 2:43 PM

phreaks said:

evildictaitor said:

*snip*

EDIT: Oh I see you changed your response, how nice.

The fact is that the top 5% of earners already pay 40% of the taxes.

You won't be happy until Marx himself is presiding over the Oval office, will you.

The CEO topic is irrelevant, and has nothing to do with the tax issue or the redistribution of wealth, which is anti-capitalist on it's face.

"You won't be happy until Marx himself is presiding in the Oval office"

That would be pretty impressive, given that he's dead.

"The top 5% of earners are paying 40% of the tax"

5% in number-of-people terms - not in percentage-of-GDP terms - and it's going to be much more than 5%. If you think the top 5% should pay 5% of tax, you are saying that people who earn much more should pay much less tax as a proportion of their income, and I'm not sure where you come from, but back here we call that "plain old unfair"
evildictaitor I'll live forever, or die trying!

Oct 08, 2008 at 2:44 PM

RoyalSchrubber said:

phreaks said:

*snip*

Eh, I'm sorry if you felt offended, I didn't make things clear - fries are for corona nut - I replied to root.

Anyway, yeah I don't know squat about finance, I'm only (CS) student. Didn't read all these economy threads that are springing on C9 recently, anyone knows when this crisis is going to stop? 6 months, a year? Any predictions?

Noone is qualified to make that call, and certainly not here on C9.
ScanIAm This is an...

Oct 08, 2008 at 3:49 PM

evildictaitor said:

RoyalSchrubber said:

*snip*

Noone is qualified to make that call, and certainly not here on C9.

Ultimately, there has to be a certain limit to how much someone is actually able to keep, for themselves. I'll argue that after, for example, $5million, any further money that you earn is just not fair. All overage should be taken back for any or all of the following:

1) taxes
2) charity
3) active job creation that benefits society, no just you.
4) some other form of social good, not selfish good.

This isn't socialism, it is simply fair.

If you can't find a way to live comfortable and happy on that amount, then let's just pick another amount, but let's be reasonable, here. Vast wealth collection is not one of 'good things' that comes from capitalism.
Sampy And I come back to you now - at the turn of the tide

Oct 08, 2008 at 4:10 PM

ScanIAm said:

evildictaitor said:

*snip*

Ultimately, there has to be a certain limit to how much someone is actually able to keep, for themselves. I'll argue that after, for example, $5million, any further money that you earn is just not fair. All overage should be taken back for any or all of the following:

1) taxes
2) charity
3) active job creation that benefits society, no just you.
4) some other form of social good, not selfish good.

This isn't socialism, it is simply fair.

If you can't find a way to live comfortable and happy on that amount, then let's just pick another amount, but let's be reasonable, here. Vast wealth collection is not one of 'good things' that comes from capitalism.
As long as we ensure the cost of a pony is MAX_WEALTH + $1 so our flag can be this:
ScanIAm This is an...

Oct 08, 2008 at 5:04 PM

Sampy said:

ScanIAm said:

*snip*

As long as we ensure the cost of a pony is MAX_WEALTH + $1 so our flag can be this:

Meh.

Ponies are social good
matthews

Oct 08, 2008 at 5:59 PM

ScanIAm said:

evildictaitor said:

*snip*

Ultimately, there has to be a certain limit to how much someone is actually able to keep, for themselves. I'll argue that after, for example, $5million, any further money that you earn is just not fair. All overage should be taken back for any or all of the following:

1) taxes
2) charity
3) active job creation that benefits society, no just you.
4) some other form of social good, not selfish good.

This isn't socialism, it is simply fair.

If you can't find a way to live comfortable and happy on that amount, then let's just pick another amount, but let's be reasonable, here. Vast wealth collection is not one of 'good things' that comes from capitalism.
It's not the government's or anyone else's money to dispense; it belongs to the person who earned it, and they should be able to do whatever the frak they want to with it.

Also, could you guys ban CC for more than just 'till the 18th? ;D
evildictaitor I'll live forever, or die trying!

Oct 08, 2008 at 6:16 PM

matthews said:

ScanIAm said:

*snip*

It's not the government's or anyone else's money to dispense; it belongs to the person who earned it, and they should be able to do whatever the frak they want to with it.

Also, could you guys ban CC for more than just 'till the 18th? ;D
Yes. The boss of Lehman's deserved all of the $310m that he took during his six year tenure, because he _is_ worth 10000 other Lehman's employees. How dare I or the government call him out on such a figure.
ScanIAm This is an...

Oct 08, 2008 at 6:54 PM

matthews said:

ScanIAm said:

*snip*

It's not the government's or anyone else's money to dispense; it belongs to the person who earned it, and they should be able to do whatever the frak they want to with it.

Also, could you guys ban CC for more than just 'till the 18th? ;D
Actually, the reason that they were able to earn that money was that the country was set up with rules that are enforced by our government. We, the people, contribute to the system that allows someone to make 10s of millions playing sports. Or 100s of millions running a company into the ground. If it weren't for all of us, collectively, paying taxes, creating laws, and enforcing them, it would be anarchy.

In my mind, the price of protection from civil uprising should be a salary cap.

I'm not naive enough to believe that this will ever happen, but I can always dream.
Bass I need better writers.

Oct 08, 2008 at 8:46 PM

phreaks said:

Minh said:

*snip*

I didn't say it was communism, I said it was socialism.

Nothing like free hand-outs to inspire people to work harder and achieve on their own merit, aye.

//what was racist about carona's first post? It may have been idiotic, but I didn't notice anything racist about it???
The whole libertarinish (sic) "they should work" argument is a bit native I think. I mean as an software engineer I have written software who's major purpose was to "relieve" the job responsibilities of groups of people. Really, I make a "living" removing the ability for others to "make a living". Sad truth. Well not really, usually the companies keep these largely useless people onboard to waste time. But really I am not sure how I fit into this work based ecomony.. my labor is to kill human labor everywhere and anywhere I can.

We are getting to a point where not everyone really needs to work. We really need a 200 million person workforce to manage the economy anymore. 10 million and some smart technology might be enough. We have increasingly intelligent technology. Soon with advancements in technology, all human labor will become obsolete.

So what then?

Socialism my friend.
littleguru <3 Seattle

Oct 08, 2008 at 8:50 PM

Bass said:

phreaks said:

*snip*

The whole libertarinish (sic) "they should work" argument is a bit native I think. I mean as an software engineer I have written software who's major purpose was to "relieve" the job responsibilities of groups of people. Really, I make a "living" removing the ability for others to "make a living". Sad truth. Well not really, usually the companies keep these largely useless people onboard to waste time. But really I am not sure how I fit into this work based ecomony.. my labor is to kill human labor everywhere and anywhere I can.

We are getting to a point where not everyone really needs to work. We really need a 200 million person workforce to manage the economy anymore. 10 million and some smart technology might be enough. We have increasingly intelligent technology. Soon with advancements in technology, all human labor will become obsolete.

So what then?

Socialism my friend.

Hmm... wouldn't that mean that we would stop at what we achieved? Isn't stopping going backwards?
Bass I need better writers.

Oct 08, 2008 at 8:57 PM

littleguru said:

Bass said:

*snip*

Hmm... wouldn't that mean that we would stop at what we achieved? Isn't stopping going backwards?

Depends if you work to live, or live to work I guess. Freedom to me is being able to do anything you like. It's a lot easier to this when you don't have job responsibilities. I'd like to go on a extended ski trip, I'd say.

But really, our current technology is very close to surpassing our biological capabilities.. brawn or even intelligence. We are working on software that is creative, software that has intelligence and wisdom. Pretty soon, there will simply be no need to work anymore, sooner if we fund this research more. So why make people work? Let's just give everyone "handouts" I say.
jamie Niner since 2004

Oct 08, 2008 at 9:56 PM

re: [Racist Content Removed. User Banned]

hahahahaha

ah... hahahah good.
rjdohnert You will never know success until you know failure

Oct 08, 2008 at 10:13 PM

Oh great, user banned until Oct 18th. Thanks admin, now he is just going to come to my forums and troll. geez. Personally though, my lesser evil is Obama.
BHpaddock

Oct 09, 2008 at 9:30 AM

phreaks said:

foreachdev said:

*snip*

Yeah, so redistribution of wealth is what this country is all about.

Oh, that guy makes 250k, take his hard earned money and give it to me.

What a bunch of lazy, pansy socialists.
"Redistribution of wealth" doesn't apply here. Focusing tax cuts on those with lesser incomes isn't redistributing wealth. It's being fair. The GOP have spread this myth that the economy is a fixed pie, and that giving tax relief to lower income families means somehow that it must come out of the pockets of the rich. That is simply not the case.

I'm in the group that won't get a tax cut under Obama but might under McCain. I'm voting for Obama. I don't need a tax break, at least not as much as the US government needs to balance its budget and stop borrowing from China. Someday my children are going to live in the country that we today leave behind for them. I don't want them paying for Bush's irresponsible big government spending and endless borrowing. I don't want religion / creationism being taught in their schools as science. I will want them to never have to worry about healthcare no matter what happens to me. I want them to have the same opportunities I had or better. Basically, I don't want this country to continue going down the toilet as it has over the last 8 years and I give that a higher priority than lowering my tax burden.

I also really have to wonder if you make 250k+ a year and are voting for McCain. In my experience, the people who seem most concerned with this "redistribution of wealth" fallacy aren't even affected by it.
wisemx Live it

Oct 09, 2008 at 9:37 AM

BHpaddock said:

phreaks said:

*snip*

"Redistribution of wealth" doesn't apply here. Focusing tax cuts on those with lesser incomes isn't redistributing wealth. It's being fair. The GOP have spread this myth that the economy is a fixed pie, and that giving tax relief to lower income families means somehow that it must come out of the pockets of the rich. That is simply not the case.

I'm in the group that won't get a tax cut under Obama but might under McCain. I'm voting for Obama. I don't need a tax break, at least not as much as the US government needs to balance its budget and stop borrowing from China. Someday my children are going to live in the country that we today leave behind for them. I don't want them paying for Bush's irresponsible big government spending and endless borrowing. I don't want religion / creationism being taught in their schools as science. I will want them to never have to worry about healthcare no matter what happens to me. I want them to have the same opportunities I had or better. Basically, I don't want this country to continue going down the toilet as it has over the last 8 years and I give that a higher priority than lowering my tax burden.

I also really have to wonder if you make 250k+ a year and are voting for McCain. In my experience, the people who seem most concerned with this "redistribution of wealth" fallacy aren't even affected by it.
One Nation Under God
-= Ooh Rah =-
jonathansampson

Oct 09, 2008 at 9:40 AM

wisemx said:

BHpaddock said:

*snip*

One Nation Under God
-= Ooh Rah =-
Oh! You said the "G" word, you religious bigot!
PaoloM Hypermediocrity

Oct 09, 2008 at 9:49 AM

wisemx said:

BHpaddock said:

*snip*

One Nation Under God
-= Ooh Rah =-
Are you serious?
jonathansampson

Oct 09, 2008 at 10:01 AM

PaoloM said:

wisemx said:

*snip*

Are you serious?
Not sure why you're asking. Religious recognition of God is one of the fundamental aspects of the American Government, so if he is serious, he's only just as serious as those who breathed this Country into existence by their own blood and passion - nothing wrong with that.

Thread Closed

This thread is kinda stale and has been closed but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums,
or Contact Us and let us know.

Obama gets gutted, McCain closer to white house

What does this mean?

What does this mean?

Thread Closed