goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
what does that in anyway have to do with what i said?
2016 Presidential Primaries [ SUPER TUESDAY | 3-1-'16]
- Thread starter 57Brave
- Start date
what does that in anyway have to do with what i said?
sturg33
I
Why not just lower taxes on Americans and be directly responsible for more money in the pockets? Why do it indirectly through corporate incentives?
sturg33
I
You said there was a cultural shift to greed, no?
It seems like you're dodging just about everything when it comes to specifics... I'm still not sure what your issue is - or more appropriately - what your proposed solution is.
At least Zito is saying something. Hell, I'm saying something. You're just saying that CEOs make too much money. That you don't want to cap their pay. That you're mad about greed.
OK?
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Well corporations investing in their workers would lead to lowering taxes.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
sturg33
I
I'm having trouble keeping up with your many deflections. I asked you what your complaint was, and your answer was:
So are you now saying that's not the case?
sturg33
I
"I spent 12 years in the state of California, a state that’s been ruled by liberals for a long time. And guess what you have: about 130 billionaires — good for them — the highest poverty rates in the nation, the exodus of middle class and destruction of industry after industry after industry. Income inequality is worse under progressive policies because progressive policies favor the wealthy, the well-connected, the big and the powerful.”
Carly Fiorina
Carly Fiorina
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Cute anecdote
10 worst states for income inequality and how they voted in 2012
New York - BLue
Connecticut - Blue
Mass - BLue
Louisiana - Red
Florida - Blue
Alabama - Red
California - Blue
Texas - Red
Tennessee - Red
Mississippi - Red
So a blue lean for sure but hardly dominance.
3 of those states have severe old money issues as well.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
No you asked:
"
So what's your complaint? That they make too much? What's your solution?"
What I replied with was "a cultural change of greed in this country"
That was to answer your question about what I would change. I answered you directly
It's sad that you have become nothing more than a troll. I guess the board needs a gatom since Vol just shows up every once and awhile. Glad you found your place
sturg33
I
Now why don't you look at it from total economies of those states - and that "blue lean" become a massive blue discrepancy
sturg33
I
I find this comment to be hysterical coming from you.
We have 57 claiming how people are too partisan and now you're claiming that people are trolls.
Classic
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
about what I expected.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
So because NYC and California are huge centers of commerce. In fact, NY, California and Texas are responsible for about 1/3 of the GDP.
BTW I stressed NYC because a lot of money bleeds from there to Connecticut and NJ in their income inequality issues.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
Boy, talk about cherry-picking. Most of those billionaires are in high tech or the entertainment industry, which are pretty narrow industries. Add to that the inflated value of land in California and there are a lot of people who are likely richer on paper than they are on a cash basis. On the other end of the spectrum, consider that the immigrants--legal and illegal--working in California are working for the minimum wage or slightly above and the current equation is reached fairly easily.
weso1
<B>Clique Leader</B>
I disagree. I think capitalism favors those who have the desire to be rich. The established rich are favored in any form of government. Liberal polices hinder the ability for individuals to become rich.
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
Which is one of the reasons why there are so many fat-cat Democrats and why Wall Street loves them some Bush/Obama/Clinton.
