HOME | DD
Deep-Hurting β Soaking the Rich
Published: 2009-07-26 23:19:21 +0000 UTC; Views: 4458; Favourites: 69; Downloads: 42
Redirect to original
Description
This started out as a gag addressing the current healthcare debate, but developed into something more generalized.Here it is on my website.
Related content
Comments: 67
Let's fix your little cartoon. Raise the water to up above the rich person's tie, since the wealthy in the US pay well over 60% in taxes. Put a huge backpack on him,, to account for the new Healthcare law that will overload his ability to continue employing people. Then put a SEIU union thug standing over him with a baseball bat beating him down at every turn. Finally, you need to put about 60 people on his shoulders in lazyboy recliners - to represent the people who have been taking his tax money for two full years of unemployment.
Then the picture would at least be accurate.
π: 0 β©: 1
Look.
That 60% figure you cite makes no account for the fact that the wealthy are able to write off or otherwise avoid paying a great portion of their taxes (beyond 90%, in the case of corporations) by way of creative bookkeeping, or taking advantage of tax breaks which the poor, the middle-class, and another non-corporations can't take advantage of.
Furthermore, it ignores the fact that a smaller percentage of a significantly larger number is far easier for any given person to live off of than a much larger percentage of a significantly smaller number.
Anyone to whom an economic system is disproportionately beneficial should be expected to bear a disproportionate share of that economic system's burdens, at least as long as not every single person subject to that economic system is still not having their basic needs met. The reality is instead inverted.
I get the impression that you see nothing wrong with somebody being condemned to starve to death just because he "didn't work hard enough to earn the right to eat." Even if it weren't for the fact that this ignores what a big part being in the right place at the right time plays in having a fair level of employment relative to one's abilities and effort, not to mention the effects of the efforts of others one one's career path, this suggests you have a personality so bereft of compassion and humanity that I can't ever begin to see things from your point of viewβI'm just not that cruel or evil, and I hope I never will be.
All the other stuff you said was brainless talk-radio nonsense with a hazy basis in fact (at best), and merits the attention of no one, especially not me.
Since know nothing of symbolism or metaphor, don't tell me how draw my cartoons, jackass.
π: 0 β©: 2
SO now you're an expert on tax write offs. Too bad you really don't know what you're talking about. You continue to just make stuff up. But that's the way liberals argue. They ignore facts, make stuff up and demand their way.
First the 60% factor is me. Not a corporation, not a business, ... me. No tax write offs, no second set of books, noting. And if the tax rates were fair, there wouldn't be write offs.
Next, you make it sound like the poor and middle class even pay taxes. Ignorance again. The token tax amounts for the middle class are not at issue..... And the poor in American not only don't pay any taxes, they get money given to them from other people's taxes in the form of earned income credit.
Then let's look at your immoral view that all money belongs to you. Those who have succeeded in life aren't unrealistically benefiting from the economic system.... they are WORKING FOR A LIVING. It's not 'being in the right place at the right time." Why should someone who has risked his own capital to build a small business be penalized for it? Why should someone who works hard and hires others, providing for their financial needs as well, be penalized with unrealistic taxes? Why should they continue to succeed? Thus, Atlas Shrugged. But then again, we've established that you don't read.
As for children starving to death ... god, how much hyperbole can you muster? But then again, it's a tactic of the left that is clearly outlined in "Rules for Radicals" ... (your playbook). There are dozens of food programs, layers upon layers.... I deal with these programs all the time.
So we've established that the vast majority Americans contribute nothing to society yet demand the most from society. Those of us who work, pay the bill. There is no foundation of fact for your claim that children are starving.
The fact remains, your "art" is completely fiction, a fantasy you had in one of your liberal dreams.
π: 0 β©: 1
The only things I claimed to be an expert on were symbolism, meaning, metaphor, and the related aspects of illustration. You clearly have no understanding of these things, but lecture me on how to do them!
You readily admit that your sweeping generalizations about national economics are extrapolated entirely from personal anecdotes. The world is bigger than you or me as individuals, and your apparent unwillingness to think outside your box shows just how selfish and narrow-minded you are.
"The poor and the middle class don't pay taxes"? Are you serious?? By the way, nice job implying that only the wealthy work for a living, you Scrooge. You're hopelessly naive if you think hard work, talent, and skill are always proportionately rewarded.
It absolutely depends on being in the right place at the right time, as well as the actions and efforts of those around you. You and the work you do don't exist in a vacuum, and depend on countless societal interactions which you can only control to a degree.
Atlas Shrugged blows. Someone else has already drawn a better response to it than I could possibly develop, which actually dovetails pretty well with the point of the last paragraph (which probably went right over your head, of course). Here: [link]
I didn't say "children starving to death," though that is a concern of mine, is certainly relevant to the conversation, and demonstrably happens in spite of your moronic claims to the contrary. Maybe you should spend less time reading Ayn Rand and more time reading my responses before you comment on them?
The only thing your comments have established, and firmly, is that money is more important to you than people, that you have no compassion for your fellow man, and that you're incapable of putting yourself in another person's shoes or imagining the world from any perspective but your own. And you have the audacity to continue criticizing me for not seeing things your way? The irony's hardly surprising.
π: 0 β©: 1
The only thing your comments have established, and firmly, is that selfishly demanding what other people have is all that is important to you. You have jealousy for what others have accomplished and are incapable of caring for yourself. The irony's hardly surprising.
Who's money is it? you've yet to answer. You want to tax the wealth to the point that they have to fire employees, and reduce production. Companies are moving overseas quickly to avoid the devastating taxation, causing even more loss of jobs. Don't YOU care about all the people that are losing their jobs because of liberals like you?
And by the way, since it's a know fact that conservatives are more generous to charities than liberals, your accusation that I don't care about others is simply your ignorance. Liberalism is truly a mental disorder.
π: 0 β©: 0
That last sentence should be "Since you know nothing of symbolism or metaphor..." in case that isn't clear.
π: 0 β©: 0
Brilliant!
So far everything I've seen from you is!
π: 0 β©: 0
fantastic
a picture you can relate with no matter wich country you are in
π: 0 β©: 0
typical class warfare. why are liberals so selfish as to demand that others pay a higher percentage of their hard work.
IT'S NOT YOUR MONEY.... Stop stealing it from those who worked for it!
π: 0 β©: 4
Looks like the rich pay more than their fair share of taxes after all.
IRS statistics that show,
[T]he top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.4 percent of the total income taxes collected by the federal government. This is the highest percentage in modern history. By contrast, the top 1 percent paid 24.8 percent of the income tax burden in 1987, the year following the 1986 tax reform act.
Remarkably, the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent now exceeds the share paid by the bottom 95 percent of taxpayers combined. In 2007, the bottom 95 percent paid 39.4 percent of the income tax burden. This is down from the 58 percent of the total income tax burden they paid twenty years ago.
To put this in perspective, the top 1 percent is comprised of just 1.4 million taxpayers and they pay a larger share of the income tax burden now than the bottom 134 million taxpayers combined.
How dare those greedy rich people oppose tax increases!
Some in Washington say the tax system is still not progressive enough. However, the recent IRS data bolsters the findings of an OECD study released last year showing that the U.S.βnot France or Swedenβhas the most progressive income tax system among OECD nations.
We rely more heavily on the top 10 percent of taxpayers than does any nation and our poor people have the lowest tax burden of those in any nation.
These statistics prove that Democrat proposals to further tax the rich are not grounded in principles of good public policy or simple notions of fairness, but rather are designed to pit one class of Americans against another in order to gain political advantage.
[[link] ]
π: 0 β©: 1
sorry... I forgot. Facts don't matter to liberals. They just make stuff up and tell it over and over and over and over....
π: 0 β©: 0
typical liberals.... selfish enough to demand that everything belongs to them. Climb out or your mom's basement and get a job. When you grow up and pay taxes, and realize that the STATE takes better than half of what you earn, then you may think differently.
And by the way, you selfish liberal idiot.... I give ten times what Obama gives to charity EVERY YEAR!... It's an undeniable fact that has been researched for years. Conservatives are more generous to charity than socialists and liberals. Maybe Liberals ought to practice what they preach.
π: 0 β©: 0
You're a muffuggin' idiot, you know that?
π: 0 β©: 1
I see how well spoken liberals truly can be when they work at it. When you can't deal with the facts, you resort to name calling.
π: 0 β©: 1
I wasn't working at it- you're really not worth being civil to.
π: 0 β©: 1
Since you are a liberal, being civil wasn't expected.
π: 0 β©: 1
Wasn't expecting civility? We aren't the ones stomping on women's heads at rallies, are we?
π: 0 β©: 2
What I saw at the Beck rallies in DC were average citizens speaking out. What I saw a leftists rallies were violent and very uncivil protests. It's not conservatives bashing in storefronts and marching in the streets... it's you guys.
Frankly, you're not worth the effort. You drank the koolaid and blame hard working Americans for everything.
It must be sad to be a liberal. So angry all the time.
π: 0 β©: 1
Which "leftist rallies" are you referring to? The lack of specificity that you provided for the "rightist rallies" seems a little suspicious. I've never met a left winger who seemed even remotely violent, or prone to it. I see a LOT of right wingers resorting to violence and enforcing their will on others, however, from Joe Miller arresting a reporter illegally, to the aforementioned curb-stomping at the recent Rand Paul rally, to the tea-partiers chucking rocks through people's windows.
If you want to talk about folks who are seething with rage, I suggest looking up and reading about how mad almost all of the members of these right-wing militia groups and white supremacist/nationalist groups are. They're pissed as hell on an almost consistent basis.
Us, we may be just as perturbed, but we discourage people from being violent for their cause and denounce the people who don't keep themselves under control. I have never met a person on my side of the political spectrum who has ever congratulated or cheered for the two men claiming to be members of the black panthers who intimidated voters back in 08, for example. Intimidation is not something we promote, but we see plenty of people ready and perfectly willing to enforce their ideology on your end... people who find that route quite successful.
It seems the monstrous left you've been introduced to is an outright fabrication, and you have only the leaders and spokespeople of your base to blame for that. Feigning terror at the left seems like yet another attempt to boost popularity for the right in a long, sad history of publicity stunts. The people have more to fear from reporter-arresters, head-stompers and rock chuckers than we do from peace-lovers, tofu-eaters and flower-planters.
But do please let me know which "leftist rallies" you're referring to.
π: 0 β©: 1
You've read one too many left wing bloggers. Check the police records for the Beck rally in DC and then check the Lefty rally sponsored by comedy central. Guess what you'll find? But truth doesn't seem to matter to you. Check also the astroturfing by SEIU.
There were no militia groups, no white supremacist groups.... .none.
And just what exactly do you mean by persons on my end enforcing their ideology? You've got to be kidding. That's a lefty tactic. For god's sake, we can't even buy a standard light bulb anymore because left wing fruit loops demand that we use florescent bulbs.... which are more damaging to the environment. But that doesn't matter.... what matters is that leftists tree huggers demand their will on all of society.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ah, thank you. All I could find was a report about a woman's camera is swiped at by a counterprotester at one of those rallies. Couldn't find anything about the other one, so correct me if I didn't even get the first one right.
Personally, I don't think you can compare a woman swiping at a camera to either a group of men restraining a woman and stomping on her head, or Joe Miller arresting a reporter for no reason. If camera swatting is your idea of a terrifying action, I don't know what to tell you.
There were no militia groups, no white supremacist groups.... .none.
I wasn't claiming they attended the rallies I mentioned, I simply listed them as examples of "angry righties."
enforcing their ideology?
Like arresting a reporter for asking too many questions to Joe Miller. Yes.
we can't even buy a standard light bulb anymore because left wing fruit loops demand that we use florescent bulbs....
Because the whole of the environmentalist movement is based on what kind of lightbulb you buy, right? That's where the majority of the focus is directed. Certainly.
what matters is that leftists tree huggers demand their will on all of society.
I don't think you can call something an agenda if it's factually sound, like the damage done by pollution.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ok... you drank the Koolaid. sorry .... I had mistaken you for someone with a brain
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't see you even attempting to refute any of the things I've brought up, just popping more lame-ass Republican talking points. That's pretty stupid for someone who's calling others out on supposed stupidity.
And nice joke and all, but seeing as how you never had any respect for me (and vicie-versie) to begin with.... nnnnah, ya didn't.
π: 0 β©: 1
no lefty has yet to address the facts. The wealthy in America pay huge portions of what they earn. They are the ones creating goods, services, products, and tangible wealth. At what point of taxation will you radicals be happy? They already take 60% of what I earn in Federal and state taxes. Your only answer is ... more taxes. America already has the highest corporate tax rates in the world.
It's idiots like you that cause business to move to other countries.
I don't have respect for you, because you seem to believe that my wealth belongs to you..... It doesn't, I earned it. Not you.
Final question - Who's money is it? How dare you demand that I have to give you money.
Get up out of your mother's basement, get a job, and stop stealing from others.
π: 0 β©: 1
Settle down. Try not to stomp on my head over this.
First of all, I don't think you've any place to be calling me a radical. Last time I checked, we're on polar opposite ends of the political spectrum, so it seems we're in that sinking ship together. We're both considered "radicals" by most of society.
Although you more than I, for reasons which I've already stated.
And that brings me to my second point: this lefty is very happy to address facts that pertain to our discussion, but I will not argue about things that you pull literally out of nowhere. I barely escaped high school economics with my grade intact, so I'm not going to try and debate a subject I don't understand. I'll leave that to the professionals. Fortunately for me, economics was NOT the topic of our discussion. It was about violence and oppression at political gatherings.
Blaming corporate outsourcing, which I'm pretty sure was already a common, money-saving, tax-dodging practice before the recession, on scary liberals and their evil taxes, once again, seems very convenient. What an utterly laughable accusation that I sincerely wish I could expect clarification on, but we both know that it was nothing but a baseless, reactionary screech that contains no truth.
This is an inane discussion, one that I'd be very happy not to have to contribute to again.
π: 0 β©: 1
680 state house seats move from dem to republican
15 governor's seats move from dem to republican
The US House of Representatives shift from dem to a dominating republican control
The US Senate moves from a dominating democrat control to a nearly 50/50 control
I think I know who is winning the debate.
π: 0 β©: 1
Because that has always been a persuasive argument. 
π: 0 β©: 1
spoken like someone who is losing control. In the words of Obama... "We Won!"
π: 0 β©: 1
Yup! "Mission accomplished!"
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh, not yet... 2012 means a new president.... this time we'll try an American.
π: 0 β©: 1
HAHAHAHA! Oh god, don't tell me you people still think he's a Kenyan? HAHAHAHAHA!
π: 0 β©: 1
Certainly not... but he sure is Anti-American.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nah, he's really a Kenyan. The birth certificate was fake.
π: 0 β©: 1
well, we would know if anyone had seen it. Actually, while I don't believe he is not an American... there IS a difference between a birth certificate and a live birth record in the state of Hawaii. He has yet to present a birth certificate and there is no federal agency that even checks it.
π: 0 β©: 1
No, he is in fact a terrorist muslim kenyan spaceman. I hurd it on Rush Limbeck. Derp.
π: 0 β©: 1
No, you didn't hear that on "rush limbeck..." But then again, we established that you make stuff up. Obama is completely out of his league as he has made clear by his inability to control his lap dog (Bella Pelosi) The only do that has had a dozen face lifts.
π: 0 β©: 1
But what does that say about his Muslimosity, or his Kenyanicity?
I do believe he may be a communist nazi in league with Hitler. BUY GOLD TO SAVE YOU FROM 2012 TODAY
π: 0 β©: 6
Don't mock ... it shows your ignorance. Gold is up 145.71 in the last two years.... when Beck said, buy gold over stock. Seems he knows more about it than you do. And by the way.... I took his advice. While you're a food stamp liberal, I'm doing fine.
π: 0 β©: 0
Don't mock ... it shows your ignorance. Gold is up 145.71 in the last two years.... when Beck said, buy gold over stock. Seems he knows more about it than you do. And by the way.... I took his advice. While you're a food stamp liberal, I'm doing fine.
π: 0 β©: 0
Don't mock ... it shows your ignorance. Gold is up 145.71 in the last two years.... when Beck said, buy gold over stock. Seems he knows more about it than you do. And by the way.... I took his advice. While you're a food stamp liberal, I'm doing fine.
π: 0 β©: 0
Don't mock ... it shows your ignorance. Gold is up 145.71 in the last two years.... when Beck said, buy gold over stock. Seems he knows more about it than you do. And by the way.... I took his advice. While you're a food stamp liberal, I'm doing fine.
π: 0 β©: 0
Don't mock ... it shows your ignorance. Gold is up 145.71 in the last two years.... when Beck said, buy gold over stock. Seems he knows more about it than you do. And by the way.... I took his advice. While you're a food stamp liberal, I'm doing fine.
π: 0 β©: 0
Don't mock ... it shows your ignorance. Gold is up 145.71 in the last two years.... when Beck said, buy gold over stock. Seems he knows more about it than you do. And by the way.... I took his advice. While you're a food stamp liberal, I'm doing fine.
π: 0 β©: 0
Why are you even arguing with this guy? If you think Palin is a bastion of feminism, Beck speaks the truth and Fox is a reliable source of information, you're too fucking stupid to be reasoned with. But if you don't even take his other notoriously stupid comments into account, he's clearly disconnected from reality.
Also, this [link] is what every single one of his posts read like.
π: 0 β©: 2
Because it's simple, easy, and I'm egotistical.
And honest. I am always honest.
π: 0 β©: 0
Palin is more qualified to be president than the idiot that is holding the office today. The stronger she gets, and the more leftists scream at her, the stronger she gets.
It must be sad to be a liberal. So angry all the time.
π: 0 β©: 1
Not even the GOP likes Palin, and they probably won't let her run for office.
Why are you replying to my message, anyway? Are you seriously scanning DH's cartoons just to see what everyone has to say? Get a job already.
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>