"Punishing success"

[Ardent15]

I'm sick of this crap from the right-wingers, the free-market apologists and defenders, etc. that high tax rates on the wealthy is "punishing success".

Newsflash: The wealthy make their money off the work of the poor and working class. That's not something to be proud of. And they pay far, far less of their overall wealth in taxes in proportion to the lower classes.

We don't need the ruling class. The ruling class needs us.

[Greyhound]

1. Just like any parasite.

:kick: & R

[yurbud]

2. a business makes a profit by buying people and things for less than they are worth

and selling them for more than they are worth.

[readmoreoften]

9. That's laughable. And how are they "worth" anything? Why do some things cost more than others?

Why? Because of labor costs and the suppression of labor costs. Why do cheap Chinese goods cost less than goods produced in the US? Because the Chinese work in slave labor conditions. Why are shirts so cheap? Because they're made by textile workers and assembly works who work in factories for pennies and the shirts are sold for tens of dollars. Who makes the difference? THE CAPITALISTS WHO OWN THE INCORPORATED FACTORIES, THE OIL FIELDS, THE BANKS, THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION. That's the origin of profit. It's the difference between what workers make and what the capitalist takes. Oh, you say well they "invest" in the factories themselves? Interesting. Who makes these factories and machines? The workers. Why are some items cheaper than others? The time and salaries of the workers.

That's why the stock market goes up when salaries go down and people get fired.

Why did the Deepwater Horizon blow up? Because "costs" were contained for the sake of profit. What are these "costs"? Fewer workers, working faster, cutting corners, so their pay rate was lower per minute and the rate of profit was higher.

capitalists are a parasite class who suck off the labor of others, and do so with the approval of the state

[yurbud]

15. I didn't say I approved of it--in fact, it's a statement that pushed me farther to the left.

[William Z. Foster]

12. yes

And that is why the system must destroy itself and everything else along with it.

Obviously, buying people for less will inevitably lead to those very people not being able to buy the things you are selling to them - that they are making. This leads to more and more frantic "growth" into "new markets," a more and more desperate effort at suppressing wages and finding cheaper labor, and more and more destruction and exploitation. No Other outcome is possible.

[yurbud]

16. and because it takes less and less labor to make more and more products, the profits

grow exponentially.

One part of Marxist analysis was correct: industrialization would inevitably lead to greater equality and it takes a concerted effort on the part of the financial elite to prevent that.

If wages were more fair, we could work seven hours a day for days a week, be able to comfortably support our families, AND the investors could still make a comfortable return--but not an ever-growing one like they want.

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2009/06/author-jack-london-made-financial-elite.html">Both Jack London and George Orwell wrote about the epic failure of our financial elite, and not much has changed since then.

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. That sounds like it came straight from Limbaugh's fat mouth.

Although others on the right probably think that way, too.

[Taverner]

4. Always retort - "No, we're punishing greed"

[Regret My New Name]

5. "The wealthy make their money off the work of the poor and working class"

While that may be true in many cases, it's inaccurate in more than a few. For example, an entrepreneur who comes up some brilliant service/product/idea or whatever may end up becoming wealthy without exploiting people. A broad-brush statement like that is offensive. It's also offensive to owners of successful companies who go out of their way to treat their employees and customers right. Unless you're saying that successful progressive business owners do not exist.

I don't disagree with your point that the wealthy should have higher taxes though.

[geckosfeet]

6. Ultimately people buy the brilliant new product or service. There is a transfer of wealth.

It should taxed appropriately.

[Regret My New Name]

8. I do not disagree at all.

I just disagree with the painting of all people who become wealthy do it by exploiting others. I think framing it like that is harmful and serves to alienate any decent people who earned wealth in legitimate ways.

[William Z. Foster]

11. the transfer should not go on at all

Why do we need a "transfer of wealth?"

A fair exchange would involve no transfer of wealth.

[William Z. Foster]

10. it is a pattern, a system

Of course there are good people running businesses. Don't let that blind you to the system, don't miss the forest for the trees.

[miscsoc]

20. The word offensive is silly in this context

"unfair" would be better. I suppose there are a few progressive business owners but I can't think of many.

[Scuba]

7. As Lincoln said...

" Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. "

[William Z. Foster]

13. we punish the good, and reward the bad

Those dedicated to something other than the amassing of capital - teachers, nurses, mothers, farmers, emergency workers, artists - those dedicated first and foremost to the well-being of others and the improvement of society, to making life better for all, are under assault from every direction. "We can't afford that!!!"

Those dedicated to finding clever ways to exploit the rest of us and destroy the commons to satisfy their own desires are lavishly rewarded and praised.

"Hey I know! Here is a smart idea, an idea that could make us big, big winners! We will take the water out of a community - we can bribe or intimidate them into turning over their water - put it into plastic bottles, sell it at a thousand times what it costs us, and get rich, rich, rich! We will give it a fancy name. We will run massive ad campaigns that make people afraid of their municipal water. Then we will sell them back their tap water in a bottle!!"

A society where something like that could go on, could happen even once for even a short period of time, is a society in trouble. A society where ideas and activities like that are pervasive, are accepted and are the rule, are admired and supported, is a society engaged in the process of committing suicide.

[Zavulon]

14. The people who make that claim are all rich, so it should come as no surprise.

I love to use this fact when I hear the claim in the OP and the claim that "only the poor want more social programs."

[GeorgeGist]

17. Make them fail.

They'll either get better ... or they'll die.

[liberalla]

18. Their success has punished the working class.

Their success has punished the economy.

[Taitertots]

19. It is the buzz word nonsense that they have to feed themselves

"punishing success", how are they punished when their tax money is used in a way that facilitates growth. Being taxed makes them better off.