Since the rich are evil, every single person working for the following companies should be fired;

[A HERETIC I AM]

Cessna Aircraft
Bell Helicopter, Commercial Division (Don't want to fire the guys making choppers for the military, do we?)
Beechcraft
Bombardier Aircraft
(In fact, all employees of makers of light planes and jets should be forced to find other work)
Polaris
Fountain Powerboats
Ranger Boats
WellCraft
Donzi Marine
Somerset Houseboats
(In fact, all employees of boat makers larger than a canoe should be forced to find other work)
Ferrari
Lamborghini
Roll Royce/Bentley Motorcars
Bugatti
(In fact, all employees of car makers who build luxury or expensive sports cars should be forced to find other work)
All makers of snow skis
All makers of golf clubs
All makers of customized Motorcoaches/RV's
All makers of anything that is regularly purchased by anyone with "Disposable Income"

The following activities/services should be outlawed because they cater primarily to the rich or people with disposable income;
The Cruise industry.
The Skiing industry.
Airline travel for vacations or pleasure.
Swimming pool building industry.
All Equestrian related businesses.
All business related to sport fishing, including charter boat operators and rod and reel makers/tackle makers.
Private rail excursions.
Recreational Vehicle ownership/usage.
Yacht ownership. (A Yacht being characterized as any boat bigger than a canoe.)
Ownership of a "Vacation Home"
The hiring of Maids/Butlers, even temporarily.


The following people should be taken around back and shot;
Every person in the world that makes more or is worth more than an arbitrary dollar amount because i simply hate people who make more than i do.
Me, for assuming that most everyone will get the point here, even without a damned sarcasm smiley, but realizing there will be at least ONE person who will think all of the above is a truly good idea.

[Missy Vixen]

1. I'll K&R

I never knew it was so evil to not only earn money, to enjoy it is Evil and Must Not Be Permitted, till I came here.

Julie

[A HERETIC I AM]

3. Thanks. Me too.

I have to go to bed soon, because i have to get up early and go to work and serve my corporate overlords. Or some such nonsense.

[question everything]

80. This is what bothers me when people here

bash Clinton, for example, as - gasp - supporting corporations. This is why I switched my support from Edwards to Biden.

I have posted here several times: thanks to corporations most of us are making a living, pay taxes - that support the DUers who are public employees - pay property taxes that allow our schools and our towns to function, and contribute to worthy causes like... DU.

Yes, there are many problems with corporations, especially when top management eviscerate pension funds while providing bonuses to itself. Or the obscene gap between CEO compensation and that of the average workers.

But this is why we have laws, and should have more of those to regulate them.

For example, I think that there should be some kind of an equation that as the ratio between the CEO/average worker compensation increase, more should be matched to the employees' 401Ks.

And that if a corporation raid a pension fund and force employees to take a pay cut - while in the process of bankruptcy, it should be prohibited from paying bonuses to top management - as Northwest Airlines had done.

[tabasco]

7. Is somebody holding a gun to your head, forcing you to read DU?

I've been here for years and never saw anyone post that it was evil to earn money or spend money. Why would you say something like that?

I have seen a lot of people decry unregulated capitalism, which is a disaster for the country.

http://www.lcurve.org/

[YellowRubberDuckie]

36. Do you read DU?

Because if you did, you would know that this happens EVERYDAY.
Duckie

[Mike Daniels]

42. LOL

Not a week goes by where someone isn't bitching about how wrong it is that people make over $x, spend over $x on some item that said poster feels is irrelevent, or otherwise heap scorn on people who spend the majority of money they make on themselves vs. giving it all to charity.

[Missy Vixen]

58. I've been here for almost seven years now

I also contribute money, which is a good thing. It seems that there are those who think the site operates for free.

>Why would you say something like that?<

Uh, because it's TRUE?
Julie

[kestrel91316]

11. To earn it and gloat over one's earnings and good fortune

while so many others must do without the basics is in bad form. Shame on those who do.

Of course that wouldn't include you. You are sinless.

[Missy Vixen]

57. Okay, Kestrel, I'll dance

When have I ever bragged about my "earnings" and "good fortune" on this site? I'm waiting.

>Of course that wouldn't include you. You are sinless.<

Actually, I'm increasingly tired of those who portray themselves as the moral arbiter of the correct amount of money to spend on anything, where that thing should be obtained, the "acceptable" amount of money to make per year, etcetera.

Julie

[kestrel91316]

60. I have accused YOU of nothing. I am merely pointing out why some here

might tend to go off on those who DO brag and gloat over their monetary situation. Bad manners on the part of the wealthier among us do not engender particularly good feelings among the less fortunate.

I referred to you specifically as sinless. I don't know you from Adam.

Why so defensive? Conscience perhaps bothering you?

[Missy Vixen]

62. Actually, Kestrel, no, it's not

When you attack me, I'll defend myself. I knew you'd find nothing to back up your original accusation, so there you are.

>Why so defensive? Conscience perhaps bothering you?<

My conscience is fine. I didn't need to spoil for a fight to prove a nonexistent accusation.

Julie

[Initech]

2. Dont forget Porsche!

[rwenos]

5. Dr. Porsche Designed the Volkswagen, You Know

For Hitler, in the early 1930's.

Just an interesting historical fact, that's all.

Q: What's the difference between a porcupine and a Porsche?
A: The porcupine has its asshole on the OUTSIDE.

[Thothmes]

32. He also built Tiger Tanks for the Hitler.

[Demonaut]

40. lol, I own porsche..my second one

I'm thinking of making it a hybrid but having trouble finding a short enough mast that'll clear bridges and over passes

[rwenos]

4. "I hate all rich people, but . . ."

". . . I think I'd be just DARLING at it." (Dorothy Parker)

"The rich are different than you and I." (F. Scott Fitzgerald's narrator Nick Carraway, in "The Great Gatsby.")

It's hard not to be envious, isn't it? But let us not confuse our envy with our enmity.

Meanwhile, I buy a lottery ticket once a week. Just in case God needs help finding me.
:-)

[Breeze54]

6. Is that you Warren ?

Maybe it's his even more wealthier friend, Bill Gates? :shrug:

I think you're mistaking the outrage against greedy, rich bastards and for some reason including
yourself in that group. Unless of course, the show fits. But I seriously doubt Mr. Buffet would
be posting here but then again, stranger things have happened. Being rich isn't the issue, as I
see it but being a greedy SOB that makes his or her money off of others pain is probably where
the wrath is directed. But that's just my take on it. YMMV If you've done well for yourself, then
that's awesome and you've earned very penny! Good for you! Enjoy it! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: Job well done!

[A HERETIC I AM]

15. What makes you think i include myself in "that group"?

Being rich isn't the issue, as I
see it but being a greedy SOB that makes his or her money off of others pain is probably where
the wrath is directed.

It is often directed at anyone who is considered "rich" by any number of arbitrary standards and regardless of how they attained it.

BTW, i can discern how the "outrage" is directed rather clearly, thanks. Some people type the same sentiments with every other post, it seems.

And as far as how well i have done for myself - not that it is anyone's business but my own (If i was loaded, DU is the LAST place i would mention it) but i have made a complete career change in the last 18 months and have taken two steps back, financially. I live in a tiny apartment and drive a 4 year old car. But things are going to get better, so i don't worry about it.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

51. What if they don't get better? What if you get sick or injured and can't work?

What if your health insurance (if you have it) drops you?

Well, I guess you could console yourself that the people making yachts for the health insurance CEOs and shareholders still have plenty of work.

BTW If wealth and success are purely a result of being smart and hard-working then you must be neither, or else you'd be flush with cash now. 18 months is more than adequate time for a plucky bootstrap-puller such as yourself to become financially solvent. Tsk tsk...

[SammyWinstonJack]

53. ...

:yoiks: :evilgrin:

[A HERETIC I AM]

71. If they don't get better it will be my own damned fault.

I made a choice to control my destiny. But, i am obviously not smart or hardworking enough because i have failed to satisfy your timetable for my success. Tsk Tsk, indeed. Just so you won't feel left out, I'll let you know when i sign the lease agreements for a hangar and a boat slip.

Plucky? Thanks. Bootstrap puller? Ok, sure. You wanted that to sound snarky but i am not ashamed of being someone who gave up pitying myself and complaining about my lot in life about 25 years ago.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

79. My parents died penniless. What losers.

My dad was an economist/statistician for the federal government and then went to law school in his 40s. He practiced criminal defense law in D.C. helping many of his poor and indigent clients go on to productive lives. He died of complications from diabetes. My stepmom was a talented artist and violinist. She taught violin to students of all ages and was a librarian at a university. She succumbed to cancer. My mom was a pianist and a successful small business owner. She developed blood clots on her brain which ultimately led to her going into a nursing home. Within 2 years all her assets were gone.

They may have made a choice to control their destinies, but their destinies had other ideas. They died broke because the greedy plutocrats you are so enamored of geared the system to enrich themselves at the expense of others.

You are one health crisis or natural or economic disaster away from poverty, my friend, just like most of the rest of us. The odds that you will end up like my parents are astronomically higher than those of you ever buying a yacht or a plane.

[A HERETIC I AM]

83. You're right. I'm sorry. I give up.

You have made it perfectly clear that there is no real point in seeking financial security. After all, i might die penniless. I might get a blood clot in my brain next week and then that would be it, so what's the point? Yes, i see it clearly now.

I am truly sorry your parents suffered. Really, I am. Tragedy and suffering are not things i would wish on even my worst enemy. But they did not die broke "because the greedy plutocrats you are so enamored of geared the system to enrich themselves at the expense of others." That is a serious stretch and you know it. The "system" has in place mechanisms available to avoid such financial catastrophes and people take advantage of them every single day. I don't know your parents or their situation or how it came about so i will leave it there. However, you don't know me or my situation either so you are out of line insinuating i am "enamored" of anyone. A proper, single payer health care system would have provided the needed care for your parents and at the same time allowed them to retain the assets they worked so hard to attain. I absolutely agree that such a system should be implemented, but the follow-on that such a system does not exist, or that your parents had extraordinary circumstances befall them merely because there are rich people is absurd.

You are one health crisis or natural or economic disaster away from poverty, my friend, just like most of the rest of us. The odds that you will end up like my parents are astronomically higher than those of you ever buying a yacht or a plane.

Again, you don't know me or my situation. As far as the odds on how i will end up - well, i'll leave that to a professional bookmaker, not you, the apparent, self appointed spokesperson for "most of the rest of us". But i can and will do all i can to affect that outcome by planning properly for the future.


If it is your opinion that all wealthy people should be stripped of their wealth then fine. So be it. You are entitled to your perspective just as i am entitled to mine.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

84. You are deliberately distorting what I said

That we don't have a single payer health care system is not simply because rich people exist. We don't have health care for all because greedy plutocrats have geared the system to benefit them and not us. Rich people are not the problem per se. Greedy people are. Any doubt that greedy people are running this country's health care system should be removed by watching the woman in Sicko testifying before Congress that she was ordered to deny lifesaving treatment to people. Since you assert (wrongly) that I advocate stripping all wealthy people of their fortunes, let me ask if you believe that ultra-rich people who deny health care to sick people (who paid their premiums like they were supposed to) should be able to keep theirs. I believe they shouldn't. There are numerous other examples of people who amass extraordinary wealth by ripping people off and sometimes killing them in the process. They may not be all, or even most, of the super-wealthy people in the world, but they comprise a disturbingly large section of them.

And you're right, I may not "know" you, but based on your description of your current financial situation I stand by what I said. The statistical probability of you becoming penniless due to a health problem or other crisis is astronomically higher than your buying a yacht or plane. That is not a statement on your ambition or whether or not you should work toward financial security. It is merely an observation of reality. You can certainly try to control your destiny but you can't guarantee the outcome.

[A HERETIC I AM]

87. Bullshit. You started this exchange by making distorted assumptions about me that fit your

prejudice, merely because i had the temerity to gore a sacred cow. What you said (The point, anyway) was that your parents died penniless because they had catastrophic illnesses that cost them their life savings. You then stated i could be next.

Your prior post;

What if they don't get better? What if you get sick or injured and can't work?
What if your health insurance (if you have it) drops you? What if a meteor lands on my head? I'm curious why it is even any of your business or why you would concern yourself with me, since you hold me and my ambitions in such obvious contempt. If those things happen to me i will deal with them, just as i have dealt with every other setback or disaster i have encountered in my life.
Well, I guess you could console yourself that the people making yachts for the health insurance CEOs and shareholders still have plenty of work. What a ridiculous statement. OK, from now on i will rejoice every time a worker at a yacht builder loses their job. Would that be satisfactory?
BTW If wealth and success are purely a result of being smart and hard-working then you must be neither, or else you'd be flush with cash now. 18 months is more than adequate time for a plucky bootstrap-puller such as yourself to become financially solvent. Tsk tsk...Again, as i said above, you meant this to be a snarky comment, aimed at me and my ambitions. Why you would insult the idea that i am trying to better my situation is completely beyond me.

My response to your post above included a remark about me letting you know if i buy a plane or a boat. I admit that is ridiculous. For some strange reason however, that prompted you to tell me your parents died penniless. I understand the point you were trying to make but not EVERYONE is in the same situation your parents or even you are in, regardless of their net worth. What happened to your parents is without a doubt a horrible thing but similar things have befallen similar individuals with a completely different result.

We don't have health care for all because greedy plutocrats have geared the system to benefit them and not us.

We don't have health care for all because the American people have not demanded it and elected representatives that will follow through with such a demand. When they do, we will have it, greedy plutocrats or not.

Since you assert (wrongly) that I advocate stripping all wealthy people of their fortunes, No, i did NOT "assert" that at all. I said "IF it is your opinion". I would have asserted it if i had said "Since it is your opinion" let me ask if you believe that ultra-rich people who deny health care to sick people (who paid their premiums like they were supposed to) should be able to keep theirs. I believe they shouldn't. I would be inclined to agree with you in spirit. I would prefer a situation where such punitive measures were never needed.

The statistical probability of you becoming penniless due to a health problem or other crisis is astronomically higher than your buying a yacht or plane. Kindly show me the actuarial tables or statistics applicable to me that bear this statement out. That is not a statement on your ambition or whether or not you should work toward financial security. It is merely an observation of reality. No, it is an opinion. You don't know what i do for a living and your opinion of reality does not necessarily translate into my life You can certainly try to control your destiny but you can't guarantee the outcome.

I have chosen to change the path my life was on and allow for myself greater control over my financial destiny. In my previous career (I drove Over-the-road Tractor Trailers for 20 years) there was no way i was ever going to be as financially secure as i want to be. There was no way i was ever going to be able to afford an airplane or a boat of any size either, but that is completely beside the larger point. Who knows if i will ever buy a plane. Maybe someday. I'd love to have one. There are several DU'rs that own their own planes. Are they less deserving of respect for their opinions because of it? But this thread and indeed this conversation is not about whether or not i personally will ever be a plane or boat owner. It is about the absurdity of suggesting the wealthy be "taxed into extinction". THAT is what this thread is about.

Sure, tomorrow i might be diagnosed with cancer or some other such catastrophe will befall me. But i don't spend my days worrying about it. I might end up sick and penniless. And i might end up comfortable in my old age.

Time will tell, won't it?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

88. Those 'distorted assumptions' about you were sarcastic.

Honestly, I don't really think you are a failure because your new career hasn't yielded extraordinary wealth yet. Next time I'll be sure to use the smiley. Your defensive reaction was typical, though. My response about my parents was to your condescension-dripping RW spew about "I stopped pitying myself about 25 years ago." Why you act surprised when you are flamed for your Ownership Society shit here on DU is beyond me. Like we don't hear those tired ass Fox News talking points everywhere we go. We come to DU to get away from it, dude, so your attempts to "enlighten" us will never be welcome.

And do I REALLY need to show you actuarial tables to prove that far more people are impoverished by health problems in the US than own luxury items like yachts and planes? According to one site I found there are about 135,000 private plane owners in the US. I'm guessing there are even fewer yacht owners, though I could be wrong. Still we're talking well under a million people here. Meaning your chances of being among them are a fraction of a percent. I think we can both safely assume, without graphs and a spreadsheet, that your chances of being sick and broke are considerably higher.

Finally, Americans ARE demanding affordable health care for all and have been for years. They may disagree on what form it should take but the majority of us are not satisfied with the current system. As for electing leaders who will bring it to us, that's a nice thought but kinda unrealistic since our elections are bought and paid for by the rich. Therein may lie the argument for taxing them into extinction. To save our democracy.

[A HERETIC I AM]

89. "We come to DU to get away from it, dude, so your attempts to "enlighten" us will never be welcome"

Speaking for the majority again, eh? "Dude?"

I've been a contributing member of this message board for over 4 years so whether or not any comments i might make are "welcome" is well beyond the purview of someone who has been a member for less than 2. Please, step down off your high horse. I am not trying to "enlighten" anybody. I am just having a bit of fun, apparently in part, at your expense. That's just one of the many perks and reasons i come to DU.

Why you act surprised when you are flamed for your Ownership Society shit here on DU is beyond me.

You confuse "surprised" with amused.

And do I REALLY need to show you actuarial tables to prove that far more people are impoverished by health problems in the US than own luxury items like yachts and planes?

Since that is not what you claimed, no, i don't need to see any tables. BTW, there are well over 600,000 licensed pilots in the US and well more than 218,000 private, or General Aviation aircraft. Source
Regardless of whether or not you might think it is more likely that i will get sick and end up penniless, that is not an exclusive group. Owners of airworthy P-51 Mustangs are an exclusive group. Licensed pilots and light plane owners, not so much. In 2005 there were almost 19 million recreational boats in the US.Source
How many are "Yachts" depends on where the distinction is made. I grant you it is only in the several thousand range.

One last thing:

My response about my parents was to your condescension-dripping RW spew about "I stopped pitying myself about 25 years ago."

You certainly do have the "O'Reilly-type tactic of accusing someone you disagree with of being a member of the opposition down pat. If simply stating that i no longer feel sorry for myself and my lot in life (which is an admission that i USED to) is "condescension-dripping Right Wing spew" then it is clear to me you really are reaching. I find it impossible to buy the idea that being a progressive thinker or a liberal or a Democrat means that i am also not supposed to think that we are in charge of our own lives and make our own reality.

The last post on this thread is yours. You have my best wishes for your future and the holidays.

[progressivebydesign]

8. I worked as a maid shortly before and after I hired one.. do I cancel myself out? ;) n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. What is this, Straw Man Day?

First RG Bolen, and now you posting exaggerated "defenses" of the rich and the military-industrial complex.

[A HERETIC I AM]

12. Merely pointing out an absurdity i see as prevalent of late, that's all.

My list above is not an "Exaggerated "defenses" of the rich and the military-industrial complex". It is merely a list of products, companies and activities that wealthy people indulge in. Since "the wealthy should be taxed to extinction" seems to be an opinion held by many on this board, i'm just pointing out where to start with the job cuts, should the desired utopia ever appear. Only rich people buy private airplanes, large boats, go skiing, etc. so all the workers (Thats regular folks like you and me) that make those products should be forced to find other employment.

It isn't a strawman. It is sarcasm.

[FormerDittoHead]

50. How about more absurdities like "There is nothing we can do to change the status quo."...

I think the answer to the question isn't, "what you're saying is ridiculous" and imply that there isn't a problem and that having a system which perpetuates a aristocracy and permanent lower class is somehow a good thing, it rather should be, "this is what I think can be done to overcome the inadequacies of capitalism and make the distribution of and opportunity to gain wealth and income more equitable..."

Let's try to be constructive.

[readmoreoften]

13. No shit. /nt

[Donald Ian Rankin]

29. Sadly, it's not a straw man.

Take a look at, for example, this thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2431804&mesg_id=2431804

The caricature in the OP is more absurd than some of the positions being put forward sensibly there, but not by much.

Sadly, a non-trivial minority of left-wingers really do have very stupid ideas about economics, inspired more by hatred of "the rich" than by thinking about what the consequences of a given policy for the poor would be.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

37. Except that in this case, there IS an alternative to these companies either

continuing to flood the world with armaments or shutting down completely: retooling to meet the world's pressing needs in the areas of infrastructure and technology.

After World War II, countless companies that had quickly converted and been running full speed ahead on military production quietly retooled to revert to or start production for civilian products.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

61. Who's going to pay for it, though?

There may be an awful lot of people who *need* infrastructure and civilian technology, but that's not the same thing as there being a lot of people who can & will *pay* for civilian infrastructure and technology.

The responsibility for improving the lot of the poor is that of governments, not of private companies.

The duty of someone running a company is to respond to the market conditions to best represent the interests of their shareholders. The duty of a government is to adjust those market conditions so that companies acting in that fashion act in desirable ways - e.g. by taxing pollution, making it a good strategy not to pollute, or by offering to subsidise medicine for the poor, making it a good strategy to supply medicines to the poor.

When governments don't do that, the blame lies with the government, not with the companies or individuals who respond to it. Companies are no more obligated to provide charity than you or I are.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

64. You're missing a step here

Those private companies are producing armaments FOR governments. If the governments in question said, "We won't pay for fighter jets anymore, but we will pay you to develop less polluting airplanes for civilian purposes," you bet those companies would rev up their R&D and retool their production so fast that you wouldn't believe it.

[A HERETIC I AM]

68. Lydia, for what its worth, only one of the companies i specifically mentioned in my OP

makes what could be considered "armaments". Bell Helicopter makes attack helicopters. Having said that, technically, they make "platforms" onto which armaments are mounted.

Cessna and Beechcraft have in the past made aircraft for the military but with very few exceptions, they were observation, transport or training aircraft, not fighters or attack planes.

The companies I named specifically were named because they manufacture items (boats, cars, planes) that are, for the most part, not typically things the average wage earner would purchase. The list did not include nor what is meant to infer inclusion of companies whose primary business is that of military contractor. That is why i specified Bell and not Sikorsky. Even though they make a civilian version of several of their models, Sikorsky is the primary supplier of military helicopters these days. It USED to be Bell. No longer.

Again, the whole point of this thread was to point out that it is silly to call for the destruction of or "taxing into oblivion" the wealthy. If one promotes such an idea, which of the companies above should begin to lay off their workers first? All of them make things the wealthy consume. And we are talking several hundreds of thousands of Americans, BTW, involved in all those companies/industries as well as hundreds of thousands around the world.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

70. The wealthy could stand to pay a lot more in taxes and still purchase all their

expensive toys.

[emilyg]

10. Good post. K&R

[readmoreoften]

14. Your comment is fairly ridiculous.

No one who opposes neoliberal policy is blaming the working class. That makes no sense. Do you have any idea of what capitalism means? It means some people don't work: they live off investments and inheritance. THEY are the rich.

Listen, if you're a rich kid, then stop railing against all the people who confront you with the truth: you aren't more deserving, intelligent, or hard-working than the poor. Start using your privilege to end privilege.

[A HERETIC I AM]

18. LOL! OF COURSE IT IS! But not for the reasons you think.

No one who opposes neoliberal policy is blaming the working class. That makes no sense. Do you have any idea of what capitalism means? ( NO. Explain it to me )It means some people don't work: they live off investments and inheritance. THEY are the rich. Really? That is what Capitalism means?

Listen, if you're a rich kid, then stop railing against all the people who confront you with the truth: you aren't more deserving, intelligent, or hard-working than the poor. Start using your privilege to end privilege.

The only way to respond to your last completely absurd assumption is :rofl: :spray: :rofl: :spray: Me? a rich kid? LOL...nope. Just a workin' stiff. Been one all my life. BTW, how do you know i am not more hard-working than others? I might be the hardest worker on the planet. I know i work and have worked harder than many people i know who make less money, so your point is ridiculous.

One more thing, readmoreoften - you don't get to tell me who i can rail against. I am A Heretic. It's my fucking job to speak things contrary to established thought or doctrine.

[w4rma]

22. You say you're a heretic, but you defend the status-quo. You are no heretic. (nt)

[A HERETIC I AM]

23. I defend the status quo?

I'll put this as simply as i possibly can.

You know NOTHING about me, about my political perspective, my perspective on economics or how i conduct myself in my daily life.

This thread is about making a point. If you don't get the point, so be it.

[JDPriestly]

25. How do you expect people to know things about you, your political

perspective, etc.? If you wanted people to know more about you, you would not write under a silly pseudonym, and you would simply tell people what they don't know. I think your thread is rather stupid. You assume that others are taking an extreme position. Then you attack them for it. All kinds of positions are taken on DU. Some of them may seem quite extreme to you. But most people on DU are very ordinary and moderate in their points of view. Do I think that wealthy people should be taxed at higher rates than others? Yes. And why? Well, because they have money.

It is interesting to note how many of the wealthy companies you list happen to be in the business of making weaponry. How do you think they make their money? By selling weapons to the government. And where is the government to get the money to buy all that weaponry from these rich companies? Where is the government to get the money to fight its many wars and dominate the world? Certainly not from the poor. Poor people barely have the money to keep alive. And the government can't get the money from the middle class either. The middle class has to be able to keep enough money to live comfortably enough to cause them to vote so that the guys who buy all the weapons can stay in power. Oh, and the middle class people many of whom work for those companies you list also need to earn enough to keep them loyal to the companies they work for. If the guys in the government tax the middle class too much, the middle class will elect someone who taxes them less and won't work so hard in the companies you list.

So how is the government to pay for all the expensive military machinery these companies make? By taxing the rich. That's how. Only the rich can support the kind of military machine that we have here in the U.S. So, stop moaning about the unfairness. The only way that we could tax the rich at a really lower rate is to spend less on the military. Right now, the Bush administration is borrowing a lot of money. They will either have to default on the lenders or raise the tax rates on the rich. They can't squeeze the middle class any more than they already have. If they try that, they will get voted out of office for sure. Your arguments are silly.

[A HERETIC I AM]

30. Go ahead and note how many of those companies make weaponry.

The answer is precisely NONE.

Bell Helicopter is the only possible exception but i intentionally specified the military division was not included, only the division that makes helicopters for private usage.

If you wanted people to know more about you, you would not write under a silly pseudonym, and you would simply tell people what they don't know.

How the hell am i supposed to know what it is people don't know? As far as my pseudonym being silly - well - thanks. I like it too. It is a pseudonym because i prefer anonymity on the internet. That ok with you?

You assume that others are taking an extreme position. Then you attack them for it. All kinds of positions are taken on DU. Some of them may seem quite extreme to you. But most people on DU are very ordinary and moderate in their points of view.

This thread is not an "attack" on anyone. If you think it is, you have a VERY THIN SKIN. It is a sarcastic comparison to the other threads of late that literally promote the death of, or at the very least, stripping of wealth from rich people. This thread is aimed at them not "most" people that are moderate on DU.

Do I think that wealthy people should be taxed at higher rates than others? Yes. And why? Well, because they have money.

Do you think that i don't agree with you? If not, why not? Because i took rather absurd perspective and turned it on its ear?

I think your thread is rather stupid. --- Your arguments are silly.

Believe it or not, you actually get it! It IS a stupid idea and it IS silly. So is taxing the rich into oblivion.

[rhett o rick]

19. Good comment. nm

[Romulox]

16. Can the rich EVER get a break?

Why oh why does god let bad things happen to people in the top tax bracket?

;( :nopity:

[annabanana]

86. lol!. . . eom

[rhett o rick]

17. What is the point of this post? Are you trying to defend the greed of the wealthy? Those that would

sell us poison toys for our children. Those that think profit is more important than fulfilling their obligations to their employees. Those that would strip every tree off the planet for a buck. Those that would pay legislators to give them tax dollars all the while they make obscene profits. Those that charge college students outrageous interest rates just to go to college. those that deny children affordable health insurance. Those that would enslave us at the first opportunity.

The wealthy in this country are trying to kill the middle class. Who's side are you on?

[A HERETIC I AM]

21. I am on the side of shiny, lead paint and bald mountain ranges

Isn't it obvious?

There are plenty of sides here in DU. I haven't even picked a candidate yet. I am having too much fun watching everyone else trash everyone else.

As for the rest of your post....well.....never mind. Detecting sarcasm not your strong suit, eh Rick?

[rhett o rick]

41. I recognized the sarcasm but still didn't understand who you were defending. The wealthy don't need

your defense. Who here is advocating obliterating the wealthy?

[A HERETIC I AM]

44. A thread for your edification

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2431804
Plenty of people on DU REGULARLY make posts advocating obliterating the wealthy. If you read DU enough, you will see this sort of sentiment all the time.

I wasn't defending anything, BTW. I was taking an absurd idea (The wealthy need to be taxed to extinction/killed/made to give all of their money away/forbidden to make more than a set amount, etc.) and turning it on its ear.

[rhett o rick]

49. I agree that post was absurd. Curious tho, do you think the wealthy have gotten out of control

in this country? Do you see that by borrowing hundreds of billions from China our government (which is controlled by the wealthy) is saddling our middle class children and grandchildren with a huge debt. The great years of this country were when we had a healthy middle class. Reagan began the assault on the middle class. Since then the wealthy have been getting much richer. Not because they earn it (agree some do) but because they use their money to buy special favors from the government. They get subsidies and are told by the courts that they can abandon retirement benefits for their workers while taking home hundreds of millions themselves.

I don't believe the rich should be obliterated but I also don't believe they should be allowed to run rough-shod over the population.

Have a happy holiday season.

[A HERETIC I AM]

63. Out of control? No. Have their power reigned in? Absolutely.

As far as the debt is concerned, i have long held that excessive debt is never a good thing, be it a person, a company or the government. I agree with your point about a healthy middle class but unfortunately, times have changed. Long gone are the days when a High School graduate could go to the factory where his father worked and get a union job, and make enough money to buy a house, raise a family and take vacations. Those jobs still exist but they are becoming the rarity, not the norm.

(Allow me to impersonate Rumsfeld)
Does this country's economic system need work? Absolutely
Do we need to educate the population so they are better prepared to handle the changes coming in the new global marketplace? With out a doubt
Should very wealthy individuals or companies be able to sway elections to the detriment of the population at large? Hell no.
Should organized labor be promoted and encouraged? God damned right, it should.
Should ANY of the employees of the companies named in my OP be fired merely because they make products primarily purchased by the well-to-do?

Of course not.

[rhett o rick]

65. I agree and I admit I over reacted to your post. I seem to be doing that more these days. nm

[Dorian Gray]

24. Nope...

He's trying to point out the absurdity of trying to obliterate wealth.

[rhett o rick]

43. Are there a lot on DU advocating "obliterating" the wealthy? Many of us want

to limit the power that the wealthy have stolen. They own the government that is supposed to be "we the people". The nation is quickly turning into an oligarchy and I, for one, am concerned.

[Swamp Rat]

20. I AGREE!!!!!!

[Occam Bandage]

26. I don't believe there is a logical link between

"The accumulation of wealth is immoral" and "all those who cater to the wealthy should be fired." If your suggestion is that the wealthy drive the economy, well, that's more or less bunk. The poorer a person is, the higher the proportion of their income they spend; redistribution of wealth would lead to more spending and therefore more jobs.

I am not one of those "tax the rich / feed the poor / till there ain't no / rich no more" types. I don't believe in punishing the wealthy. I'm generally a fan of regulated capitalism. I'm also an even bigger fan of honest debate, which is why I must register my disagreement.

[Raine]

27. Good post

:thumbsup:

[hfojvt]

28. you may need to define your terms

when some people talk about the "rich" they are only talking about the Fortune 500.

It is ironic though, that you think we would suffer if we lost all those jobs. The fact that we would is only due to our economic arrangement. People do not need jobs. People need goods and services. To eliminate the goods and services which are purchased primarily by the very rich, should not impact the lifestyle of anyone else. In theory, we would each have the same amount of stuff, but be doing much less total work. If suddenly a bunch of peons did not have to work hauling heavy blocks to build pyramids for rich people, they should be singing 'ding dong the a$$hole is dead'

[Marrah_G]

31. Thank you

Some people can never see past their emotions to the larger picture.

[blindpig]

33. Typical

Take the sins of the rich and blame them on the workers.

This is no different than the "bootstraps" argument that the Repubs and DLCers promote. Indeed, it chimes quite well with all of the "self-help" nonsense which encourages self improvement over social action. Pure crap, we are social critters, not Ayn Rand cartoon archtypes.

The rich are not evil per se, they are rich when the vast majority are not, when many have not the means to survive. That is indictment enough.

It ain't the individual, it's the society.

[flashl]

34. Maybe its time to introduce the myth of equality and meritocracy?

Meritocracy Myth

[dysfunctional press]

35. apparently, you've never heard of carnival cruise lines...

or above-ground swimming pools.

[Time for change]

38. I don't remember ever reading a DU post that said rich people are evil

Can you provide a link to one?

[Snarkturian Clone]

39. Have you been going on a different DU than I?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2431804

No one says out and out "Rich people are evil" but there is definitely some hate spread in this link's thread.

"I'd much rather see them lined up against a brick wall and shot" comes to mind.

[Time for change]

45. Ok, saying that they should be "taxed to extinction" is over the top

A bit of hyperbole there, and I doubt that the poster meant that literally.

More important, I don't think that the post was directed at ALL rich people, but mostly towards those who have a condescending attitude towards the poor.

And it was directed at what is perceived to be an unfair economic system -- which I agree with.

[Mutineer]

75. I haven't forgotten the "Burn LA Burn" contingent here

who thought it was just fine if SoCal burned because it was "only the rich" who were suffering and it was okay for them to suffer because well, obviously, they are wealthy.

[Lurking Dem]

46. I used to use one of the

quotes as my sig line. I don't still have the link. But the rich were referred to as "evil uncaring parasites".

[Time for change]

72. When DUers use phrases like that, do you think

that they're referring to ALL rich people, or just certain ones?

[Lurking Dem]

74. Some of them,

when asked, insist all rich people. Apparently one cannot become wealthy without screwing over everyone else. Or so I have been told.

[Common Sense Party]

82. Just the Republican ones. nt

[mrreowwr_kittty]

47. They'll find work in the booming guillotine industry. nt

[AlCzervik]

48. i'm driving my vw into my pool later on, the video will be up shortly.

[stirlingsliver]

52. Do I Smell Straw?

Hmmm......

Do I smell straw?

I do. I do smell straw!

And it's mixed with the smell of bullshit.

[Nye Bevan]

54. Fire them? IMPRISON or EXECUTE them!

Anyone who is twice as rich as me is an evil parasite who deserves to be "extinct".

(I reserve the right to change my mind if I win the lottery).

[alfredo]

55. Can we add makers of irritating ringtones?

[blondeatlast]

56. Let's move them ahead of the line, IMHO. nt

[alfredo]

66. A show of hands people? All in favor..................

[Beerboy]

59. Well, there's a lot of sarcasm there, but I think the CEOs could buy some time

to save their companies if they agree to fire all their employees who smoke or are overweight. That would be a small step towards demonstrating good corporate citizenship. Paying a windfall-profits tax wouldn't be a bad idea in any case, just about everything listed is some superfluous luxury for the idle rich.

[chaska]

67. Fuck the rich and their enablers.

[lonestarnot]

69. K & R

[Mutineer]

73. I need a DU ruling on this---

so if I stay in a hotel, should I refuse maid service since that might indicate I'm pro-illegal aliens?

[SOS]

76. Maids and nannies?!

How will the rich raise their progeny without the woman from El Salvador who works 70 hours-a-week, with no benefits, for $4 an hour?
It's not fair!

[CRF450]

77. What a stupid post

Right many people (as am I) that are involved in the above are not filthy rich, and most of those activities dont require that!

Lets see what what I'm active under...

"Recreational Vehicle ownership/usage." Yes, I ride my dirtbike when I get a chance!
"Swimming pool building industry." (mabye someday, but I will be a swimming pool tech)
"All business related to sport fishing, including charter boat operators and rod and reel makers/tackle makers." Yeah I like to go fishing.

I dont agree with any of what yous said. Thats just asking to put millions out of work who rightfully made a living and worked hard to get where they are, outlawing peoples personal sport or hobby.

Yes, I know its a sarcasm.

[unkachuck]

78. I'm the ONE....

....but the employees shouldn't be fired, they should be laid-off, retrained and encouraged to seek gainful employment in non-trickle-downer type industries....

....the scum they now work for should be required to forfeit all their ill-gotten gains to the state, then spend the rest of their working lives as wal-mart greeters after serving their prison time....

....we don't need the leaching fascist wealthy; they provide no service that democratically elected officials couldn't provide at a fraction of the cost, with much less duplication and energy input....

....they stand between you and I, keeping us from improving our country and our lives....cleansing our society of this vermin would be good for you, me, God and the United States of America!

[treestar]

81. Maybe they could all get jobs for whatever company is selling

to the people who then have the redistributed wealth. Fewer yacht makers, more car-makers, because more people could buy cars.

Everyone wants the company they work for to make money, of course. That's why you have repukes. Some of them probably work for military contractors. That's why they whined so much back in the days when Clinton was cutting back on military spending.

The trial lawyers are always against laws that will cut back on lawsuits. (Though I think there is good reason, nonrelated to the benefit to trial lawyers, for not locking people out of the courthouse). Then those who work for them, legal secretaries and court reporters, are always against that kind of change too - it'll cut back on their jobs.

It's human nature. Though it'd be a good thing if we felt secure about finding new jobs if whatever we were doing became unnecessary or less needed.

[LanternWaste]

85. Ok...

You're right! I'll begin (this very instant) to pity the poor, oppressed rich people who never seem to be able to catch a break in this day and age....

Dear God! The horrors the rich must go through. Horrors that are unimaginable to the mere middle and low income families. I imagine those dark days filled with choosing which 'naked-cherubic-boy-peeing-in-the-fountain' statue would be akin to one of the Labors of Hercules.

Yup. It's started already! There's a single, lone tear falling down my face over the trials and tribulations of the wealthy, because we all know that Conspicuous Consumption makes us Better People.