Skip to main content

View Diary: IMF & Iceland: If this isn't true, I want to know, because if it IS true I want to bathe in it! (147 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You missed the word "assets". (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    All Cretans are sockpuppets. -- Epimenides the Cretan

    by JesseCW on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 11:02:57 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  OK, how much "assets" (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      do you think the top 10% have?

      lets take an amazingly high number, 100 trillion (it's not that high).

       threaten a one time surchage of 22% of everything they own? one you get back the top 2-4% these are not people who are rMoneys. these are middle management, people who have mortgages and car payments and student loans still.

      it's just a ridiculous thing to even say out loud, let along consider a reasonable proposal.

      •  Please research. Just a little. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        codairem, blueoasis

        The top 1% holds 33+% of all the wealth in the US.  That's 2007, it's higher now.

        Total assets of the US Economy = 188 trillion.  That's 2009.

        All Cretans are sockpuppets. -- Epimenides the Cretan

        by JesseCW on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 11:52:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  you fogot to subtract debts (0+ / 0-)

          and even then - that includes homes, farms, cars, etc that many of those families had to save and pay for... not exactly liquid assets.

          you're telling me a family making 100k a year (easily in the top 10%) is going to be forced to find 5-10k in cash or be forced to sell their home?

          I'm nowhere near rich, but if you're not including debts I guess I might be in the top 10% due to just buying a home for me and my fiance. i would actively fight any proposal that included me being forced to sell me home and any candidate who supported such a proposal.

          if you said you want to go to clinton tax rates for everyone, or even just the top tax group, and limit all of that money to pay off debts and only to pay off debts, that's a reasonable thing.

          but to simply say anything with anything of value, sell it off now to pay off a massive tax, or we're keep increasing the amount you have to pay, is just plain mean.

          f that.

          •  No. I didn't forget to subtract anything. (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mkor7, codairem, TimmyB, blueoasis

            That's total assets.

            That's the total net worth of the 1%.

            I don't know why you're going on and on about the problems of poor lil' rich kids, and pretending rich people aren't rich.

            I don't know what purpose that serves.

            I understand that you and I aren't part of the same social class and aren't on the same side in this war.

            Do you?

            All Cretans are sockpuppets. -- Epimenides the Cretan

            by JesseCW on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 12:23:21 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Frank Knarf

              first off - you don't seem to understant an asset has no value unless someone is willing to buy it. therefore under your "rich and some middle class people should sell their assets to pay off the debt" plan the total $ amount of US assets decreases drastically because no one will want to buy it out of fear.

              wtf are you talking about poor lil old rich people? are you talking about those who owe 200k on their homes and 40k on their educations and 15k on their cars while making 50k a year (100k if the wife is lucky enough to have a job?) are those the rich people you want to sell everything? those are the people you want to put on the street? cause that is what your plan would do?

              are my grandparents who have worked a farm for the last 60 years (after getting it from their parents etc) rich? they're not mega farmers, they don't have a bank account big enough to buy a new car let alone pay off their debts or improve on their 2 bedroom self built home.  but i guess as part of your "war" you'd say they should sell their assets (to who, i don't know, cause everyone with money to buy is going to be doing the same thing) to pay an extortion tax. and yes, it's extortion when you say agree to this now or we'll double it. I guess my grandparents should just sell everything they have because you're angry they're in the top 10%.

              it serves the purpose that just because you consider someone to be better off than you, it doesn't mean they have a lot, and should be punished because you're angry.  there is a difference between leveling the playing field, and the destruction of 10% of the country simply because you want revenge for something 99.999% of them didn't do.

              the fact is this plan is about as well thought through as mcdonalds having a healthy kids meal that includes french fries.

              •  If you want to call rich people "middle class", (4+ / 0-)

                that's your business.

                But it makes it really really hard to have a conversation with you.

                Those who have property got it under a morally bankrupt system of organized theft and exploitation by force.  They don't have a right to it.

                The only reason the rest of us should refrain from expropriating all of it is to minimize disruption.

                Every spoiled rich kid I've ever met has 1) A sob story 2) A refrain about how they're not really rich.

                The only thing worse that a run of the mill pay for play pro-war hack is one who pretends to detest war to build credibility.

                by JesseCW on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 02:06:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  really? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Frank Knarf

                  "Those who have property got it under a morally bankrupt system of organized theft and exploitation by force.  They don't have a right to it."

                  no one forced the person who owned my home before me to sell, she decided to. no one forced her to sell to me, she decided to. no one forced the homebuilder to build the home for her 40 years ago either. no one forced the farmer to sell to the developer, no one forced the farmer to buy the land in the first place.

                  you're going to argue everyone who owns property got it illegally and has no right to it, despite paying for it?

                  you're telling me every person who got a mortgage, paid it for 15-30 years dilligently and now legally owns the property should just have it taken from them?

                  if you want property, go out and get it. I'm working my ass off every day of the week and so is my fiance so we can afford our little bit of america. so yes, i have a legal, moral, and every other kind of right to it. and I'm sorry you think you deserve it for simply being able to post on the internet.

                  you're off the deep end pal, time to take a deep breath.

              •  Actually, the core ASSET we are after is... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Seneca Doane

                The $7-8 Trillion in treasury bonds held by the Filthy Rich (tm) who are in the upper ends of the top ONE PERCENT.

                You understand that IS the National Debt, and by simply VOIDING those bonds held by those being hit by the surtax, we get most of the job done.

                Personally, I'd want to go beyond what David Stockman has called for because I think the players in this mass theft need to be punished. To do so in a way that can fund massive stimulus programs to get the economy working again.

                Remember, the scam was a TAX CUT.

                People like your grandparents, with large assets but lower income would be unaffected. If they weren't making $10's millions in net income, they weren't benefiting from the theft.

                However, if they were benefiting from the theft, then yes, they need to pay just like the Koch Bros and the Walton family have to pay. I don't care whose gamma and gammpa they are.

      •  Huh? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wu ming

        None of the people we are talking about have mortgages and kids college to pay for.... unless you mean the mortgage on their 10th vacation home, or giant yatch-it.

        Seriously, someone with $10 million gets hit for $2 million, still has $8 million. I think he can still feed the kids.

        Someone with $50 billion pays $10 billion, still has $40 billion.

        Sorry, I don't see the pain.

        But make no mistake, if the trend... that has continued unabated for 30 years... continues unabated, the people who come for the surtax down the road will probably be including a free ride in a wood chipper, which is cheaper than building guillotines.


Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site