audioholic
5,000+ posts
not a moderator
Call the 98% poor, middle class, or anything you want... the point is you are part of that 98%, and therefor you would stand to benefit from your 'charity' plan to take money from rich people. You can tap dance around that fact all you want, with your what color am I thinking about now games, but the fact remains that rich people have more money than you, and your stance would remove it from their bank accounts and go towards govt plans that would help YOU.
"I make about $700 a month, working five days, minimum wage. How much disposable income do you think I have? I give $200 to my mom every month, I spend around $150 a month to pay for gas to get me to school and work. That leaves me with $350 to pay for everything else. After having to pay for car maintenance and **** like that, I probably have $3500 through a year as disposable. But because I don't give every last cent to some charity, that makes me a hypocrite because I think people who makes hundreds of thousands of dollars a year should pay extra in taxes. Take a step back and look how ridiculous you are being."
$3500 a year would go a long ways towards helping a homeless person, the local soup kitchen, or many other local charities. How many do you donate to? Zero. And you clearly have plenty of free time on your hands... how much time do you donate to... anything? Since you've once again ignored this question, I'll assume... zero. Hypocrite.
"I'm not saying that the rich should spend ALL of their disposable income and ALL of their free time on charity that only helps less than 1% of people anyway (the homeless). I'm saying those with enormous incomes should be taxed more than the average person to pay for things beneficial to 99% of people."
They already are "taxed more than the average person". Nice attempt to downplay your radical view that the richest people should have absolutely most of their income taxed right out of their wallets. You''ve used figures as high as 70% and even 90%, and then want to claim you are the one here championing fairness. Take a step back and look how ridiculous you are being.
Even ignoring you horde your disposable income and donate ZERO of it to the needy, you donate ZERO of your time to helping too. But we are suppose to think you are being fair when you say 'I'm not saying that the rich should spend ALL of their disposable income and ALL of their free time on charity'... you donate ZERO, and yet you seem to get to decide what is fair that others donate. Hypocrite.
"I want to use the "sacrifice the 1 to save 99" metaphor, but it's not like you're sacrificing the rich. It's more like cutting the arm of 1 to save 99."
Hey look, the mantra of socialism, coming out of Prox's mouth, yet again.
"Anyway, I'm done defending your bullshit arguments about me being a hypocrite. You have in firmly in your head that you're psychic, know everything about me, so nothing I say, despite all the logic used, will change your mind."
Your little psychic argument might have some meaning if we'd just started this debate. But Ive listened to you jabber on for over a month now. I have a pretty good sense of your stance, and your reasoning behind it.
"****, you probably won't even read it anyway, let alone respond to it. If you want to call me a hypocrite to make yourself feel better, that is fine, it doesn't making taxing the richest 1% of people to benefit 99% of people unfair. Which is exactly what you're trying to accomplish."
You've pissed and moaned that I should listen to you, well I have. But now that I have, and drew a conclusion that you dont like, you claim Im simply speaking based on assumptions and not reading what you say. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif
Deny being a hypocrite because you dont practice what you preach all you want, it doesn't making removing money from someone's pocket who earned it, to give to someone who didnt, fair simply because the guy who didnt earn it has less income.
