Skip to comments.Democrats: Let's Ban Profits!
Posted on 09/06/2012 11:41:31 AM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Peter Schiff speaks to mainstream DNC delegates who want to see a cap or ban on corporate profits.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
Uh, not quite.
They only mean to ban some...well, OK, most profits.
But what they mean by "banning" is simply, "if you make a "profit", it will, in it's entirety, revert to government coffers. Then they will "redistribute" it, or something like that.
If you make a "profit", you are engaging in immoral, unethical, and anti-American behavior, and laws to reign this type of behavior in is in the public good. They allow the business to continue, they simply "regulate" the excess.
There will be corollaries to this law, such as taxing anyone with "income" over, say, $250,000 at a rate of 104%, or something like that.
People like entrepreneurs/inventors will be permitted to retain a "living wage" (to be determined by the scions of Political Correctness on the Left), but anything over that reverts to the Treasury.
All overseas bank accounts, of course, will be outlawed, and once this law passes, all monies in those accounts revert to the treasury, as it will be assumed such monies placed in accounts deemed "beyond the reach of government" must, ipso facto, be the result of illegal behavior and are, thus, ill-gotten gains. These monies may, or may not, be "redistributed", depending on how our fearless leaders feel on that particular day.
There will others, rest assured, but I'm sure you get the gist of what they are saying to you.
As the horse Boxer opined in Animal Farm, "The answer, as I see it, is for me to work harder."
Remind your Democrat and otherwise Communist-thinking friends of this.
You have been warned!!!
Elections have consequences!
Take it elsewhere, pal. FR is pro-life. Don’t like it? Spin on it.
They aren’t “breeders” anyway. Just ask them.
Actual quote text?
A few years back at dinner, she went on a tangent about corporate salaries, etc. that these guys made too much money and that was so wrong and something should be done about it. Blah, blah, blah.
I finally had enough (had promised hubby many times that I would bite my tongue), but enough was enough. I asked her who would decide who made "too much money". Was she going to decide, how about me ? Heaven forbid it was the government to decide. How about if I decide that she makes too much money ? She can take a paycut.
Needless to say, she was had no response to my questions and sat there speechless. Dinner ended rather quickly after that and the next time we saw them (about a year or so ago), we had a surprisingly pleasant dinner since she chose to keep her stupid comments to herself (but still definitely a zero zombie).
Ah, good point considering one of their heroes is Margarat Sanger.
Liberals want to control EVERYTHING from how much water you flush in your toilet, to what you eat, to where you will live and how much you will make at work.
At this point,I’d rather it be sooner. Why wait until the country is so impoverished that resistance will be much harder?
I believe he could have asked that question to every person who walked into that arena and would have gotten the same answer.
Nucking Futs!!!! All of them!
And, the resentment has started,too.
Do these people understand that corporate/business taxes are based on profit?
Domestic Enemies. Try them for treason, theft, and perversion.
And they earnestly believe this. Many people (and whole cultures) hold as a fundamental axiom that acquisition of wealth ONLY occurs by removing it from others, presumably by illicit means. They cannot conceive of the creation of value out of mundane goods/resources/services; the concept of "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts" eludes them. They refuse to end contractual involvement at the end of a contract; if one party benefits from a contract, then by mere prior association others are somehow owed a share of the profits. They believe this.
It’s not the innocent children. It’s the adults. While I am totally against abortion,except in a very few extreme circumstances, I’m not opposed to doing whatever it takes to keep the leeches from breeding.Some measures I have thought of are pretty extreme, too. No easy answer to your question, but the answer isn’t abortion.
They do not comprehend that high enough taxes discourages profit-making activity. They view income as a fixed given (hence the "living wage" notion, but that digresses), with no consideration that taxing a million-dollar income at 90% will persuade the worker to reduce his efforts 85% (same net income), dropping expected gov't tax revenue 95%. They think tax_rate = C x tax_revenue. They laugh at the Laffer curve.
They do not observe that Steve Jobs' salary from Apple was $1. They do not observe that Ronald Regan, as actor, did not make many more movies because doing so would put him in a 90% tax bracket. They don't comprehend that 1% of a million is greater than 50% of a thousand. And they don't notice that federal revenue NEVER exceeds 20% of GDP.
That was a “plank” in the “green party” platform the last time around...
Anything earned over a certain amount (I seem to recall it was 1 million dollars, but it might have been less) would be taxed at 100%.
I wonder how much productivity there would be after than maximum was reached...
The only businesses that can operate without profit are run by the government, and they always LOSE MONEY. But then they don't have to worry about that, because they'll just allocate more money to the business.
1) a profit is an accounting concept that is morally neutral. For an individual industry, it is the difference between sales revenues minus costs. Also, for the economy as a whole, aggregate profit is the sum of net consumption plus net investment.
2) Profit motive is beneficial to a free society because it:
2.1) is a natural consequence of and depends on private ownership of the means of production and private property rights.
2.2) is the foundation of the price system and rational economic planning
2.3) gives consumers the power to determine the relative size of the various industries
2.4) keeps the various branches of industry in proper balance
2.5) makes businessmen act as agents of the consumers
2.6) operates contrary to doctrine of planned obsolescence
2.7) promotes safety voluntarily rather than through force
2.8) represents pursuit of material self-interest under division of labor and money
2.9) underlies the connection between process and costs of production
2.10) underlies continuous economic progress
2.11) underlies the free markets allocation principles
2.12) underlies the uniformity-of-price principles
2.13) underlies the uniformity-of-profit principle
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.