Obama Caught on Tape "I believe in redistribution"

[Dr Kynes]

how telling. this silly doodle asserts that romney doesnt want the support of illegal aliens, which begs the question why doe obama WANT the support of people not eligible to vote and who are in this country illegally?

answer, because he doesnt give a shit about the laws, our constitution, or our nation he wants EVERYBODY to share in the dream of marxism, and the stateless, classless, hopeless socialist dystopia he endorses

the vote of an illegal alien is just as valid and important to obama as the vote of a citizen, since he is not a citizen either.

 

[NoDrama]

So, the sentence above the one that is bolded says that Obama BELIEVES IN REDISTRIBUTION.

The next sentence talks about the technical issues of redistribution.

And you got from it he wasnt talking about redistribution....

The above poster is the product of the public education system.

I don't think London has yet realized that his demigod either completely contradicted himself, or London interpreted it wrong. Those are the only 2 possibilities. London thinks Barack said " I want to redistribute the wealth, but not really."

 

[beenthere]

If taxation is the same as the redistribution of wealth, why has it been so hard for Obama to use that term?
Why does he dodge that very question when asked? You people are so fucking easy! LOL

 

[nontheist]

All taxation is redistribution unless all tax payers demand identical services and make indentical amounts of money.

This "redistribution" cannard is just one example of the right's single minded interpretation of anything they don't understand as being baaaad.

I have shown several times on this website that conservatives actually believe in redistribution, so long as it is taking from the poor and middle class and giving to the rich. I posted a chart indicating that wages have remained flat over the last several decades while income for the rich has increased - even as production has increased - that would indicate..... redistribution.


But conservatives have no problem with that sort of redistribution, it is only when the money flows the other way that they have a problem.

Canndo, I have seen many many republicans pitch "flat tax" lets make it fair across the board argument. Flat tax also makes tax easier to manage and corruption stick out like a sore thumb. It get's killed every time, because democrat's don't want fair, they want redistribution.

 

[Fungus Gnat]

how telling. this silly doodle asserts that romney doesnt want the support of illegal aliens, which begs the question why doe obama WANT the support of people not eligible to vote and who are in this country illegally?

answer, because he doesnt give a shit about the laws, our constitution, or our nation he wants EVERYBODY to share in the dream of marxism, and the stateless, classless, hopeless socialist dystopia he endorses

the vote of an illegal alien is just as valid and important to obama as the vote of a citizen, since he is not a citizen either.

Because all Hispanics are illegal right?

 

[canndo]

If taxation is the same as the redistribution of wealth, why has it been so hard for Obama to use that term?
Why does he dodge that very question when asked? You people are so fucking easy! LOL

You are making a case by asking why a person has trouble using a particular term? How is that "easy"?

You aren't actually claiming that taxation is not redistriution of wealth are you beenthere?

 

[canndo]

Canndo, I have seen many many republicans pitch "flat tax" lets make it fair across the board argument. Flat tax also makes tax easier to manage and corruption stick out like a sore thumb. It get's killed every time, because democrat's don't want fair, they want redistribution.

the flat tax prohibits government from being able to influence society - that is the simple truth of it. The Dems would like to preserve their ability to promote or discourage certain activities through manipulated taxes. Republicans as well would like to retain that ability.

I can't see the flat tax as being fair at any rate if I have an understanding of what a flat tax looks like (and I may not)

 

[NoDrama]

- that would indicate..... redistribution.

What that actually indicates is that the rich people know how to invest and the poor people don't.

The other thing you forgot to realize is that 47% of the poorest people don't pay any income tax so they don't redistribute shit to anyone. The top 53% of earners pay all the income tax.

The US Constitution originally setup a tax system where everyone paid the same, but they changed it.

 

[NoDrama]

the flat tax prohibits government from being able to influence society - that is the simple truth of it. The Dems would like to preserve their ability to promote or discourage certain activities through manipulated taxes. Republicans as well would like to retain that ability.

I can't see the flat tax as being fair at any rate if I have an understanding of what a flat tax looks like (and I may not)

Society should influence government, not the other way around. Government is supposed to work for the people, not against them.

 

[Dr Kynes]

"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise."

Thomas Jefferson

yes, taxes on PROPERTY not taxes on labour and sweat.

jefferson would slap the taste out of your mouth for twisting his words like that. all poor people have to sell is their labour, to whit, their sweat and their time, and taxing those labours by definition robs the poor man of the essence of his life, while the wealthy are taxed on their possessions and property.

leftists see the poor man's labours and the rich man's property both as resources to be tapped for the good of the leftist agenda. i dont want my resources tapped for anybody's agenda.

the income tax is in fact unconstitutional theft of not money, but LIFE ITSELF from the poor, while it is a punitive confiscatory theft from the rich, but a constitutional tax on standing wealth, and corporate income would NOT have required any shenanigans or a poorly crafted and unratified constitutional amendment.

if you leftists could stop picking my pocket long enough to listen to your own retarded rhetoric in defense of taxing a poor man's very life you might grow a conscience and reject the current tax system in favour of a constitutionally allowed option.

obama and the gang all harp on higher taxes for the rich, but only to pay for more stupid programs, when what we need is fairer taxes on the rich, and a method of taxation that does not demand 30% of your life as compensation for government services that most working people dont want or need.

 

[nontheist]

the flat tax prohibits government from being able to influence society - that is the simple truth of it. The Dems would like to preserve their ability to promote or discourage certain activities through manipulated taxes. Republicans as well would like to retain that ability.

I can't see the flat tax as being fair at any rate if I have an understanding of what a flat tax looks like (and I may not)

Yeah that is a very socialistic answer. So with that answer you do admit that democrats are for redistribution? They have zero intentions of being fair?

 

[canndo]

What that actually indicates is that the rich people know how to invest and the poor people don't.

The other thing you forgot to realize is that 47% of the poorest people don't pay any income tax so they don't redistribute shit to anyone. The top 53% of earners pay all the income tax.

The US Constitution originally setup a tax system where everyone paid the same, but they changed it.

NoDrama, you rarely spout party lines, in fact I tend to do that more than you. I am surprised that you would bring up this 47 percent issue without talking about the particulars.

Firstly, it isn't 47 percent of the poorest people, it is 47 percent of all tax filers (as Beenthere mentioned). Just because these people don't pay income tax does not mean they pay no tax at all. Among that 47 percent are students and retired people, and, about 4 percent of those that pay no income tax are those who make more than 100,000 dollars. The students will likely pay their full share soon, the poor have already paid theirs.

Regardless of how you couch it, there is redistribution and it is not necessarily that some "know how to invest". It may well be that those people haven't the money to invest, they have had financial setbacks, or find themselves in any number of situations that would preclude their "getting rich".

Please direct me to that Constitution that set up a tax system.

 

[londonfog]

I don't think London has yet realized that his demigod either completely contradicted himself, or London interpreted it wrong. Those are the only 2 possibilities. London thinks Barack said " I want to redistribute the wealth, but not really."

no silly I listened to the whole speech from 1998 and realize that Obama was speaking about competition, the market place and innovation in an effort to improve government services ( what some call social programs ) in Chicago. You people just heard a sound bite with a particular word and now are very confused.

 

[canndo]

Yeah that is a very socialistic answer. So with that answer you do admit that democrats are for redistribution? They have zero intentions of being fair?

What? I said that both the left and the right insist that they keep their ability to alter society through taxation, now that may be socialistic in through some strange interpretation of the concept but it is responding to your original post in a truthful way. It has nothing to do with my having "admitted" that democrats are "for" redistribution.

Deductions for morgage payments was a Republican idea, it is based on their original contention that everyone should own a house and that individuals owning homes was good for America. Deductions for children was a Republican idea that was seen as encouraging people to have families and children. Republicans to this day think that having children is good for America.

But each of these alterations in general taxation are redistributions. Those that have no children or rent a home are in effect, paying those who do have houses or children - redistribution, and not something that, to my understanding, is included in a flat tax.

 

[NoDrama]

no silly I listened to the whole speech from 1998 and realize that Obama was speaking about competition, the market place and innovation in an effort to improve government services ( what some call social programs ) in Chicago. You people just heard a sound bite with a particular word and now are very confused.

If that were true he would have said so, instead he said he believes in redistribution. No where in the lexicon of English language is redistribution defined as " Free market competition".

 

[NoDrama]

NoDrama, you rarely spout party lines, in fact I tend to do that more than you. I am surprised that you would bring up this 47 percent issue without talking about the particulars.

Firstly, it isn't 47 percent of the poorest people, it is 47 percent of all tax filers (as Beenthere mentioned). Just because these people don't pay income tax does not mean they pay no tax at all. Among that 47 percent are students and retired people, and, about 4 percent of those that pay no income tax are those who make more than 100,000 dollars. The students will likely pay their full share soon, the poor have already paid theirs.

Regardless of how you couch it, there is redistribution and it is not necessarily that some "know how to invest". It may well be that those people haven't the money to invest, they have had financial setbacks, or find themselves in any number of situations that would preclude their "getting rich".

Please direct me to that Constitution that set up a tax system.

Ok I will go along with the fact that not all of the 47% are poor, just that 47% aren't paying in, therefore the other 53% are doing all the paying.

Just for future knowledge so we don't argue over semantics, when we talk about INCOME tax, we are talking just about INCOME tax on the federal level. Don't confuse the issue by bringing state, sales, fuel, excise taxes and such into the picture.

 

[Dr Kynes]

What that actually indicates is that the rich people know how to invest and the poor people don't.

The other thing you forgot to realize is that 47% of the poorest people don't pay any income tax so they don't redistribute shit to anyone. The top 53% of earners pay all the income tax.

The US Constitution originally setup a tax system where everyone paid the same, but they changed it.

thats funny, i FEEL like i pay taxes... my paycheck SHOWS i pay taxes, and my lack of money PROVES i pay taxes.

stop parroting romney's talking points. the "income tax" is not the only tax on income, nor is it the only tax. the poor pay the greatest percentage of the other non "income tax" income taxes, and other taxes. the real truth is niether side gives a fuck where the "revenue" comes from all they want is more of it. they sing and dance and create powerpoint presentations to support their own personal favorite place to rob, but they both steal big, steal little and always ALWAYS steal. its what washington and politicians do.

Romney wants to rob from those who already shoulder the burden of the heaviest and most "regressive" taxes, while obama wants to shove his fist up the asses of the wealthy till he can pull out their pancreas for sale on the chinese black market for used organs.

both these assholes are liars when it comes to taxes, and on the tax issue neither one will change shit for the people who are currently getting kicked in the nuts.

your assertion that rich people are smarter with their money than poor people only proves that you dont know why poor people are called POOR, BECAUSE THEY GOT NO MONEY TO INVEST!

if we had money to invest we would be part of the investment class or the "Middle Class" of merchants and managers. Romney's tone deaf harping on the evils of the people who pay the lions share of TAXES (not income taxes, but taxes in general) proves that he is exactly as stupid as Barry Seotoro on the issues that make the economy work.

Protip: Rich people and the middle class dont pay taxes. they simply charge more for the goods and services used by the poor to ensure their continued prosperity, and the burden of paying for the higher costs created by taxation of the wealthy and the merchant class falls squarely on the bent and weary shoulders of those who cannot charge more for their sweat that the merchants and industrialists will pay, and with a whole world full of poor motherfuckers to squeeze they got the lock on options for reducing their costs.

the aim of capitalism is to reward industry for industriousness and ideally provide a ladder out of poverty for those with a good idea, a willingness to work their asses off or a shitload of luck.

the cronyism we got now (and for the last 100 or so years) ensures that the poor stay in their place, while the middle class dream of upward mobility and the wealthy get a free ride on the backs of the hoi pollloi

neither mitt romney nor barry seotoro have any intention of changing the status quo since the status quo ensures the quo of their status.

 

[abandonconflict]

yes, taxes on PROPERTY not taxes on labour and sweat.

jefferson would slap the taste out of your mouth for twisting his words like that. all poor people have to sell is their labour, to whit, their sweat and their time, and taxing those labours by definition robs the poor man of the essence of his life, while the wealthy are taxed on their possessions and property.

leftists see the poor man's labours and the rich man's property both as resources to be tapped for the good of the leftist agenda. i dont want my resources tapped for anybody's agenda.

the income tax is in fact unconstitutional theft of not money, but LIFE ITSELF from the poor, while it is a punitive confiscatory theft from the rich, but a constitutional tax on standing wealth, and corporate income would NOT have required any shenanigans or a poorly crafted and unratified constitutional amendment.

if you leftists could stop picking my pocket long enough to listen to your own retarded rhetoric in defense of taxing a poor man's very life you might grow a conscience and reject the current tax system in favour of a constitutionally allowed option.

obama and the gang all harp on higher taxes for the rich, but only to pay for more stupid programs, when what we need is fairer taxes on the rich, and a method of taxation that does not demand 30% of your life as compensation for government services that most working people dont want or need.

nice strawman, we're talking about redistribution though, not income tax

 

[nontheist]

What? I said that both the left and the right insist that they keep their ability to alter society through taxation, now that may be socialistic in through some strange interpretation of the concept but it is responding to your original post in a truthful way. It has nothing to do with my having "admitted" that democrats are "for" redistribution.

Deductions for morgage payments was a Republican idea, it is based on their original contention that everyone should own a house and that individuals owning homes was good for America. Deductions for children was a Republican idea that was seen as encouraging people to have families and children. Republicans to this day think that having children is good for America.

But each of these alterations in general taxation are redistributions. Those that have no children or rent a home are in effect, paying those who do have houses or children - redistribution, and not something that, to my understanding, is included in a flat tax.

Ah but republicans are the majority for flat tax. So please tell me why are democrats so anti flat tax? It would eliminate a lot of "fairness" bickering. It would make the system so much easier, it would allow business and people to know their tax rate from year to year. No guessing games no red tape voodoo.

You know what most democrats argue about flat taxes, if we all pay the same people that have more money will have more money when taxed the same as me. Fuck fair right?

 

[londonfog]

If that were true he would have said so, instead he said he believes in redistribution. No where in the lexicon of English language is redistribution defined as " Free market competition".

WTF Dude... Foodstamps are a godsend to farmers in the "free market" system. Do I really need to break down how they link...You should know this...are you not a farmer