73% support the "Buffett Rule"

[A0220R]

Your signature quote misses the point as well. When an individual 'earns' 100k what determines that the value of that sum is 7 million Japanese yen rather than vice versa (effectively turning that 100k salary into a 1k salary, and sending you from the middle class into abject poverty)?
Certainly, it has nothing to do with your personal productivity or skill set, because the value of the dollar is beyond your control. So you cant say that you earn a set value. Instead you earn the product of your labor, which is then appraised by others and given a value based upon a variety of factors that often have very little to do with you.

So if we as a collective decide to reduce your earnings we can do so, because we are setting that value to begin with.

 

[Openmind]

I put retired in quotes because it is not my plan to never return to work. I was first laid off when my entire department was closed. Then I went to work for a couple of years as a loan officer. At that time my wife and I decided that I was the best person to raise our young kids rather than putting them in day care or having her quit her job. The sacrifices of psychology in the social services field burned me out and I do not plan to return to the same field. It is time to make a different set of contributions when I go back to work.

I totally understand about the "burn out" in the field of social services! It happen to me, because I was too involved, trying to spend my "normal" work time with my clients and their family, then trying to do all the (HUGE amount of) paper work from home, after my workday and on weekends.

As a "beginner," I looked at some of my colleagues who didn't "push" themselves and did the minimum as "not committed." But looking back on it, I realize that they are still there, still serving their clients, when I have "abandonned" mine for a comfortable retirement.

Not proud of it. . .and too old to start again, except as a part-time volunteer. What I did learn (you see, I can learn!) is that TOO MUCH commitment is the way to the fastest burn out!

And, raising your children is a wonderful commitment. It is a gift to them (and to you) that will last you for ever. . .even if you feel like strangling them sometime!

My son (when his first child was about 8 years old, and he was staying home because he was unemployed for a few months, so it took over the "house dad" role) sent me this quote. . .don't know who wrote it, but it's very appropriate!:

"Grandchildren are God's gift to parents for not having strangle their own children when they were growing up!"

So glad my son now understand that, being a mom or a dad is not always easy, in spite of the love (and sometime because of it!)

 

[Openmind]

Socialims and marxism have been evil every time they were implemented. People are not capable of running either system without it becoming a totalitarian monster. Capitalism is the only system that checks the greed and evil in men.

But what did Marx teach?

He said that there needed to be a revolution before communist principles could work - that they could not work otherwise. Prior to his utopian state he believed in capitalist principles. He created an intentionally oppressive regime to quicken that revolution.

The revolution never materialized and never will. We still have limited resources and always will. The only way to fairly distribute those resources is to let people make free choices about trading their time and treasure with a rule of law to assure that violations of rights do not occur. The role of gov is to stop people from hurting each other and to let them trade, or give as they see fit. If, as has been disproven, people were to trade ONLY in greedy ways and never gave to their fellow man, then this system of free trade would result in much suffering. But IF people really were that callous, and they are not, then all systems would result in great suffering, if not greater suffering. Free markets are the best shot we have at achieving the most good for the most.

So, you see Europe (France, England, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Italy, Spain) as "totalitarian monsters?"

That is almost laughable! Did you ever live in ANY of those countries? There is more freedom in all those countries than in the US, because people are FREE not to work huge number of hours, they are FREE from worrying about losing their job because it would mean losing their health care, they are FREE to travel anywhere they want EACH YEAR, even if they are part of the lower middle class, and they are FREE to express anything they want to say. Their education system is MUCH superior to ours, and their economy is really not any worse than ours. . .in fact, for some of those countries, it is much better!

Our 'false" capitalist system (false, because it is no longer based on "free market," but on "manipulated market") is hurting people. . . .the wealthy get wealthier AT THE EXPENSE of the poor. And that trend is speeding up.

You accuse the poor and the middle class (the 99%ers) to want to TAKE ALL the wealth away from the top 1%! You say "redistribution of wealth" is not constitutional. . .and yet redistribution of wealth is exactly what has happened (thanks to the Bush administration's policies that gave all rights to the wealthy to pursue MORE wealth at infinity, with fewer and fewer regulations, with attacks on organizations that make attempts to protect the disenfrancised, with tax policies that strongly favor the wealthiest among us) but in the direction of the poor to the wealthy!

I do NOT believe that that sort of "runaway greed" was the intent of our forefathers! And. . in a society where the govenment has had the power over the last 10 years (longer even) to "favor the wealthy," What is wrong with requesting a govenment that puts a stop to that "runaway greed" and begin to level off the amazing inbalance between the abilities of the poor and the middle class to "pursue their dreams" and that of the wealthy!

You are correct that, in the best of world, the wealthy would decide that they do have enough wealth, that it is time to look at the "OTHER" benefits provided by a successful corporation (other than financial wealth for a few) but respect also that the "profits" of a healthy corporation also reside in how many people's lives are positively affected by it, how many families can live a relatively stable life in a community that surrounds and support (both by their work and by their demand for products) the corporation, rather than looking SOLELY to the "increase in financial profit" that too often is measured by "increased stock prices," and is achieved by laying off hundreds, and even thousands of people.

This is no longer free market.

 

[dogtowner]

So, you see Europe (France, England, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Italy, Spain) as "totalitarian monsters?"

That is almost laughable! Did you ever live in ANY of those countries? There is more freedom in all those countries than in the US, because people are FREE not to work huge number of hours, they are FREE from worrying about losing their job because it would mean losing their health care, they are FREE to travel anywhere they want EACH YEAR, even if they are part of the lower middle class, and they are FREE to express anything they want to say. Their education system is MUCH superior to ours, and their economy is really not any worse than ours. . .in fact, for some of those countries, it is much better!

nope. for example

Belgium

Main articles: Belgian Anti-Racism Law and Belgian Holocaust denial law
The Belgian Anti-Racism Law, in full, the Law of July 30, 1981 on the Punishment of Certain Acts inspired by Racism or Xenophobia, is a law against hate speech and discrimination passed by the Federal Parliament of Belgium in 1981 which made certain acts motivated by racism or xenophobia illegal. It is also known as the Moureaux Law.
The Belgian Holocaust denial law, passed on March 23, 1995, bans public Holocaust denial. Specifically, the law makes it illegal to publicly "deny, play down, justify or approve of the genocide committed by the German National Socialist regime during the Second World War". Prosecution is led by the Belgian Centre for Equal Opportunities. The offense is punishable by imprisonment of up to one year and fines of up to 2500 EUR.

 

[Openmind]

nope. for example

BRAVO for Belgium!

But I must say they do have an advantage: They DID go through the war, the WHOLE war, with citiies bombarded, with families broken up because of death, emprisonment, participating in the underground fight, and because everyone didn't have the same opinion.

They do not want this horrible time to repeat. . .so they make sure that it will NOT because of a ridiculous "re-writing of history" that seems so popular in the GOP circles!

Again, bravo to Belgium for standing up AGAINST prejudices and hate, and AGAINST lies.

I am very proud of my country of origine!

 

[dogtowner]

BRAVO for Belgium!

But I must say they do have an advantage: They DID go through the war, the WHOLE war, with citiies bombarded, with families broken up because of death, emprisonment, participating in the underground fight, and because everyone didn't have the same opinion.

They do not want this horrible time to repeat. . .so they make sure that it will NOT because of a ridiculous "re-writing of history" that seems so popular in the GOP circles!

Again, bravo to Belgium for standing up AGAINST prejudices and hate, and AGAINST lies.

I am very proud of my country of origine!

I hope that they would block another such thing the next time but that being said, your statement:

they are FREE to express anything they want to say

is not true. Much the same applies across the Eurozone.

So are you Flemish or Wallonian ?

 

[Pandora]

Were there so many anti Jewish people in Belgium that they had to create a law like this?


The Belgian Holocaust denial law, passed on March 23, 1995, bans public Holocaust denial. Specifically, the law makes it illegal to publicly "deny, play down, justify or approve of the genocide committed by the German National Socialist regime during the Second World War". Prosecution is led by the Belgian Centre for Equal Opportunities. The offense is punishable by imprisonment of up to one year and fines of up to 2500 EUR.


I am very pro Israel but its creepy to think that a country had to make a law like this, there had to be a real problem with anti Jewish people for them to feel the need to create such a law.

but even then the idea of a law that doesnt let you believe what you feel is right. I know what happened in WW2 is true but if there is someone who wishes not to believe it, shouldn't they have that right even if its stupid?

 

[dogtowner]

Were there so many anti Jewish people in Belgium that they had to create a law like this?

The Belgian Holocaust denial law, passed on March 23, 1995, bans public Holocaust denial. Specifically, the law makes it illegal to publicly "deny, play down, justify or approve of the genocide committed by the German National Socialist regime during the Second World War". Prosecution is led by the Belgian Centre for Equal Opportunities. The offense is punishable by imprisonment of up to one year and fines of up to 2500 EUR.

I am very pro Israel but its creepy to think that a country had to make a law like this, there had to be a real problem with anti Jewish people for them to feel the need to create such a law.

but even then the idea of a law that doesnt let you believe what you feel is right. I know what happened in WW2 is true but if there is someone who wishes not to believe it, shouldn't they have that right even if its stupid?

Antisemitism has been a fact of life in Europe forever. Laws such as this are an attempt at mea culpa for ignoring what happened as a result.

 

[Openmind]

I hope that they would block another such thing the next time but that being said, your statement:


is not true. Much the same applies across the Eurozone.

So are you Flemish or Wallonian ?

I am a Walloon.

Not necessarely proud of it, because the Flemish are actually much more enterprising and smarter . . .they at least learn to speak at least 3 languages and have done for decades. I very much admire them. I wish the US would learn from their exemple: learning a foreign language is ALWAYS an advantage. . .and when you know two languages, it is MUCH easier to learn a 3rd and a fourth.

And, Belgian people have ALL the liberties and the freedom that matter to them. . .

Changing history, lying to themselves, and praising prejudices is NOT something to be heralded.

 

[Openmind]

Were there so many anti Jewish people in Belgium that they had to create a law like this?


The Belgian Holocaust denial law, passed on March 23, 1995, bans public Holocaust denial. Specifically, the law makes it illegal to publicly "deny, play down, justify or approve of the genocide committed by the German National Socialist regime during the Second World War". Prosecution is led by the Belgian Centre for Equal Opportunities. The offense is punishable by imprisonment of up to one year and fines of up to 2500 EUR.


I am very pro Israel but its creepy to think that a country had to make a law like this, there had to be a real problem with anti Jewish people for them to feel the need to create such a law.

but even then the idea of a law that doesnt let you believe what you feel is right. I know what happened in WW2 is true but if there is someone who wishes not to believe it, shouldn't they have that right even if its stupid?

As in EVERY country (including the US), there was a resurgence of "neo nazism." This party was a VERY minute minority, but the Belgians didn't want them to become a insidious force. They nipped this resurgence in the bud.

Same as the German. You see, in Belgium they do NOT have a two party system, but have MULTI PARTY system, where everyone then gets proportional representation in the governments. . .in both the "Flemish," and the "Walloon" governments.

This multitude of parties, in both languages, creates a little chaos, and A LOT of FREE discussion. . .which sometime leads to a NON-GOVERNMENT. . .

But then again, it is better to have a NON-GOVERNMENT that can still function with all the parties compromising to form alliances to reach common goals, rather than a two party government that is totally frozen!

 

[Openmind]

Antisemitism has been a fact of life in Europe forever. Laws such as this are an attempt at mea culpa for ignoring what happened as a result.

Are you talking about the "antisemitism in Europe" directly before and during WWII?

How about talking about the antisemitism in the US during that period?

It is NOT the Belgians who send a ship full of Jewish refugees back across the ocean after refusing to allow them to land ANY PLACE in America!

On the Eve of War
In May 1939, only a few months before war began in Europe, a passenger ship called the St. Louis left Germany carrying nearly a thousand refugees, most of them Jews. Many of these people had already qualified for, but had not yet received, American visas. They arranged for temporary Cuban tourist visas that would let them wait outside of Germany for U.S. visas. When the St. Louis reached Havana, however, the Cuban government had changed its visa regulations. It refused to allow most of the refugees to land.

Forced to leave Cuban waters, the St. Louis sailed up the Florida coast. The U.S. Coast Guard followed close behind to prevent any passengers from swimming ashore. The State Department refused to allow the refugees to land without special legislation by Congress or an executive order from the president. Efforts by American Jewish organizations to work out a compromise failed. The desperate passengers aboard the St. Louis sent President Roosevelt a telegram pleading their case. He never replied.

Political realities may have influenced Roosevelt's decision to remain silent. Most Americans opposed entering the approaching European war. Many felt that America's best interest lay in avoiding foreign conflicts. Others were disillusioned by the U.S. intervention in World War I and wanted to avoid the loss of American lives. These views had strong support in Congress. In addition, Roosevelt knew that the United States was not yet prepared for war and was reluctant to antagonize the Nazi regime.

Finally, the St. Louis returned to Europe and several nations granted asylum to the refugees. But when Hitler's troops marched through Europe, the Nazis eventually caught most of the St. Louis' ill-fated passengers and sent them to concentration camps.

On the eve of World War II, a bill that would have admitted Jewish refugee children above the regular quota limits was introduced in Congress. President Roosevelt took no position on the bill, and it died in committee in the summer of 1939. Polls at the time indicated that two-thirds of Americans opposed taking in Jewish refugee children.

It is BELGIUM and HOLLAND who took those people in. . .after months at sea, trying to find a "safe place" away from Hitler's fury!

And, because Belgium and Holland got invaded by Hitler... many of those Jewish people, who would have been out of harm and safe IF the US had granted them asilum, were sent to the gas chamber, with many of the people (Belgians and Deutsh) who tried to hide them to safe their life.

Don't over play your self-righteous attitude toward the situation in Europe between 1932 and 1943. . .The US only decided to help the Jewish people, and other countries in Europe who were fighting nazism, AFTER Pearl Harbor!

There was NO help until the US itself became a victim of the association between Germany and Japan.

 

[dogtowner]

I am a Walloon.

Not necessarely proud of it, because the Flemish are actually much more enterprising and smarter . . .they at least learn to speak at least 3 languages and have done for decades. I very much admire them. I wish the US would learn from their exemple: learning a foreign language is ALWAYS an advantage. . .and when you know two languages, it is MUCH easier to learn a 3rd and a fourth.

And, Belgian people have ALL the liberties and the freedom that matter to them. . .

Changing history, lying to themselves, and praising prejudices is NOT something to be heralded.

Perhaps the solution for Belgium is for both halves of the country to unite instead of what they usually do. Think the Motherland will split ? That debate seems to bubling up again.

"That matter to them" is a better assessment but you cannot make blanket statements such as yours.

We understand that free speech is not necessarily pretty be it "not in MY school" or "I have a dream" or "God hates (fill in the blank)". The difference is that we understand that its actions and not words that violate rights.

 

[dogtowner]

Are you talking about the "antisemitism in Europe" directly before and during WWII?

No, the antisemitism reaching back a thousand years.

How about talking about the antisemitism in the US during that period?

It is NOT the Belgians who send a ship full of Jewish refugees back across the ocean after refusing to allow them to land ANY PLACE in America!

Antisemitism is rampant here to be sure, a European export.

It is BELGIUM and HOLLAND who took those people in. . .after months at sea, trying to find a "safe place" away from Hitler's fury!

And, because Belgium and Holland got invaded by Hitler... many of those Jewish people, who would have been out of harm and safe IF the US had granted them asilum, were sent to the gas chamber, with many of the people (Belgians and Deutsh) who tried to hide them to safe their life.

Don't over play your self-righteous attitude toward the situation in Europe between 1932 and 1943. . .The US only decided to help the Jewish people, and other countries in Europe who were fighting nazism, AFTER Pearl Harbor!

There was NO help until the US itself became a victim of the association between Germany and Japan.

Perhaps if Euro governments had validated the stories of what the Nazis were doing things might have been different. But the truth only came out when my father's Army company discovered and liberated the Ohrdruf Concentration camp. (The first discovered by the Allied Forces.)

As to involvement in hostilities, there was still a bad taste after WW1 so it was a hard sell.

 

[Openmind]

Perhaps the solution for Belgium is for both halves of the country to unite instead of what they usually do. Think the Motherland will split ? That debate seems to bubling up again.

"That matter to them" is a better assessment but you cannot make blanket statements such as yours.

We understand that free speech is not necessarily pretty be it "not in MY school" or "I have a dream" or "God hates (fill in the blank)". The difference is that we understand that its actions and not words that violate rights.

I disagree. Words can kill. . .and have killed.

I don't know if Belgium will split. . .probably not, but if it does, it would not be very different from two small US States with Brussels being the equivalent of Washington DC.

One thing keeps ALL Belgian united, is the pride in their country, in the long, rich heritage of their country, and in the resiliency Belgians have demonstrated.

You see, there is such a thing as "Belgian exceptionalism" as well.

 

[dogtowner]

I disagree. Words can kill. . .and have killed.

I don't know if Belgium will split. . .probably not, but if it does, it would not be very different from two small US States with Brussels being the equivalent of Washington DC.

One thing keeps ALL Belgian united, is the pride in their country, in the long, rich heritage of their country, and in the resiliency Belgians have demonstrated.

You see, there is such a thing as "Belgian exceptionalism" as well.

I'm told y'all have exceptional chocolate. My former neighbor and dedicated chocoholic confirmed this when they lived in Brussels for a couple years (husband transferred there to develop his company's business in Europe).