Huey Long: Share the Wealth; Every man a King; Income Redistribution; Tax the Rich

[KarenS55]

we learnin about Huey P. LoNg in La Histoy

[jbranstetter04]

@KarenS55 That he was a Socialist who thought that one man should work for the benefits of another man? That one man should work and give the money that he labored for to another man who did not work for it? Is that what you learned?

[mouayad888]

that is the great Huey Long, that is part of his radio speech i believe it was in 1934

[mouayad888]

It is not the difficulty of the problem which we have; it is the fact that the rich people of this country—and by rich people I mean the super-rich—will not allow us to solve the problems, or rather the one little problem that is afflicting this country, because in order to cure all of our woes it is necessary to scale down the big fortunes,

[mouayad888]

he was one of the most interesting man that this earth has known,

[sulatlalaki]

But this kind of rhetoric supports the concepts that have gotten this country in to TRILLIONS of dollars of debt! Giving homes/loans to people who CANNOT make their payments! Giving welfare to illegal immigrants that DO work, but then send their money out of the country! "Poor" people that DON'T WANT to work, but want a hand out! "Victims" of society that want OTHER PEOPLE to pay their way! The reason so many own so much is most of 'em have done the majority of the work!

[superfish812]

@sulatlalaki They STOLE from the people! I have never met one single millionaire who worked as hard or harder than the average worker does! WE should slaughter the rich and their children, that would be justice.

[snowrocket]

@superfish812 Super, are you kidding? Henry Ford and Bill Gates "stole from the people"? No, they gave people easy-to-use, desirable things at an affordable price; inexpensive, reliable cars and useful, mostly reliable software. Oh yeah, and they started companies that now employ millions, allowing those workers to earn a living. Work smarter, not necessarily harder. Don't forever make the burgers, eventually create the next McDonald's. Greater risk CAN mean greater reward.

[superfish812]

@snowrocket I said "I have never met one single millionaire who worked as hard or harder than the average worker does". Bill gates stole windows form a severely depressed man who later killed himself over the deal when good old Billy wouldn't even let him in on his own invention. Henry Ford...lol did you eve hear of "Battle of the Overpass" where he had security attack legal union men and tried to destroy evidence of the event. Once they make it they make sure no one else can, it the golden rule

[superfish812]

@snowrocket those who have the gold make the rules.

[filatetes]

Kingfish. "every man a king" .

[HollyTNUSA]

marxist KINGFISH. ANYONE THAT HOLDS UP THIS CORRUPT POS HAS NO BRAINS

[superfish812]

@HollyTNUSA please die



[BigBingFan]

WIth Long & his current disciple, Barack Hussein Obama, they NEVER LEARN History. Never. As Margaret Thatcher, the Brilliant leader of England once said: (With Socialism) "Pretty Soon, you run out of everyone else's money!" WELL SAID, Maggie! Obama and his Saul Alinsky Wealth Re-Distributors Never learned from history, that it just doesn't work. Are there income inequalities in a free country? Absolutely there is. Obama wants everyone the same (except for himself in Hyde Park) of course.

[superfish812]

@BigBingFan please leave my country you are no longer welcome, seek your greedy ways else where!

[kobidobidog]

When the rich sell that they have giving to the ones that do not have they will have treasure in heaven that will last forever. That is the best exchange anyone could ever ask for. Then the rich will have God in them giving even as God gives. Then war will vanish into nothingness.

[jbranstetter04]

@kobidobidog The poor will inherit the earth.

[kobidobidog]

@jbranstetter04 The poor, and poor in spirit being the persecuted thinking they are less will be the first to be in Gods Holy presence being the greatest in Gods house. Huey Long has God in him speaking through him. Jesus said very much the same thing to the rich man that Huey Long said.

[jbranstetter04]

@kobidobidog Jesus was more along the line of individual responsibility. Meaning, people should not be forced to give. It should be something that you want to do, to help others. I think Huey wanted to take from some people and to give it to others.

[kobidobidog]

@jbranstetter04 You are right. Jesus wanted humans to willingly give, and not have it taken or begrudgingly given, Jesus saw what a human gave according to what they had. The poor woman who gave two cents gave more according to Jesus than the generous gift of a rich man because the poor widow gave all the money that she had.

[superfish812]

@kobidobidog eye for a eye tooth for a tooth! Slaughter the sinner before he can repent!

[kobidobidog]

@superfish812KJV, Matthew 5;38;Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

[kobidobidog]

@superfish812 Because your body dies makes your Physical body sin. Say what you want for another, and the soul will vaporize in Gods light = hell to you. That will be all over for you. Religion have been lying to the world about many things.

[superfish812]

@kobidobidog I am righteous for I slay in his name!

[kobidobidog]

@superfish812 K,J,V Proverbs 12 20,Deceit is in the heart of them that imagine evil: but to the counsellers of peace is joy.This means deceit is in your heart. There is no detect in Jesus therefore you take Christs name in vain. Therefore not righteous at all. Therefore repenting would be good for your soul.Therefore, Proverbs 4 24,Put away from thee a froward mouth, and perverse lips put far from thee.

[1tonykirk]

@jbranstetter04 Christ threw the Moneychangers down the steps of the Temple.

What we have now is Usury, Avarice and Monopoly under the doublespeak of "Capitalism".

"Banksters 101 for Zombies", "The New American Century", "The Secret of Oz" ,"The Money Masters","1932, A True History of the United States" and the Trilogy: "America's Secret Beginnings" 1. "The New Atlantis", 2."Riddles in Stone" and 3."Eye of the Phoenix" should be Mandatory viewing in High Schools. Peace.

[cpklapper]

The way that I look at it is that Long was a Populist returning controlling wealth and power to "the balance of the people". His stock ownership tax presents a choice to the "few hands" with an oligopoly in controlling wealth: either sell your shares so that those of more middling means can invest and earn dividends, or pay for the necessities of the poor. He was only incidentally progressive in a "trust-busting" TR way on the basis of that first choice. His priority was in the second choice.

[snowrocket]

@cpklapper An interesting statement you make about his preferred priorities, and you may be correct. Either way, I don't see his ideas as constitutional, nor do I believe that we should amend the Constitution in that manner. We should work towards a flat tax at the retail level, not a progressive income tax. Additionally, we should move towards fair trade, not the sort of "free" trade that sucks the jobs out of America like Ross Perot warned us about in 1992. Ross was right.

[RoosterCogburn1008]

Like this comment if this reminds you of Rick Perry's drunk speech :)

[nitewolf89]

communist!!!!!!!!!!!!

[YoshiTheBlue]

@nitewolf89

When in doubt, just shout Communist down your opponent's throats, and proceed to ignore all their good arguments.

[emeraldtiger777]

I WAS RELATED TO HIM!!  GOOD TO KNOW was a cool guy

[jbranstetter04]

@emeraldtiger777 You "were" (was) related to him. Why not now? Did you kill off all of your family?

[emeraldtiger777]

@emeraldtiger777 , my bad forgot I was in english class ,, were , was, seriously? you get the point, thanks for correcting my grammer. I am going to start my own political party, democrats and republicans are working for the same people, feeding america there bullshit agendas, and everyone is still buying it?

[bdawgy0]

Man, the critical ending is kind of a cheap shot. Long wasn't advocating just confiscating wealth from the wealthy, but giving the public a stock interest in these industries like Standard Oil. He said that very clearly---he wanted to keep these operations running, but for the public benefit. Maybe he wasn't the most clear-minded leftist, but his position was much more than just a one-time seizure and redistribution of wealth.

[cpklapper]

@bdawgy0 Huey Long was far more intelligent than the Democratic propagandists would have you believe.

[thomasward00]

As a Native Louisianian, I'm well aware of Long's legacy... He did advocate wealth re distribution.

That is a huge difference from today, White America is no longer massively impovrished, they won't continue supporting entitlements that are increasingly for minorities....

People will help other people, only if they look alike.....

Whites pay the vast majority of the taxes, Minorities per capita take the largest chunk of entitlements, that simply won't continue.

[freepress666]

Look nothing has change from then to now, in 100 years it will be the same, the rich will always be rich and the poor will be poor. End of story.

[matrxmax]

Still, the establishment considered him a threat, they did not want loose cannon politicians not under their control, so they - the establishment sent him a lone gun men.

[MysticVideo]

Those crazy progressives keep forgetting one little thing: incentive. If all my wealth is to be taken away, why should I work hard to produce it in the first place? Then, when everyone realizes they get nothing extra for their hard work and stop doing it (it won't take long), where does the wealth for redistribution come from? We all become equally broke. The scheme doesn't work. If it did the USSR would still be around.

[electango]

@MysticVideo Of course the scheme doesn't work and progressives know it doesn't work. But they use the scheme to seize power and that's what they're after. They want the limos, the aircraft, weekends at Camp David and vacations in Brazil, Nantucket, and Hawaii. They've already accomplished their goals.

[PatriotsRepublic]

I can honestly say I have a strong hatred for progressives. I'd just as soon seem them six feet under as six feet in front of me. People who think that my property is somehow theirs because I make too much need to die.

[MadBadVoodo]

Long was a con man just like Obama! Hope and Change my Ass!!

★★★★★

[stxrobstar]

@MadBadVoodo

Heh.

The big 0-hole is like a teleprompted Long bereft of the folksy charm or innate charisma of a traditional American snake oil salesman.

[electango]

@MadBadVoodo Long's con job was much more sophisticated and much more proficient than Obama's. Compared to Long, Obama's an amateur.

[ThaAmericanSocialist]

@MadBadVoodo Obama was not a con man, hes just to weak to actually put though policies he bleives in thats why i never supported him... this guy would of made america a very different place, and at least i think a very better country.

[nullibist]

And the top tax rate does need to rise, the wealthy are not paying their fair share, they're getting away with murder at the expense of everyone else, the lowest tax rates in many decades, if republicans want to talk about 'shared sacrifice', what are they asking the wealthy to sacrifice for the sake of balancing the books? Nothing. In fact they want to transfer MORE wealth to them.

[jbranstetter04]

@nullibist The latest IRS figures for 2008 shows that the top 1% of earners paid 38% of all federal individual income taxes and earned 20.0 percent of adjusted gross income. So they earned only 20% of the income earned in the country, and yet they paid 38% of the income tax. I would say that they paid more than there fair share. So as see, there is no wealth being transferred to the top earners; it is impossible.

Is not 18.2% of GDP enough for federal spending? Balance budget? Cut spending.

[nullibist]

@jbranstetter04 Not even talking about the 1%, more like top 4 or 5 at least. 400 individuals possess more of the wealth of the nation than 165 mil. As W Buffet said he's paying a lower effective tax rate than his secretary. He also said we have class warfare going on in this country, "and my class is winning", and he's right. U.S. needs to go back to the top rate under Eisenhower 91% or Nixon, Kennedy, Johnson 74%, econ was doing great for those decades, till 80, hmm what happened then : /

[jbranstetter04]

@nullibist In 1980 with a 70% income tax rate, the top 5% of income earners paid 37% of all personal income taxes. In 2007, with a rate of 28%, the top 1% payed about that same amount (37%), and the top 5 percent paid 57%! So as you can clearly see, lower rates make the tax system more progressive. Are you more concerned with perceptions or with results?

Here's a little help for your argument. A lot of the rich get their income in the form of capital gains, which is taxed at "only"15%.

[nullibist]

@jbranstetter04 Top rate in 07 would have been 36% not 28% and your bandying of figures ignores the fact that the top few % drastically increased their share of the income and wealth of the nation since 1980, they *should* be paying a much higher % than struggling middle income earners. They are paying historically and internationally absurdly low rates at the top, the repubs ask them to sacrifice nothing and want to balance the books by cutting programs for the poor and middle class. Nice.

[jbranstetter04]

@nullibist "the top few % drastically increased their share of the income and wealth of the nation since 1980"

Who cares? Are you jealous? Go out there and get into the top 1% if it bothers you that much. I just explained how they're paying more and more of the income tax, so then you change the subject.

It is really nice. It's about time the federal government gets brought down to 250,000% of what it was meant to be. And if enslaving programs to the people are cut, then that's a bonus.

[nullibist]

@jbranstetter04 There isn't a spending problem, there's a revenue problem, the wealthy need to sacrifice their tax cuts in order to balance the books. What are the repubs asking them to sacrifice?  The question no-one can answer.

[jbranstetter04]

@nullibist In 2007, total federal government receipts as a % of GDP was 18.5% (being the average since the 1950's), with the outlays being 19.6%, leaving a 1.2% deficit. In 2010 the receipts were 14.8%, with the outlays being 25.4%, which resulted in a deficit of 10.6% of GDP. This clearly shows that all we need to do is to wait for the economy to get better which will bring receipts back up to 18.5% of GDP, but without bringing outlays back to normal, we will not be able to balance the budget.

[nullibist]

@jbranstetter04 Pretty easy to balance the budget and pay down the Bush debt, cut the military budget by 50% (it would still be too big but its a start) and roll back the Reagan tax cuts for high income earners. 2010 under Obama was the lowest tax year since 1971, contrary to repub claims about Obama being a "taxer and spender" and he needs to insist on letting the Bush cuts for the wealthy expire when they come up again, they added another trillion or so to the debt (and then go much further).

[jbranstetter04]

@nullibist You need an education. 2010 the lowest tax year since 1971? It's called a huge recession. Do you understand? Bad economy equals low tax receipts. Only 18% of the Bush tax cuts were for the wealthy, so you're advocating raising the taxes on the average person, as you are using those numbers. I told you how to balance the budget; let the economy get better, which will bring revenue up to normal, and then bring spending back down to 07' levels. You need to learn the facts man.

[nullibist]

@jbranstetter04 Yes we're still in the 2nd Bush recession but I'm talking about *rates* being the lowest since 71, not the tax take. Teabag dummies are out there yelling 'taxed enough already', too stupid to know tax rates are historically low esp for high income earners who are paying way less than their fair share while poor women with infants are having their assistance cut. Nice priorities.

[jbranstetter04]

@nullibist As stated above to read (I doubt you were able to understand it), "Are you more concerned with perceptions or with results?"

I guess we have the answer to that. You don't care about how much revenue the government takes in, and that it's the rich who are paying most of it, you only care about the rates, and to make it appear the you are sticking it to the rich. Just like Obama, who during the debates said that he wanted the capital gains tax raised even if it generated less revenue.

[electango]

@nullibist Of course the rich could and should pay more. However, there is clearly a spending problem. For instance, the current fire chief in San Francisco will retire with a yearly pension of $225, 000. That's unaffordable for the taxpayers of the city. And that's just one example of government overspending. There are thousands of other similar examples of pensions and benefits off the chart. Taxpayers are going to revolt at the polls if something isn't done.

[nullibist]

@electango Well, individual cases like the fire chief, assuming it's correct, are interesting but rare i would think. The problem is certainly not teacher, police & firefighter pensions, benefits & collective bargaining rights (!) as the GOP would have people believe. I'd say there are going to be a lot of recalls in the midwestern states with the extreme stuff they're doing at the state level. Most of the repub gov's elected in Nov. would lose if an election were held now.. buyers remorse.

[jbranstetter04]

@nullibist It will be a great thing for my state if the voters of Wisconsin kick the ones out who are on the road to helping their state repair itself from the destructive ways of 100 years of progressive policies. The more high income earners and businesses that flee Wisconsin if the democrats take back control the better. Many of them will relocate to my income tax free state. Imagine being able to keep your earnings until you choose to spend them. This is our goal at the federal level.

[electango]

@nullibist The money to pay the huge benefits and pensions exemplified by the case of the SF Fire Chief (a non union public employee not covered by collective bargaining BTW) and her upcoming $225,000 yearly pension does not exist and property tax payers are not going to ever be able to afford it. No matter which political party is in control, these irrationally excessive pensions and benefits are going to be slashed to manageable, affordable levels.

[NOMCCBAMA]

@jbranstetter04 these are also the same jackasses that are dictating where 100% of our taxes are spent. Do you think they might be manipulating our laws. With things such as nafta? Where (last I've heard) corporate profits have risen 40% And jobs have went rocketing to mexico and overseas. All the while wages have risen 4%. Before the recession created by them of course. In which they were enabled to by up huge corporations and banks at discount rates.

[jbranstetter04]

@NOMCCBAMA Give us a realistic solution to our economic problems then.

[NOMCCBAMA]

@jbranstetter04 REVOLUTION.

Patrick Henry said, “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people; it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government, lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."

-Thomas Jefferson

[jbranstetter04]

@NOMCCBAMA Then I would submit to you respectfully that you are a nut. Have you lost your right to vote? Are you literally in chains? Have government troops been at your door confiscating your possessions, and I mean literally, not through taxation, a result of the votes of the representatives who we voted in. Have you been denied the right to organize groups to get the people into office that you desire? The answers are no, therefore we are far away from the need of a violent revolution.

[NOMCCBAMA]

@jbranstetter04

Have I lost my right to vote? Yes

Ron Paul Third Party Press Conference

watch?v=iz7maOrGW3Y

The 1.5 to 2 million protestors in Washington DC on 9/12/09 changed nothing.

Boston Legal Speech on America

watch?v=TwDAbVqQqv0

"It seems that these people believe that until federal storm troopers knock in their doors and drag them off to the gulags They have lost no freedoms. Nothing could be further from the truth." Chuck Baldwin 2008 Constitution Party Presidential candidate.

[jbranstetter04]

@NOMCCBAMA You have not lost your right to vote, that is unless you are a felon; maybe you are. As a very conservative American I would put down your thoughtless insurrection in a heartbeat, as George Washington did the Whiskey Rebellion. So your political rights have been taken away. It's amazing that you would think such a thing, the fact that you live in the freest country in the world. Just because you are involved and others are not, does not mean that it is revolution time.

[NOMCCBAMA]

@jbranstetter04 A revolution doesn't have to be violent. Did you watch Ron Paul Third Party Press Conference

watch?v=iz7maOrGW3Y

The two "parties" have essentially hijacked the process. We haven't had a viable third party candidate since Ross Perot. He received 20% of the vote which scared them. That's when they formed the commission on presidential debates.

I recommend watching all of this series

AARON RUSSO'S MAD AS HELL clip0of8

watch?v=Ix-z8res0Jo

[nullibist]

There's nothing new about wealth redistribution, that's what the tax system is, so unless ppl are advocating the abolition of taxes everyone supports wealth redistribution. All this stuff about 'wealth redistrib.' and 'spreading the wealth' is just bone headed BS.

[jbranstetter04]

@nullibist A tax system structured properly is not wealth redistribution. You're thinking of a progressive tax system. If for every dollar earned, 10 cents of it was sent to the federal government, then that would be an equatable tax system. But because I believe that the money it takes to support living should not be taxed, I would not have the first X amount of money taxed. Of course we are dealing here with peoples beliefs, and that is of course why we have reps who write the laws.

[NAGGERNUTZ]

Who is the narrator? He also narrated Ken Burns' The Civil War.

[jbranstetter04]

@NAGGERNUTZ Jody Powell. Yes, he is the same guy. You have a good ear for narrators.

[1989kirby]

i demand free stuff!

[Fenianboyo]

So are you just putting this out there for general consumption, or is this Progressive, Redistibutive, thing something you subscribe too?

[jbranstetter04]

@Fenianboyo Of course I subscribe to progressivism and liberalism. All of my conservative video uploading and conservative commenting on other videos for the last 3 years was just a ploy to get conservative youtubers to subscribe to my channel so that I could, three years later, upload a Huey Long video and convert them to progressivism. Did it work? At last my work is finished!

[Fenianboyo]

@jbranstetter04 lol...no reason to get snarky now. If I find something like this on my Subs, at least give me a wink and a nudge, ya know. Or else I get the DT's from the stupidity overload from the vid and I get pissy!