Re: Redistribution-Revisited.
Pony States:
Man I am getting ripped off. I didnt know that taxing the rich at a higher level would be ike giving me money. This example is ridiculous. It would more true to say that the girl with the 2.0 gets taxed .5, since if they taxed her more, survival in college would be difficult. Then to get more gpa return, tax the 4.0 student 1 gpa point. makeing them 1.5 and 3.0 respectively. NOT 3.0 each. This seems fair since all 4.0 students would be taxed the same way and a 3.0 would stil have all its advantages, while still being well above the 1.5 from the under performer who doesnt deserve the increase. At least thats how I see it........
The solution you have noted is communism NOT Democratic. Perhaps this is why you neocons keep confusing the two? 8)
Pony: You are a li'l 'cornfusted' here. When you are talking economic philosophys: Communism is where the state owns all the means of production; Capitalism means private parties own those same means of production. Democracy is a form of chosing the government leaders, (and shocking as it may seem from your tortured perspective a Democracy could choose Communism as apposed to Capitalism to own the means of production) every domestic Conservative shudders at this prospect Pony. Hill's socialized medicine proposal in the early 1990s could have moved us rapidly in that direction, (and we would still be cornsidered a "Democratic Republic"). The "Republic" part is the "Cornsitution" Pony. (That Keeps the majority from lynchin' the minority).
You guys want to talk union health bennies?? How much of a break does $800 for a family of 4 per month for the MINIMUM amount of coverage sound? Cuz thats what it is.................
BTW, this is coming from an independant, Not a liberal or conservative.
[/quote]
Reply HMMMMM. Now I'm 'cornfusted' Pony
The neocons I refer to are the ones on this site who constantly refer to Democrats as Communists and use the terms interchangeably. Is that so hard to understand?
Reply: Yah Pony; I think you are really 'cornfusted' here too. Conservatives may "ridicule" Liberals who tend to spew negatives about our wonderfull country, (kinda like John Kerry stabbing his fellow servicemen in the back and spewing the Soviet propaganda before the Senate in the early 1970s). In fact that seems to Domestic Conservatives to be a common characteristic of Domestic Liberals, (and European Libs like the French: Pony) to side with America's enemies, and use each others' talking points about the negatives of our, (America's) history and or motives. Communists like F Castro, or the Sandinistas are worshiped by Lib Democrats like: C. Dodd, (now there's a good Presidential candidate for ya). So Conservatives try to "deride" Libs from time to time by calling them Commies: that does not make them a "Neocon". Clear that up a bit for ya Pony?
Care to explain income redistribution to me then?
Reply: Real simple Pony. Take money from someone who is productive, (taxing is a proven way to do this), give it to someone who is unproductive, (welfare is a proven way to do this). We clear on this one now?
because the FORM of it in the original post IS NOT a form that we use in democracy..........In our democracy things will never be equal like it is in the example. That is communist. Sure when the rich are taxed more, programs like welfare get funding and then the poor get some of that. So yes that is income redistribution. I am not dumb, i get that. I just happened to look at the original post a little differently. The example of the GPAs in the real world would suggest that the Democrats want everyone to make the EXACT same income and if they dont they tax appropriately. Thats not the way it works. The guy who makes $500,000 does not give $240,000 to the guy making 20K so they can be equal.................yet that is what this example of GPAs is asking us to believe.
Let me explain myself again, so you can stop reading too much into the words you see to prove some point you feel like making.
income redistribution IN THE WAY THIS EXAMPLE SHOWS (aka the communist form NOT the taxation form we have) is what I disagree with. This is what i have already said, which I thought my other posts alluded to. Didn't think it had to be spelled out word for word.
Hey Pony, sounds like ya think Uncle Joe Stalin or Chairman Mao did't make more in material returns from their respective Commie systems then the average Prolatariat in their Commie system? Wrong Pony.
income redistribution in terms of taxing according to income I do think is good, and i think it needs to be adjusted.
Still 'cornfusing' to me Pony, seems ya like income redistribution to me. I now see why DWJ opted not to respond to you, and I kinda wish I hadn't of responded either. Hope I helped sort things out for ya jus' a li'l. JR
I am not spewing my confussion on others.......I just read more into this example than others. Perhaps I was being too specific.[/quote]
