socialism in America.

[OddTrader]

Certainly a good man!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Carnegie

Later in life, Carnegie's firm opposition to religion softened. For many years he was a member of Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church, pastored from 1905 to 1926 by Social Gospel exponent Henry Sloane Coffin, while his wife and daughter belonged to the Brick Presbyterian Church.[108] He also prepared (but did not deliver) an address in which he professed a belief in "an Infinite and Eternal Energy from which all things proceed".[109] Records exist of a short period of correspondence around 1912–1913 between Carnegie and `Abdu'l-Bahá, the eldest son of Bahá'u'lláh, founder of the Bahá'í Faith. In these letters, one of which was published in the New York Times in full text,[110] Carnegie is extolled as a "lover of the world of humanity and one of the founders of Universal Peace".

World peace

Carnegie commemorated as an industrialist, philanthropist, and founder of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1960[111]

Influenced by his "favorite living hero in public life" John Bright, Carnegie started his efforts in pursuit of world peace at a young age.[112] His motto, "All is well since all grows better", served not only as a good rationalization of his successful business career, but also his view of international relations.

Despite his efforts towards international peace, Carnegie faced many dilemmas on his quest. These dilemmas are often regarded as conflicts between his view on international relations and his other loyalties. Throughout the 1880s and 1890s, for example, Carnegie allowed his steel works to fill large orders of armor plate for the building of an enlarged and modernized United States Navy, but he opposed American oversea expansion.[113]

Despite that, Carnegie served as a major donor for than newly-established International Court of Arbitration's Peace Palace - brainchild of Russian Tsar Nicolas II.[114]

His largest and in the long run most influential peace organization was the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, formed in 1910 with a $10 million endowment.[115] In 1913, at the dedication of the Peace Palace in The Hague, Carnegie predicted that the end of war was ‘‘as certain to come, and come soon, as day follows night.’’[116]

 

[digitalnomad]

Our imbalanced tax code is the culprit for the demands from the left. Avenues open to wealthy citizens don’t exist for the lower class. If the funds were obtained through a flat tax across the board, we wouldn’t have this problem. But the law, is the law. Until it’s changed, the government can’t just decide it wants to extract legitimately obtained assets. That’s a criminal act. Blame the government, not the wealthy.

 

[Humpy]

Lets face it the rich not only stick together to keep their wealth but can afford to hire the best accountants etc. to hide it.
Well wouldn't you ?

 

[Sig]

Our imbalanced tax code is the culprit for the demands from the left. Avenues open to wealthy citizens don’t exist for the lower class. If the funds were obtained through a flat tax across the board, we wouldn’t have this problem. But the law, is the law. Until it’s changed, the government can’t just decide it wants to extract legitimately obtained assets. That’s a criminal act. Blame the government, not the wealthy.

Your grasp on who passes laws and how in the U.S. is frighteningly bad. "The government" is what passes and changes laws, pretty much by definition! If congress "just decides" it wants a 100% inheritance tax over the first $1M, they pass a law to say that. If the President signs it, then it's the law, regardless of if you think it's "extracting legitimately obtained assets" or anything else. By your logic, you would then be a "criminal" if you continued to think the inheritance tax was "extracting legitimately obtained assets" after such a law was passed, and you should be put to death for advocating that position. If you can't see what a dystopian viewpoint that is, spend a little time in a dictatorship and let us all know if your viewpoint changes!

 

[NeoTrader]

 

[digitalnomad]

If congress "just decides" it wants a 100% inheritance tax over the first $1M, they pass a law to say that.

This would trigger a catastrophic civil unrest, and the government would be overthrown by its citizens, while the military steps back or joins in.

 

[Sig]

This would trigger a catastrophic civil unrest, and the government would be overthrown by its citizens, while the military steps back or joins in.

Have you ever noticed you can be more than a bit hyperbolic? If you seriously believe this you probably need to get out a bit more. Having served, I can't think of a single person in the military who would kill a fellow citizen over a tax on estates over $1M passed by congress and signed by the President, let alone anyone but a few batshit crazy survivalists who would "rise up" against it. You severely overestimate your fellow countryman's desire to lay down their lives and their kids lives for the multimillionaire's kids in the country! Hint, not many revolutions get started to protest the mistreatment of the rich, so good luck with that. The level of violence you espouse and anti-democratic rhetoric is both frightening and tellingly it's something I've never seen in someone who has themselves been subject to violence. Easy to be a tough guy on your mom's couch or running around in the woods in second hand camo with a paint gun, not so much when real people start getting torn apart.

Again @tomorton where's your outrage against dictatorship and "banning competing political ideologies" when this kind of nonsense get espoused by the people railing against socialism? Are you sure you're on the right side?

 

[tomorton]

Have you ever noticed you can be more than a bit hyperbolic? If you seriously believe this you probably need to get out a bit more. Having served, I can't think of a single person in the military who would kill a fellow citizen over a tax on estates over $1M passed by congress and signed by the President, let alone anyone but a few batshit crazy survivalists who would "rise up" against it! The level of violence you espouse and anti-democratic rhetoric is both frightening and tellingly it's something I've never seen in someone who has themselves been subject to violence.

Again @tomorton where's your outrage against dictatorship and "banning competing political ideologies" when this kind of nonsense get espoused by the people railing against socialism? Are you sure you're on the right side?

In one sense there is no difference between a socialist party state and a fascist party state - they both ban other parties on ideological grounds.

For the oppressed individual within the state, there is no practical difference, so I would support opposition to both.

 

[Sig]

In one sense there is no difference between a socialist party state and a fascist party state - they both ban other parties on ideological grounds.

For the oppressed individual within the state, there is no practical difference, so I would support opposition to both.

And yet you don't criticize posts by those who share your political viewpoint, and you accuse those on the other size of desiring a dictatorial state. That says a lot.

 

[tomorton]

And yet you don't criticize posts by those who share your political viewpoint, and you accuse those on the other size of desiring a dictatorial state. That says a lot.

If anyone proposes a fascist state I would have to oppose it.