Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered

Joint Economic Report April 2000...Federal Revenues 1980-517 billion, 1990 1 trillion...Revenues from Individual Income Taxes 1980 -244 billion, 1990-467 billion 25% increase...however fed spending increased 591 billion to 1990 1.25 trillion....Defense spending increased by 50% in the 80's while Entitlement spending not including Social security and Medicare increased 102% defense spending then fell by 15% after cold war...I think this shows what the debt is caused by..

@raptor2391

Fair point.

that's what I used to think but I don't think the evidence supports that if you look at it closely, at least for the us - there was no income tax/ safety net (CHARITIES instead) until 1913 and the country was lot more stable from 1775-1913 than it has been since - consider that there were no depressions in that period. moreover, we are now about to enter the worst depression this country has ever seen and it is no coincidence that government is the biggest and there are the most benefits.

@raptor2391

I understand your point and empathize greatly with those who question the income tax. I just think that until we have a social safety net and do keep sweeping the issue of reparations under the rug, we will continue to have to rely on piecemeal redistribution, welfare statism, and other half-measures that do not address the cycle of poverty.

I think we should look at countries that used to partake in slave labor and learn from their reparation/reconstruction solutions.

that's not the point of taxes in my view. first of all there should be no income tax - there never used to be until 1913 when they set up the federal reserve which is responsible for the boom and bust cycle which gets worse everytime.
more importantly the poor does not have a right to other people's wealth. this sort of arrogance comes from a mistaken view that humanity is perfectable - it isn't. no one is born with an inalienable right to the fruits of some one else's labour.

That's a fair argument and I would find it hard to disagree with it. But the reason for taxes is the two Rs: revenue and redistribution. 1st goal is to create revenues for the government and 2nd goal is to redistribute that money.

Unfortunately what happens is that the money is going to Wall Street instead of to the less fortunate, which is a crime in my opinion.

But what can ya do except vote.

Well said! (Except that I believe that everyone's highest moral purpose is to live for his/hers own happiness.)

yeah of course we should give to the poor. but if the government takes my money from me how can I give to the poor? if I have no choice in giving to the poor how can I get into heaven? the whole point of jesus is that he gives you a choice to love him and a CHOICE to do good. if somebody forces you to give someone money the act has no goodness. I can give money to the poor and so can you but we no RIGHT to force anybody else to!! good day sir!

Yes, and the Republicans should not have engaged in wealth redistribution by giving welfare to the rich, reducing their tax burden while increasing the burden on the poor and the middle classes. Reagan/Bush gave tax cuts to the super wealthy, as did GWB. It's time to end the welfare to the super rich and fix the economic mess that they created. It's time to end corporate control of gov't. It's time to end the Republican redistribution of wealth!

Bullocks. The marginal tax rate was reduced from 75% which is where it should be for those making over 2 million in revenue a year, to 35% under Reagan/Bush. This has caused the tremendous debt that we now have. It's time to raise the tax rate on the rich back to 75% like it was under Eisenhower and stabilize the economy again. It's time for the super super rich to get off of welfare! The poor and middle are now paying more than their fair share, 36%, versus 15% for dividend income.