Racisms and Tea Partiers

[Krylo]

Originally Posted by DFM

Actually krylo, IIRC they already do that. Somewhere along the line, I'm going to say in the 80's because I blame Regan for pretty much anything, rich people suddenly got all smart and realized you can't keep taxing poor people until their wallets bleed because, for one, there just isn't all that much money to be made and two, there's a fuckton of them and if they all get pissed off at the fact you're taking their food money to pay for your villa moat it'll be the French revolution all over again. You also can't tax the rich because, you know, that's you. But what you can do is tax the $100,000 to $200,000 bracket, and you can tax the shit out of them. They're not individually wealthy, so they can't fight you on the lobby level. There's not that many of them so them banding together won't really mean shit compared to you and your buddies saying "Tough." and the rest of the country who make twenty thousand a year are just going to look at them and go "Awww poor widdle baby lost half his money to taxes now he only makes more than twice as much as I do."

Yeah, but that's only $50,000 from each of them.

I was talking about people making 500,000+ salaries. You know the ones who are rich enough to be considered part of the club.

I probably should have said six figures and up, 'cause seven and eight figure pay checks are the real dodgers.

[Lyaer]

Hmm. To play devil's advocate for a second, if anybody is going to be bringing guns to a peaceful(?) protest, it should be the gun nuts. If any group (minority or otherwise) shows up to a rally fully armed, my assumption will be that either a) they want to intimidate people or b) they want to shoot them. But with the second amendment people, you at least have the argument that they are doing it to make a statement that is relevant to their cause. Not that that rules out a) or b).

Out of curiosity, to what extent is it legal to take a gun to a protest? I'm a bit fuzzy on the weapons in public laws.

[BattyAsHell]

Originally Posted by Smarty McBarrelpants

The system is out and out broken, just because the lesser of two evils is in power doesn't mean it's any good now. The problems we face today are the same problems we have faced for the last 50 years- nobody is fixing them by they democrat or republican.

I wouldn't even call it the lesser evil, personally.. Both sides cater to lobbyists and "special interest groups".. Both sides have an agenda where they want to use government muscle to socially engineer society.. (Why not allow same sex marriage and decriminalize weed? And why make it illegal to be offensive against protected groups? That just makes it harder for me to know who to shun!)

Someday, maybe both parties will collapse and we'll get better options out of the ashes...

[BattyAsHell]

Originally Posted by Krylo

To be fair, it's not your average citizen that should be taxed with paying for all those new things, as that many of them are barely maintaining an equitable standard of living as is.

It's the people pulling down six figures that should be taxed harder to pay for those things. Wouldn't even take much. Hell, just eliminating the loop holes that prevent them from having to pay the taxes they're already supposed to be paying and you'd probably got a lonnnng way toward balancing the books.

Well, historically speaking, when people pulling down six figures or more get taxed too hard, they tend to move to greener pastures..

It's happening in Connecticut. We're losing more businesses because of our tax rates, including driving out one prospective land development project. Prat and Whitney is gone. A friends father is losing his warehouse job because his company is moving out of dodge.. And he's past his 50's. Can't afford to retire, but who'll hire him?

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by DFM

Actually krylo, IIRC they already do that. Somewhere along the line, I'm going to say in the 80's because I blame Regan for pretty much anything, rich people suddenly got all smart and realized you can't keep taxing poor people until their wallets bleed because, for one, there just isn't all that much money to be made and two, there's a fuckton of them and if they all get pissed off at the fact you're taking their food money to pay for your villa moat it'll be the French revolution all over again. You also can't tax the rich because, you know, that's you. But what you can do is tax the $100,000 to $200,000 bracket, and you can tax the shit out of them. They're not individually wealthy, so they can't fight you on the lobby level. There's not that many of them so them banding together won't really mean shit compared to you and your Rockefeller buddies saying "Tough." and the rest of the country who make twenty thousand a year are just going to look at them and go "Awww poor widdle baby lost half his money to taxes now he only makes more than twice as much as I do."

these are often the same people though. Bill Gates actual salary was in that bracket, but in addition to that you get your perks, bonuses, stock options ect thats where you get bulk of your money and how they avoid taxation in the first place. The amount of money billionares make from whats called "income" isn't that high Well I mean its insanely high, just not millions a year high

[Premmy]

Originally Posted by PyrosNine

Some of us may be vaguely hispanic. But yeah. Shit be crazy! Probably something along the lines of "crazy ass adjective noun" for any given problem here. If the Non-Tea Party (because it has nothing to do with the Boston Tea Party) 'movement' (because it is not a movement) were any other ethnicity or culture/lifestyle (What would happen if the Tea Partyists were all Goths? Or LGBT? or Internet Geeks?) they would still be considered pretty damn crazy for being all up with guns in the Government's face.

You have both splendidly missed the point of my post, and effectively proved it.

All I'mma say about this,
Black People Loot, white people Find

[Wigmund]

Originally Posted by BattyAsHell

Someday, maybe both parties will collapse and we'll get better options out of the ashes...

We won't.

What we'll get is either for the current groups to eventually collapse under their own weight and then it will arise again with different names or you'll have a third party come in, dislodge one of the big two and then it become what had just dislodged while the old group fades into memory.

It's the same old same old since the first parties sprung up after Washington left office. Roughly every sixty years we have a party shift. Back in the 40s thru the 50s it was nothing more than the Democrats and Republicans switching which side of the aisle they sat on.

The best one can hope for is that the younger generation taking control of the various parties can swing them in the way people want.

[BattyAsHell]

Originally Posted by Osterbaum

What would the Teabaggers say, if a similar protest as theirs was held, but all the participants were black?

The Million Man March?

Not really a protest, but it's a massive congregation of African Americans.

[BitVyper]

Black People Loot, white people Find

Being fair, the black guy's got what looks like a couple garbage bags full of stuff compared to the white girl who has... a loaf of bread and a soda. I think the difference in terminology actually applies here... or I would if we were talking about something other than basic food items. I have a hard time looking at taking food from a grocery store so that you can survive as looting to begin with.

[Viridis]

Snopes talks about the loot/find thing a bit. I think the fact that the two pictures were captioned by two different people in different agencies is notable. If it was the same person, yes it would be bias. Maybe if the same person had captioned both maybe they both would have been looting or finding.

All conjecture on my part, though.