6 votes

California Income Taxes Collected per Worker, Since 1990

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Someone explain the point of

Someone explain the point of it is?

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

Cyril's picture

Oh, I can. "God I HATE SOCIALISM."

Oh, I can. Granted, that won't be a very strong point, essentially a matter of tastes/personal curiosity only.

First, it's mostly chart-nerd stuff I posted for information and for whoever may be interested. I know there are some on the Daily Paul interested in these visuals.

Second, just have a look at this:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774473.html

(not that I condone or support the idea of minimum wage, I'm firmly against it not only in the principle but also for the obviously negative results it brought, every single time it's been tried)

Third, just ponder about these:

a) who gets to decide about large scale economics policies in this country? - closed question - enumeration

b) do YOU or I have ANY word about those? - closed question - Yes or No

c) if planning, economic policies, management by the state (gov't) and central banks - hint hint, wink wink to point (a)? - is so beneficial to an entire country's economy: how come the M.W. has roughly not quite doubled between 1990 and today, while the Federal Income tax - ALONE - has almost been multiplied by 3.5 (4,500 / 1,300) over the same period of time? ... Thus: a factor 2 vs. a factor 4 ... unbalanced, much?

d) Or... maybe... (Devil's advocate) would that mean that the American working class' purchasing power has improved SO GREATLY that it can afford giving away - very kindly! - that much more of their income to the state (gov't)?

e) Assuming someone - Mr. Paul FRAUD Krugman, probably - would insist with answering "Yes" to the previous (d) ... okay, but then how come this:

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

and that:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/48898378

?

So much for "purchasing power" when you become dependent on the state ... FOR FOOD, to begin with.

Funny, YMMV, but I'd rather tend to get the feeling that everything is being done to have the "working class" not only be SHRINKING but ALSO be TRANSFORMED into a "taker class", while you still hear about a 1% getting richer and richer.

Please note that I couldn't care less whether we talk about a 1% or a 2% or a 5% of the richest - and note also I don't aim to judge or blame the most virulently the people "who take" - that'd be striking only at the branches (i.e., consequences) of the Evil - while we ought to strike at the roots, RELENTLESSLY, because, precisely...

Mr. Bernanke, et al., are those WHO DECIDE, PLAN, AND SCHEDULE for this :

http://dotxml.brinkster.net/2012/Misc/G4_Charts.pdf

These guys on those boards aren't on "minimum wage". They don't need foodstamps, either. And even less : they're CERTAINLY NOT successful "capitalists". It's not capitalism. It's fascism - the money flows only between them and the gov't - while everybody else is, either :

struggling, enslaved to feed them and the state

- OR -

precisely, dependent on them and the state, and asking the latter to do more of the same PLUNDER.

Hence, this post - just a tiny bit of refresher (for future reference) about a facet of the COMPLETE FAILURE of collectivism in the USA, not even going further back than what we could witness in our adult lifetimes.

\begin rant

God I HATE SOCIALISM.

/end rant

'HTH,

Peace.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius