Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I was listening to NPR the other day and heard this beauty:

Apparently, anyone earning over $32,000/year is among the top 1% of earners in the world.

I'd imagine that would include the majority of people on this site...even the uber-libs.

So, let's hear it from all of you selfish money lovers about how you need to be taxed more so that the rest of the world's people can live a better life. Give up your big screen TVs, your cable/internet connections, cell phones, cars, North Face jackets, and your one bedroom apartments and sacrifice for the sake of others.

Cluck U wrote:I was listening to NPR the other day and heard this beauty:

Apparently, anyone earning over $32,000/year is among the top 1% of earners in the world.

I'd imagine that would include the majority of people on this site...even the uber-libs.

So, let's hear it from all of you selfish money lovers about how you need to be taxed more so that the rest of the world's people can live a better life. Give up your big screen TVs, your cable/internet connections, cell phones, cars, North Face jackets, and your one bedroom apartments and sacrifice for the sake of others.

The 1% only applies to america. And the two richest men in the world are libs. Duh.

kalm wrote:

Cluck U wrote:I was listening to NPR the other day and heard this beauty:

Apparently, anyone earning over $32,000/year is among the top 1% of earners in the world.

I'd imagine that would include the majority of people on this site...even the uber-libs.

So, let's hear it from all of you selfish money lovers about how you need to be taxed more so that the rest of the world's people can live a better life. Give up your big screen TVs, your cable/internet connections, cell phones, cars, North Face jackets, and your one bedroom apartments and sacrifice for the sake of others.

The 1% only applies to america. And the two richest men in the world are libs. Duh.

Stop fearing the world, kalm.

If Libs want the top 1% to give more...why should they stop at the border? Cripes, most Libs belch on about a world without borders...until it negatively impacts them.

Nope, if anyone earns over $32,000, they should be willing to give up a substantial amount of that in order to assist others who are less fortunate. After all, they are blessed with a born in advantage over others....familial advantages that should be torn down so that others in this world can live a better life.

And forget about the idea of a rich liberal...they don't exist. Situational ethics at work.

"Honey, I'm home. Listen, I've sold our houses and given the proceeds to a charity in Senegal. We'll be taking our kids to live in the shelters where they can be taught by some first year student who is trying to get in touch with his inner feelings to temper his guilt.

Honey?

Honey?"

1% you say....

Cluck U wrote:I was listening to NPR the other day and heard this beauty:

Apparently, anyone earning over $32,000/year is among the top 1% of earners in the world.

I'd imagine that would include the majority of people on this site...even the uber-libs.

So, let's hear it from all of you selfish money lovers about how you need to be taxed more so that the rest of the world's people can live a better life. Give up your big screen TVs, your cable/internet connections, cell phones, cars, North Face jackets, and your one bedroom apartments and sacrifice for the sake of others.

You can tax me heavily and take away most of my possession, but my The North Face jacket? No sir. You'll have to pry that from my COLD DEAD HANDS!!!

Cluck U wrote:

kalm wrote:
The 1% only applies to america. And the two richest men in the world are libs. Duh.

Stop fearing the world, kalm.

If Libs want the top 1% to give more...why should they stop at the border? Cripes, most Libs belch on about a world without borders...until it negatively impacts them.

Nope, if anyone earns over $32,000, they should be willing to give up a substantial amount of that in order to assist others who are less fortunate. After all, they are blessed with a born in advantage over others....familial advantages that should be torn down so that others in this world can live a better life.

And forget about the idea of a rich liberal...they don't exist. Situational ethics at work.

"Honey, I'm home. Listen, I've sold our houses and given the proceeds to a charity in Senegal. We'll be taking our kids to live in the shelters where they can be taught by some first year student who is trying to get in touch with his inner feelings to temper his guilt.

Honey?

Honey?"

I get it. It's the liberal self loathing wealth envy argument and it's a good one. It was a nibble not a bite.

But really, how can the $32,000/1% begin to de-materialize unless they have an iPad and smart phone to tell them to do so? Besides, the world's 99% need the shining example of the American working poor's standard of living to be motivated into launching twitter based revolutions so that they too can live decently and contribute a greater percentage of their income to taxes and charities.

For decades, surveys have shown that upper-income Americans don’t give away as much of their money as they might and are particularly undistinguished as givers when compared with the poor, who are strikingly generous. A number of other studies have shown that lower-income Americans give proportionally more of their incomes to charity than do upper-income Americans. In 2001, Independent Sector, a nonprofit organization focused on charitable giving, found that households earning less than $25,000 a year gave away an average of 4.2 percent of their incomes; those with earnings of more than $75,000 gave away 2.7 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/magaz ... wln-t.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

93henfan wrote:

Cluck U wrote:I was listening to NPR the other day and heard this beauty:

Apparently, anyone earning over $32,000/year is among the top 1% of earners in the world.

I'd imagine that would include the majority of people on this site...even the uber-libs.

So, let's hear it from all of you selfish money lovers about how you need to be taxed more so that the rest of the world's people can live a better life. Give up your big screen TVs, your cable/internet connections, cell phones, cars, North Face jackets, and your one bedroom apartments and sacrifice for the sake of others.

You can tax me heavily and take away most of my possession, but my The North Face jacket? No sir. You'll have to pry that from my COLD DEAD HANDS!!!

Typical limousine liberal.

93henfan wrote:

Cluck U wrote:I was listening to NPR the other day and heard this beauty:

Apparently, anyone earning over $32,000/year is among the top 1% of earners in the world.

I'd imagine that would include the majority of people on this site...even the uber-libs.

So, let's hear it from all of you selfish money lovers about how you need to be taxed more so that the rest of the world's people can live a better life. Give up your big screen TVs, your cable/internet connections, cell phones, cars, North Face jackets, and your one bedroom apartments and sacrifice for the sake of others.

You can tax me heavily and take away most of my possession, but my The North Face jacket? No sir. You'll have to pry that from my COLD DEAD HANDS!!!

Same goes for my Orvis hunting jacket!

Ivytalk wrote:

93henfan wrote:
You can tax me heavily and take away most of my possession, but my The North Face jacket? No sir. You'll have to pry that from my COLD DEAD HANDS!!!

Same goes for my Orvis hunting jacket!

Orvis? East Coast "gentleman hunter" weak sauced garb. Real men wear Filson.

kalm wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:
Same goes for my Orvis hunting jacket!

Orvis? East Coast "gentleman hunter" weak sauced garb. Real men wear Filson.

I am an East Coast "gentleman hunter," so you may kindly stick it!

93henfan wrote:

Cluck U wrote:I was listening to NPR the other day and heard this beauty:

Apparently, anyone earning over $32,000/year is among the top 1% of earners in the world.

I'd imagine that would include the majority of people on this site...even the uber-libs.

So, let's hear it from all of you selfish money lovers about how you need to be taxed more so that the rest of the world's people can live a better life. Give up your big screen TVs, your cable/internet connections, cell phones, cars, North Face jackets, and your one bedroom apartments and sacrifice for the sake of others.

You can tax me heavily and take away most of my possession, but my The North Face jacket? No sir. You'll have to pry that from my COLD DEAD HANDS!!!

Cold hands? You must have already donated your North Face Windstopper gloves. Thank you for setting such a shining example for the rest of the 1%...you've always been a leader in my eyes. *





*Wonder if the smiley is willing to donate one of his Michael Jackson gloves?

Ivytalk wrote:

kalm wrote:
Orvis? East Coast "gentleman hunter" weak sauced garb. Real men wear Filson.

I am an East Coast "gentleman hunter," so you may kindly stick it!

IT is the epitome of East Coast gentleman hunter. He's even got the Tip O'Neil look!

AZGrizFan wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:
I am an East Coast "gentleman hunter," so you may kindly stick it!

IT is the epitome of East Coast gentleman hunter. He's even got the Tip O'Neil look!

Minus the accent and the bulbous red nose!

Ivytalk wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
IT is the epitome of East Coast gentleman hunter. He's even got the Tip O'Neil look!

Minus the accent and the bulbous red nose!

Oh, for sure.

More a "Newt" or "Phil Donahue" look, truth be told.

Cluck U wrote:

kalm wrote:
The 1% only applies to america. And the two richest men in the world are libs. Duh.

And forget about the idea of a rich liberal...they don't exist. Situational ethics at work.

Here's one. Buffett to conk tax cutting geniuses: 'Suck it!'.


http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-warren- ... 3QD;_ylv=3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

kalm wrote:

Cluck U wrote:


And forget about the idea of a rich liberal...they don't exist. Situational ethics at work.

Here's one. Buffett to conk tax cutting geniuses: 'Suck it!'.


http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-warren- ... 3QD;_ylv=3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As Sen. McConnell's spokesman noted this is a false argument. It isn't the Repubs that want higher taxes it is Buffett, Obama, and the Dems. This would mean something if Buffett asked his fellow Dems to pony up.

HI54UNI wrote:

kalm wrote:
Here's one. Buffett to conk tax cutting geniuses: 'Suck it!'.


http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-warren- ... 3QD;_ylv=3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As Sen. McConnell's spokesman noted this is a false argument. It isn't the Repubs that want higher taxes it is Buffett, Obama, and the Dems. This would mean something if Buffett asked his fellow Dems to pony up.

And the Republicans want to reduce the debt.

kalm wrote:

HI54UNI wrote:
As Sen. McConnell's spokesman noted this is a false argument. It isn't the Repubs that want higher taxes it is Buffett, Obama, and the Dems. This would mean something if Buffett asked his fellow Dems to pony up.

And the Republicans want to reduce the debt.

Some of them do but unfortunately most don't really care.

And the whole tax the rich thing is a false argument. If you took 100% of everything that the Forbes 400 has it wouldn't even cover the budget deficit for 1 year.

The govt has enough revenue but they spend too much.

HI54UNI wrote:And the whole tax the rich thing is a false argument. If you took 100% of everything that the Forbes 400 has it wouldn't even cover the budget deficit for 1 year.

The govt has enough revenue but they spend too much.

Then clearly, we need to increase the size of the 1%.

It took us 30 years of deregulation and consolidation of wealth and power to get to this point where the use of capital is becoming increasingly unproductive for the greater economy. Even a few Republicans are getting this. Check out how Perry and Gingrich are attacking Romney for "vulture capitalism"

But I agree that spending needs to be addressed.

kalm wrote:Here's one. Buffett to conk tax cutting geniuses: 'Suck it!'.

I know you are kidding, but seriously, Warren Buffet is a great example of a liberal who isn't willing to part with his goods in order to back up his talk. The guy is worth BILLIONS, and yet he makes a big hullabub about giving away millions (millions, mind you, that he says he should already be funneling to the government) ONLY if others give away their money.

Can't bring himself to simply give it away as suggested by others. Nope....he only wants to play if others are coerced or forced to join him.

Wonder when he will give up all his bug houses, cars, cell phones (wait, apparently cell phones are now a necessity ) so that others can live a better life.

Answer: never.

Typical.

Still waiting for jellybean to post that he donated his bike to charity so that some guy in Mayanmar can get to the fields to feed his family.

kalm wrote:

HI54UNI wrote:And the whole tax the rich thing is a false argument. If you took 100% of everything that the Forbes 400 has it wouldn't even cover the budget deficit for 1 year.

The govt has enough revenue but they spend too much.

Then clearly, we need to increase the size of the 1%.

There's tha EWOO education coming back to haunt you.

AZGrizFan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Then clearly, we need to increase the size of the 1%.

There's tha EWOO education coming back to haunt you.

I was accepted to Idaho. Had enough sense to turn them down though.

kalm wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
There's tha EWOO education coming back to haunt you.

I was accepted to Idaho. Had enough sense to turn them down though.

Well at least you'd understand the flaw in your logic if you'd gone to an Engineering school...

kalm wrote:But I agree that spending needs to be addressed.

And how would you "address" it, O Mighty Kalm? "Please, sir, could you spend another [trillion]?"