Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Soak the Poor

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 21, 2012, 10:37 a.m. EST by darrenlobo (204)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

To be sure, the original Populists, and the aping Democrats and Republicans, to say nothing of the conscious Socialists, little thought that their income-tax gadget would ever be used to "soak the poor." It was an instrument, they thought, that could lend itself to no other purpose than to expropriate the rich in favor of the poor. How the poor would benefit from the expropriation, they did not explain; their intense hatred of the rich conveniently filled this vacuum in their argument. Their passion blinded them to the fact that this "soak the rich" law would enable the government to filch the pay envelope.

The class-war doctrine is most vicious not in that it sets man against man, producer against producer, but in that it diverts the attention of the contestants from their common enemy, the State.

(snip)

In Germany, the social-security philosophy of government led to that moral decadence which facilitated the advent of Hitler. In England, it made a once-proud people into a nation of panhandlers. What will it do to America?

http://mises.org/daily/5736/Soak-the-Poor

16 Comments

16 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 2 years ago

The ugly truth. America's wealth is STILL being concentrated. When the rich get too rich, the poor get poorer. These latest figures prove it. AGAIN.

According to the Social Security Administration, 50 percent of U.S. workers made less than $26,364 in 2010. In addition, those making less than $200,000, or 98 percent of Americans, saw their earnings fall by $4.5 billion collectively.

The incomes of the top one percent of the wage scale in the U.S. rose in 2010; and their collective wage earnings jumped by $120 billion. In addition, those earning at least $1 million a year in wages, which is roughly 93,000 Americans, reported payroll income jumped 22 percent from 2009.

Overall, the economy has shed 5.2 million jobs since the start of the Great Recession in 2007. It’s the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression in the 1930’s.

Another word about the first Great Depression. It really was a perfect storm. Caused almost entirely by greed. First, there was unprecedented economic growth. There was a massive building spree. There was a growing sense of optimism and materialism. There was a growing obsession for celebrities. The American people became spoiled, foolish, naive, brainwashed, and love-sick. They were bombarded with ads for one product or service after another. Encouraged to spend all of their money as if it were going out of style. Obscene profits were hoarded at the top. In 1928, the rich were already way ahead. Still, they were given huge tax breaks. All of this represented a MASSIVE transfer of wealth from poor to rich. Executives, entrepreneurs, developers, celebrities, and share holders. By 1929, America's wealthiest 1 percent had accumulated 44 percent of all United States wealth. The upper, middle, and lower classes were left to share the rest. When the lower majority finally ran low on money to spend, profits declined and the stock market crashed.

Of course, the rich threw a fit and started cutting jobs. They would stop at nothing to maintain their disgusting profit margins and ill-gotten obscene levels of wealth as long as possible. The small business owners did what they felt necessary to survive. They cut more jobs. The losses were felt primarily by the little guy. This created a domino effect. The middle class shrunk drastically and the lower class expanded. With less wealth in reserve and active circulation, banks failed by the hundreds. More jobs were cut. Unemployment reached 25% in 1933. The worst year of the Great Depression. Those who were employed had to settle for much lower wages. Millions went cold and hungry. The recovery involved a massive infusion of new currency, a public works program, a World War, and higher taxes on the rich. With so many men in the service, so many women on the production line, and those higher taxes to help pay for it, some US wealth was gradually transferred back down to the majority. This redistribution of wealth continued until the mid seventies. By 1976, the richest 1 percent held  less than 20 percent. The lower majority held the rest. And rightfully so. It was the best year ever for the middle and lower classes. This was the recovery. A partial redistribution of wealth.

Then it began to concentrate all over again. Here we are 35 years later. The richest one percent now own 40 percent of all US wealth. The upper, middle, and lower classes are sharing the rest. This is true even after taxes, welfare, financial aid, and charity. It is the underlying cause. If there is no redistribution, there will be no recovery. 

Note: A knowledgable and trustworthy contributor has gone on record with a claim that effective tax rates for the rich were considerably lower than book rates during the years of redistribution that I have made reference to. His point was that the rich were able to avoid those very high marginal rates of 70-90% under the condition that they invested specifically in American jobs. His claim is that effective rates for the rich probably never exceeded 39% and certainly never exceeded 45%. My belief is that if true, those effective rates for the rich were still considerably higher than previous lows of '29'. Also that such policies still would have contributed to a partial redistribution by forcing the rich to either share profits and potential income through mass job creation or share income through very high marginal tax rates. This knowledgable contributor and I agree that there was in effect, a redistribution but disagree on the use of the word.

One thing is clear from recent events. The government won't step in and do what's necessary. Not this time. Book rates for the rich remain at all time lows. Their corporate golden geese are heavily subsidized. The benefits of corporate welfare are paid almost exclusively to the rich. Our Federal, State, and local leaders are sold out. Most of whom, are rich and trying to get even richer at our expense. They won't do anything about the obscene concentration of wealth. It's up to us. Support small business more and big business less. Support the little guy more and the big guy less. It's tricky but not impossible.

For the good of society, stop giving so much of your money to rich people. Stop concentrating the wealth. This may be our last chance to prevent the worst economic depression in world history. No redistribution. No recovery.

Those of you who agree on these major issues are welcome to summarize this post, copy it, use any portion, link to it, save it, show a friend, or spread the word in any fashion. Most major cities have daily call-in talk radio shows. You can reach thousands of people at once. They should know the ugly truth. Be sure to quote the figures which prove that America's wealth is still being concentrated. I don't care who takes the credit. We are up against a tiny but very powerful minority who have more influence on the masses than any other group in history. They have the means to reach millions at once with outrageous political and commercial propaganda. Those of us who speak the ugly truth must work incredibly hard just to be heard.

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=XgygaG87rZY

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

"The ugly truth. America's wealth is STILL being concentrated. When the rich get too rich, the poor get poorer. These latest figures prove it. AGAIN."

Quite so, but why? Because of the corporatist economic system. The govt facilitates the concentration of wealth at the top through regulation, licensing, & taxation. Do you want to help the people? Advocate a free market where the govt is powerless to help the 1% & powerless to keep the 99% down.

[-] 0 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 2 years ago

It's not only corporations that concentrate wealth. Regardless, our society would crumble with no safety net. I can not support your proposal.

[-] -3 points by LaraLittletree (-850) from Scarsdale, NY 2 years ago

Seems unhappy people become Liberals. People seek out those that are similar. Birds of a feather flock together. An unhappy person looks around and sees two groups: happy people, and unhappy people. Rather than take a page out of the former group, enter the herd and ask for help and guidance , the person is more likely to choose the path of least resistance — of instant acceptance. “Come to Mumsy, darling, you’re one of us.” And once in the herd, it becomes very, very difficult to leave it.

The Liberal, of course, will deny this pathology. No, they say, they are only trying to make things fair. Liberals are consumed with fixing the world. By eliminating what is unfair, by eliminating the evil banks and the greedy corporations, all the little people will receive what is rightfully theirs! Subconsciously, then, nobody will be more successful than they are... are so twisted with hate, and so convinced of their own in inability.. they cannot even rely on themselves to overthrow The Other. They hand over their own power to a third party — the GOVERNMENT, to do their dirty work in the form of increased taxation and regulation.

Liberals, however, have got it turned around. They seek to heal the world before healing themselves first. They see this as somehow noble, great sacrifice. Well, it’s easy to make a sacrifice when you regard yourself as valueless. Every major religion across almost every culture, instructs man to take care of himself first, and then attempt to heal the world. Get with the program..

[-] 2 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 2 years ago

No man-made structural barriers to the pursuit of happiness? Just bad choices, right?

You are perpetuating false division, being at times happy and at times unhappy is to be a modern human.

[-] -3 points by LaraLittletree (-850) from Scarsdale, NY 2 years ago

However to perpetually identify yourself with the lib group....for long periods of time...(years & decades)...appears to be potentially pathological.. Is a dead end ...Just creates a more dependent multitude who are and making more excuses for their own personal failures and lack of ambition. (sorry for run on sentence)

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 2 years ago

How long have you yourself identified with this 'anti-lib group'? more than two hours i can prove by your comment below to Jess.

[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 2 years ago

What will you do if your product still further increases next year? You should then destroy again the warehouses which you are now preparing to build, and build bigger. For the reason why God has given you fruitful harvests is that He might either overcome your avarice or condemn it; wherefore you can have no excuse. But you keep for yourself what He wished to be produced through you for the benefit of many -- nay, rather, you rob even yourself of it, since you would better preserve it for yourself if you distributed it to others.

-Ambrose, Bishop of Milan (339-397)

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 2 years ago

Like your recipe you have many ingrediants but no substance. Im sorry but you do not deserve more than anyone else,you are not special.Find somthing of meaning to do with your life besides the me first mentality.

[-] -2 points by LaraLittletree (-850) from Scarsdale, NY 2 years ago

hey...what is up? thanks for sharing your thoughts. Have an excellent day.. Ps...Good website if you need it...bestjobsusa

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 2 years ago

Sorry to bust your bubble,But retierd five years ago.I have no intention of working for the next seven years. Paid off mortgage and kids student loans.I just don't fit your idea of what an occupier should be.But you keep up with your misguided assumptions of how everyone that does not subscribe to your viewpoint is lazy unemployed etc. Nice conservative talking point but False

[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 2 years ago

Don't believe this outrageous crap about the rich paying 37% of the taxes in America and the poor paying none. It's a trick. A spin on statistics to make it seem as if the rich are overtaxed. They aren't. But they damn well should be. We're in this mess because of them.

Be careful when you hear or read anything regarding the PERCENTAGE of OVERALL FEDERAL INCOME taxes paid by any particular group, it's a terribly misleading statistic. The rich pay a larger PERCENTAGE of OVERALL FEDERAL INCOME taxes now than 10 years ago because they have a larger PERCENTAGE of OVERALL INCOME in America now than 10 years ago. That statistic regarding 37% of Federal Income Taxes is one of the most misleading in the history of propaganda.

When you account for all FEDERAL, STATE, and LOCAL taxes and fees, the middle class actually pay about the same rate (as a percentage of income) as the rich. The difference is within 5 percent. It shouldn't be that way. The rich should pay a MUCH higher rate simply because they are horribly over-paid. We aren't. They own 43% of all financial wealth in America. We share the rest. But it gets even more disgusting. The devil is in the details.

Corporate profits have been partially subsidized with federal, state, and local revenue. This benefit has been hoarded at the top. Business managers make up the largest group of one percent club pigs. Plus 40% of the market is owned by the top 1%. Their record territory dividends have been partially subsidized by federal, state, and local revenue. The benefits have not been shared proportionally with the little guy. The lopsided division of household income growth across quintiles proves it. 

The highest percentile has grown more than 10 times faster than the middle percentile over the last 30 years. This is true EVEN AFTER taxes. When you account for inflation and the actual cost of living (tied to record high profits in energy, finance, and healthcare), the middle class have actually lost relative buying power while the top 1% have drastically increased their income and bottom line wealth. 

In 1976 (when their taxes were much higher), the top one percent reaped 9 percent of all private income and held less than 20 percent of all private wealth in America. Now, they reap 21% percent of all private income and hold 40% of all private wealth. Meanwhile, the lower majority (those who are still employed) are working more hours and have less to show for it.

Just to make it crystal clear: The rich do not pay 37% of all taxes. They never have. They pay roughly 37% of all FEDERAL INCOME TAXES which account for less than 1/2 of total government revenue. The rest is drawn from a number of sources and across income levels. The rich harp on this 'Federal Income Tax' statistic because it leads people to believe that they pay 37% of ALL taxes. They don't. Their share as a group represents just over their share of income. The difference is within 5 percent. In fact, the 2nd percentile actually pays a slightly higher rate on average than the top percentile. 

If the rich want to pay a lower share of the taxes in America, then they should get themselves a lower share of the income in America. In other words, don't be so rich to begin with. After all, this obscene concentration of wealth actually CAUSES economic instability. It CAUSES poverty. It will CAUSE the next Great Depression.

No more excuses.  

RAISE THOSE GOD DAMN TAXES ON THE RICH!

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=XgygaG87rZY

This site is being ruined by trolls. It's no accident. It's no game. It's about money and PR. The rich don't want our messages read. They don't want people to understand. They don't want to accept responsibility for any of this. They will say or do anything to divert our attention.

Don't let them get away with it. 

Search the AM dial day and night for local call in talk radio shows. There are dozens of them. Call in and be heard by thousands at once. Its easy. I've done it over 800 times. Just don't bother with Limbaugh, Hanity, Levin, Beck, Ingraham, Savage, Doyle, Harley, Mcnamera, Bortz, or Bruce. Those guys are a waste of time. The others are ok.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 2 years ago

Billionaire businessman Warren Buffet said on CNBC about a year ago already: “There's CLASS WARFARE, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning.”

On CNN, he later stated : "Actually, there’s been class warfare going on for the last 20 years, and my class has won. We’re the ones that have gotten our tax rates reduced dramatically. If you look at the 400 highest taxpayers in the United States in 1992, the first year for figures, they averaged about $40 million of [income] per person. In the most recent year, they were $227 million per person — five for one. During that period, their taxes went down from 29 percent to 21 percent of income. So, if there’s class warfare, the rich class has won."

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (21771) 2 years ago

How about we don't do that and continue with income tax. :D

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

Sure, when the Sugar Plum fairy is in the Whitehouse she'll do it. http://youtu.be/8At8zfh_o3E Until then the politicians will keep messing us all over.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (21771) 2 years ago

Sorry, Libertarians, like Trix, are for kids.

[Removed]