Understandable, predictable and natural. Makes the case for taxing the wealthy at 90%.
As more and more wealth is being funneled from the middle and lower classes to the wealthy, they are less able to find employer-paid health insurance, for one. As they lose their houses, can't find jobs and still have families, they are more and more dependent upon public assistance.
Outsourcing has created an enormous public burden, far larger than the profits made by the companies doing it, as people can't pay taxes, property taxes, buy cars and lose houses.
Social Security is naturally rising as the boomers come along. And people have paid into Social Security. Simply because that's been squandered by both Republicans and Democrats is not the fault of the people and their employers who paid.
All in all, you make a great case for taxing the wealthy, those people who don't produce, like Romney, out of existence. They are a drain on the country and exconomy. Remember, hedge funds to not promote job creation.
Great job!
Current Events » in reply to The growth of government dependence (edited)
Re: The growth of government dependence (edited)
The whole thread (36 posts)
- The growth of government dependence (edited)
- Re: The growth of government dependence (edited)
- Of course.
- Corrected for clarity.
- Re: Corrected for clarity.
- It was already clear who you meant.
- When I'm talking "Democrats" it's usually shorthand for the Democratic Party and its leaders and cronies. I'll try to watch that.
- I need to be clearer.
- Re: I need to be clearer.
- "Because for better or worse, he’s our troll. "
- I've ripped ER a dozen times for abusing the word "conspiracy." Don't you start.
- I need to be clearer.
- When I'm talking "Democrats" it's usually shorthand for the Democratic Party and its leaders and cronies. I'll try to watch that.
- Corrected for clarity.
- Re: The growth of government dependence (edited)
- Re: The growth of government dependence (edited)
- Re: The growth of government dependence (edited)