His "proposal" relies on these fantasies:
1) Rich people earned it the hard way.
2) You earn what you deserve
3) You magically can support losing percentages of your income when you are low income instead of judging based off of cost of living.
Because I live in the motherfucking Bay Area and support three people? I live extraordinarily cheaply, take the two hour train to and from my work, and it still is fucking expensive. Did I also mention that I live in the mountains?
If my entire salary went just to me, you can be fucking assured I'd be A-OK. But I'm not. Why?
Because the world isn't fucking ideal and many, many people support more than their own hides.
What is it? WHAT IS IT?
Money is not a "magical infinite spring" -- it can be better approximated as a zero sum game. So if Billy G. has billions in storage, what economic good can that possibly do?
None, because it is cloistered away and held like some reservoir.
So the "benefit" (often espoused by trickle-down-cock suckers) is nil even then, because the fucking cash just sits there.
Nope, I think "No, because it will wipe out my support net to help some money-hoarding billionaire families and I fucking don't like it" is a pretty damn good argument.
1) Rich people earned it the hard way.
2) You earn what you deserve
3) You magically can support losing percentages of your income when you are low income instead of judging based off of cost of living.
(December 14, 2011 at 9:27 pm)Dotard Wrote: Damn it! I hate math. So you make 57,000 dollars a year? Why is it you are 'barely making ends meet'?
Because I live in the motherfucking Bay Area and support three people? I live extraordinarily cheaply, take the two hour train to and from my work, and it still is fucking expensive. Did I also mention that I live in the mountains?
If my entire salary went just to me, you can be fucking assured I'd be A-OK. But I'm not. Why?
Because the world isn't fucking ideal and many, many people support more than their own hides.
(December 14, 2011 at 9:27 pm)Dotard Wrote: 10% of mine is 2500 and I do just fine. But that's beside the point, it's not based on your lifestyle, just your income. So what if Bill Gates has billions left after his 10%? So what if you have $51,300 after your taxes. So what if I have $22,500.
What is it? WHAT IS IT?
Money is not a "magical infinite spring" -- it can be better approximated as a zero sum game. So if Billy G. has billions in storage, what economic good can that possibly do?
None, because it is cloistered away and held like some reservoir.
So the "benefit" (often espoused by trickle-down-cock suckers) is nil even then, because the fucking cash just sits there.
(December 14, 2011 at 9:27 pm)Dotard Wrote: We all paid an equal percentile of our income. We earn what we earn.
Do you have anything better than that? I'm not feeling sorry for you or jealous of Bill.
Nope, I think "No, because it will wipe out my support net to help some money-hoarding billionaire families and I fucking don't like it" is a pretty damn good argument.
Slave to the Patriarchy no more
