Re: I Never Saw An American Flag Burned at a Gun Show

"Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1999@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1193413360.036514.250060@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Oct 25, 10:35 am, "Patriot Games" <Patr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1193254370.908172.15310@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Oct 24, 2:16 pm, "Patriot Games" <Patr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>news:1193239168.742255.246790@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > On Oct 24, 10:03 am, "Patriot Games" <Patr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> I Never Saw An American Flag Burned at a Gun
>> >> Showhttp://www.militariapress.com/page/militariapress/PROD/Gun_Bumper_Sti...
>> > So true. Symbolic gestures would be dangerous and ineffective in >> > such
>> > a context. Much more appropriate, under such circumstances, to just
>> > wire the premises with plastique, set an electronic fuse, and >> > trigger
>> > it from a safe distance. You agree, I trust?
>> Why do you Socialists hate America and freedom so much?
> As I've said, Patriot, I have no ideology. All I'm doing is
> suggesting an alternative approach. No flag burning necessary.
> You see, I agree that noisy dissent is quite ineffective. If you want
> to change things you have to actually do something about them.
> Sometimes, considerable thought and analysis can be useful prior to
> this, to determine exactly what needs to be done. And how. But,
> utlimately, something must actually be done.
You advocate breaking the law...
> I'm not really sure what will happen in this country. The huge
> disparaties in wealth do cause instability, as you are aware.
Many wealthy people were unstable before they became wealthy. At least
that's what I've observed. Its especially true with inherited wealth versus
this-generation earned wealth.
> The rich -- of whom you are not really a member, more like middle to
> upper-
> middle class, at best -- are very likely to be targeted.
It all depends on how you define rich. My house is worth 7-figures. So
what?
> Why shouldn't they be?
They should be. People who feel they're owed more than they've earned
should make their move so we can promptly get rid of them. And people who
have earned more than others shouldn't feel guilty for it or threatened
because of it.
> To me, we are, at the very least, headed to
> Mexican and Latin American style civil conflict -- small scale civil
> wars, kidnappings of the rich, vigilantism against police, increasing
> communism in the electorate.
I think you're right, I think that's coming.
> As I've indicated in my thread "democracy does not exist in the modern
> world", we need federal referenda on a regular basis to even things
> out a bit. Otherwise, you are welcome to your guns. You're going to
> need them, I expect.
Federal referenda can't have the affect you want on the Socialist
redistribution of wealth. Rich people would just move.
You need to come to terms with the fact that you'll never get from them what
they have earned, and you'll never get more than you've earned, period.
Actually, as usual Patriot, our differences are much more superficial
than real. We are both much too practical, experienced, intelligent
and curious to let ideological differences get in the way of reality
and the truth. The fact is, where wealth has been legitimately earned
-- and it has been, I am aware, many cases -- it can be legitimately
retained. As you may be aware, under the Eisenhower administration,
marginal tax rates got up to 91%.

That was insane...

But that did not mean all rich
people were paying 91% of their income in taxes. Quite the contrary.
You may recall the concept of the "tax shelter", largely unnecessary
now because taxes are so low? You could keep your money, as long as
it was invested productively -- businesses, jobs, research, the arts
-- and you did not simply invest in bonds, real estate and blue chip
stocks. This boosted the economy and created social stability. You
will still be better off in this country than anywhere else, where, in
general, you would really have to hand all your money over.

You don't have to hand over your money to go live in the Caymans (British).

Real world... Donating money gets you a tax deduction. Almost all tax deductions are LESS than what was donated. Rich people make charitable donations because it makes them feel good. They don't make or save any money doing it, and they lose money doing it.

Parking money in bonds or real estate or the stock market means nothing. Its still parked money. You're not taxed on it any more than if it was in a savings account. The issue is taxes on Gains. An ACTUAL Tax Shelter is when money that has already been taxed is used to make money that IS NOT taxed.

Anything anyone does with their money is productive unless they keep cash under the bed.

If the government does not create these changes using the current
system, we could move to the more democratic approach I have
suggested, of referenda. Otherwise, prepare to find private armies on
your doorstep requesting sizable donations.

I'm prepared! Trust me, I'm prepared! Unfortunately my smarter half says we're moving to the Caymans instead...

Regarding your home being worth seven figures, don't worry. In 2-3
years it will be down to six figures.

Naaaa... The housing market is always going up and down.

But the point was that if I sell it I have to pay taxes on that. And then I'd be looking for a place to live at today's prices... So "rich" can have very different definitions.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: NASA moon trip video
    ... The real answer is to get serious about cutting spending. ... several serious problems with Bush's tax cuts, ... The counter point is, "if the rich aren't making money, nobody's making ...
    (rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated)
  • Re: Who Gets the Most Government Spending?
    ... I agree completely that we should not punish the more successful in life. ... I do not agree that wealth is necessarily a measure of success. ... Well, the same applies to when the wealthy gives their money away....the people who receives the money, has done nothing to deserve the money. ... A question that I have posed before is whether capitalism is so fragile that the implementation of what I would call a fair tax code might destroy it. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Neocon Is: Growing Income Inequality
    ... But, so will wealth. ... loopholes afforded to the wealthy in the US tax code. ... cited "inheritance" as their sources of wealth. ... You obviously make less than $150,000 (rich by no measure), or you ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: Doesnt matter who you tax....
    ... Taking money from people who know ... how to generate wealth and giving it to those who don't. ... progressive tax system for your entire lifetime, meaning that the rich ...
    (rec.sport.golf)
  • Re: Neocon Is: Growing Income Inequality
    ... But, so will wealth. ... loopholes afforded to the wealthy in the US tax code. ... cited "inheritance" as their sources of wealth. ... You obviously make less than $150,000 (rich by no measure), or you ...
    (alt.politics)
Loading