World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017

[raykeller]

<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>

World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017 with Amazon's Jeff
Bezos adding a cool $34.2 billion to his fortune

World's 500 richest people saw their collective wealth expand from
$4.4 trillion to more than $5.3 trillion in 2017

New Bloomberg figures showed their wealth soared four times more
than 2016

Amazon's Jeff Bezos the richest with a net worth of $99.6 billion
after adding $34.2 billion to his wealth this year

Behind Bezos, Chinese property developer Hui Ka Yan was the second
biggest gainer having raked in $25.9 billion

The richest billionaires in the world added a cool $1 trillion to their
collective wealth in 2017 with Amazon's Jeff Bezos raking in the most.

New figures from Bloomberg show that the world's 500 richest people saw
their wealth expand this year from $4.4 trillion to more than $5.3
trillion.

Booming stock markets saw their wealth soar four times more than they
did in 2016.

Thanks to a surge in Amazon's share price, Bezos added $34.2 billion to
his wealth to round out a standout year for the tech and retail giant.

Bezos is now listed as the world's richest person with a net worth of
$99.6 billion.

He overtook Microsoft founder Bill Gates on the billionaire's list back
in October.

Gates, who had held the top spot since 2013, added $8.89 billion to his
wealth in 2017 despite donating large chunks of his fortune to charity.

The Microsoft founder's overall net worth is now $91.3 billion.

Behind Bezos, Chinese property developer Hui Ka Yan was the second
biggest gainer in 2017 having raked in $25.9 billion - a 350 percent
jump from last year.

The third largest gainer was French business magnate Bernard Arnault,
with the head of LVMH adding $23.6 billion to his fortune.

Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg added a whopping $22.6 billion in 2017,
bringing his networth to $72.6 billion. Zuckerberg saw his profits soar
despite his firm encountering the anger of government around the world
amid claims they fail to do enough to take down extreme and criminal
content.

Other key factors from Bloomberg's report indicate that the US had the
largest presence on the Billionaire's Index, with 159 billionaires
adding a collective $315 billion.

The 38 Chinese billionaires on the list added $177 billion in 2017 and
Russia's 27 richest people added $29 billion.

It was a also standout year for tech moguls in general with 57
technology billionaires adding a collective $262 billion, which is a 35
percent increase from last year.

In total, 440 out of 500 billionaires on the list added to their wealth
in 2017.

The Bloomberg Billionaires Index is a daily ranking of the world’s 500
richest people.

Financial experts have said the stock market is enjoying one of its
biggest booms in years raking in stellar profits for big investors.

Mike Ryan, chief investment officer for the Americas at UBS Wealth
Management, told Bloomberg: 'It's part of the second-most robust and
second-longest bull market in history.

'Of all the guidance we gave people over the course of this year, the
most important advice was staying invested.'

[Mr. B1ack]

Just because you're rich doesn't mean you
don't deserve to get even richer if you are
clever and industrious.

The idea that success is some kind of crime
was invented by communists who weren't
smart or industrious enough to even hold a
regular job.

[raykeller]

The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
of the people and the riches of the land.

The top 500 people get $1 trillion is excessive. That works out to be
about $2 billion for each of the top 500 people.

Apparently each of these people did not get $2 billion through salary.
Just like Warren Buffett said, his effective tax rate is lower than that
of his secretary. So the super rich effective didn't pay any tax.

Now Trump has passed another tax bill to give the super rich even more
tax loopholes.

We are setting ourselves up for a revolution. That is not good for anybody.

[Winston_Smith]

On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:

>The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
>of the people and the riches of the land.

How much was the combined pay checks for those "laboring people" over
the course of a year?

The "riches of the land" is not community property; it belongs to
whoever owns the land and is willing to pay the bill to extract it.

>Apparently each of these people did not get $2 billion through salary.

Brilliantly perceptive of you. Of course the article says that.

Most of it came from equity investments. You too can put a few of your
bucks at risk and share in the haul. No bitching though when you take
a loss.

[DoD]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message
news:ecv84dhl17pm970ma...@4ax.com...

Do you think this forger bitches when he can't figure out how to tie his
shoes?

--
Antikristi i masoni
Komunisti ovi, oni
Sire sotonske fraze
Da nas poraze
E, moj narode, e, moj narode
...
Generacije junaka
I pobjednicka vojska jaka
Jos se brine i gine
Zbog Domovine

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71KWtHZ75tL._SL1000_.jpg

[raykeller]

Winston_Smith wrote on 12/28/2017 12:19 AM:
> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>
>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>
> How much was the combined pay checks for those "laboring people" over
> the course of a year?
>
> The "riches of the land" is not community property; it belongs to
> whoever owns the land and is willing to pay the bill to extract it.

The riches of the land belong to the country and the people. The land
owner has to pay for extraction of the riches.

According to you, if you own 100 thousand acres of land, and you get to
keep everything from using the land for cattle and crops. You then use
the new money to buy more land and get to keep everything from using the
new land for cattle and crops. Eventually the whole country will be
owned by people like you, the rest of the people will just be serfs.

You are a fucking brainless idiot. Please shut up and die quietly.

>
>> Apparently each of these people did not get $2 billion through salary.
>
> Brilliantly perceptive of you. Of course the article says that.
>
> Most of it came from equity investments. You too can put a few of your
> bucks at risk and share in the haul. No bitching though when you take
> a loss.

The country has to build and maintain infrastructure so the super rich
can invest. The country has to build and maintain a military to protect
their investment. The super rich are the biggest beneficiary of our
government expenditure so they should be paying for most of the expenses.

So you are just a fucking brainless idiot. Please shut up and die quietly.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/27/2017 8:32 PM, raykeller wrote:
> Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/27/2017 10:29 PM:
>> Just because you're rich doesn't mean you
>> don't deserve to get even richer if you are
>> clever and industrious.
>>
>> The idea that success is some kind of crime
>> was invented by communists who weren't
>> smart or industrious enough to even hold a
>> regular job.
>>
>
>
> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
> of the people and the riches of the land.

LOL! Okay - I admire you for you mockery of the real ray-ray keller,
but when you start spouting 99.44% pure bullshit like "the riches of the
land", I have to call time out.

The GDP of the United States - and of the world - comes from all aspects
of economic activity: labor, capital, entrepreneurship, raw materials.
The last - "the riches of the land" - accounts for but a small
percentage of value added. Raw materials are worthless without labor,
capital and entrepreneurship added to them.

"The rich" supply virtually all capital, and the large majority of
entrepreneurship, and unless you can show that they acquired those
factors illegitimately - and you can't show that, of course - then they
are fully and unquestionably entitled to their returns to the factors of
production they legitimately own.

I wish I were rich, and I wish I had the personal traits required to be
entrepreneurial. Regrettably, I have neither, but I don't envy those
who have them.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/27/2017 9:57 PM, raykeller wrote:
> Winston_Smith wrote on 12/28/2017 12:19 AM:
>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
>>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>>
>> How much was the combined pay checks for those "laboring people" over
>> the course of a year?
>>
>> The "riches of the land" is not community property; it belongs to
>> whoever owns the land and is willing to pay the bill to extract it.
>
> The riches of the land belong to the country and the people.

No.

[raykeller]

The native people lived off the land before the settlers came.

The settlers came and lived off the land together with the natives.

Eventually came industries and jobs and everything else we see today,
but ultimately we still live off the riches of the land, except that you
don't directly plant the crops, raise the chickens and milk the cows.

Do you know why people in some South American countries we call "banana
republics" are so poor? It is because we have bribed their leader and we
have bought up all their land for cheap. We hire the locals to plant
crops and extract minerals. We keep 100% of the riches of the land and
we pay the locals peanuts to do the work.

We will soon let the super rich do that to ourselves here. We will
become another banana republic.

[raykeller]

Then you are just a slave.

[Rudy Canoza]

Irrelevant.

> The settlers came and lived off the land together with the natives.

Also irrelevant, but largely false. Settlers came and instituted a
capitalist economy.

> Eventually came industries and jobs and everything else we see today,
> but ultimately we still live off the riches of the land

No. We live principally off of human initiative.

[Rudy Canoza]

No. I own my own person, my own intellect and my own effort. The
latter two are hired from me, and I am paid for them. I am not a slave.

[raykeller]

The people in those banana republics down south are their own persons too.

Our corporations hire them to work the land but our corporations keep
the product and the profit.

We pay them barely enough to stay alive to keep working another day. If
they stop working they will starve to death because we have bought all
their land from their corrupt leaders (mostly are puppets that we've
installed).

They are not slaves, but they sure live like slaves in their own country.

[raykeller]

Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:45 AM:
>
> No. We live principally off of human initiative.

Can you eat "human initiative"?

[Mr. B1ack]

On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:

Good.

Shouldn't have been nearly so much tax
to begin with.

>We are setting ourselves up for a revolution. That is not good for anybody.

Only lazy-ass commies want a revolution over
such shit.

Ya know, I don't think you're actually Ray ...........

[Mr. B1ack]

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 00:57:19 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &

gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:

>Winston_Smith wrote on 12/28/2017 12:19 AM:
>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
>>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>>
>> How much was the combined pay checks for those "laboring people" over
>> the course of a year?
>>
>> The "riches of the land" is not community property; it belongs to
>> whoever owns the land and is willing to pay the bill to extract it.
>
>The riches of the land belong to the country and the people.

No, they belong to the people who EARNED those
riches by whatever clever means.

NOT your money. NOT "everybody's money". They
don't owe you shit.

[raykeller]

If China "by whatever clever means" managed to get Trump to sell the
land and riches of USA to China, would you be OK to be a slave in your
own homeland because "they don't owe you shit" ?

If no, then why not? It is not much different from the faceless
powers-that-be owning almost everything now.

[raykeller]

Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/28/2017 2:38 AM:
> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>
>> Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/27/2017 10:29 PM:
>>> Just because you're rich doesn't mean you
>>> don't deserve to get even richer if you are
>>> clever and industrious.
>>>
>>> The idea that success is some kind of crime
>>> was invented by communists who weren't
>>> smart or industrious enough to even hold a
>>> regular job.
>>>
>>
>>
>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>>
>> The top 500 people get $1 trillion is excessive. That works out to be
>> about $2 billion for each of the top 500 people.
>>
>> Apparently each of these people did not get $2 billion through salary.
>> Just like Warren Buffett said, his effective tax rate is lower than that
>> of his secretary. So the super rich effective didn't pay any tax.
>>
>> Now Trump has passed another tax bill to give the super rich even more
>> tax loopholes.
>
> Good.
>
> Shouldn't have been nearly so much tax
> to begin with.

So you are saying that they don't have to pay enough to work for them.

In the old days a slave owner had to house and feed the slave.

But now you are OK to house and feed yourself to serve your slave
master. (The country is going in debt to maintain infrastructure and
subsidize workers to make money for Walmart, Amazon and other big
corporations)

>
>> We are setting ourselves up for a revolution. That is not good for anybody.
>
> Only lazy-ass commies want a revolution over
> such shit.

Saudi Arabia has a lot of oil. They have a very small population. Most
of the people in Saudi Arabia are foreign workers. The foreign workers
do all the work. The real Arabs get all the oil money. (Because the
foreign workers have no right to the riches of the land)

You are as good as a foreign worker in Saudi Arabia, but you are here in
America. And you are happy with it.

>
> Ya know, I don't think you're actually Ray ...........
>

You mean I am not stupid. Thank you.

[Just Wondering]

On 12/27/2017 4:26 PM, raykeller wrote:
>
> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>
>
> World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017

Good for them.

[Jim Wilkins]

"Just Wondering" <JustWo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:vj31C.304018$oE2....@fx33.iad...

They grew rich by selling us what we demanded. If you resent their
success you could try to need less or learn to repair (better-built)
old things as I do.

-jsw

[Michael Ejercito]

"Mr. B1ack" wrote in message
news:qt794dtn03un6a6ko...@4ax.com...

Interesting meme.

I wonder if women do NOT owe men the use of their vaginas either.


Michael


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[Michael Ejercito]

"Mr. B1ack" wrote in message

news:e3p84dhms8leckcib...@4ax.com...

>Just because you're rich doesn't mean you
>don't deserve to get even richer if you are
>clever and industrious.

Whose fault is it people choose to spend money on professional sports,
movies in theaters, and songs?

[Gunner Asch]

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:38:44 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
wrote:

He isnt, of course.

He is just a cowardly troll who picked Ray's nym to use.

He will be someone else next week


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[raykeller]

Do they produce the products without using the country's resources and
infrastructure?

Do they transport the products without using the country's resources and
infrastructure?

Do they sell the products without using the country's resources and
infrastructure?

If they do, why don't they have to pay for consuming the country's
resources and pay for building and maintaining the country's infrastructure?

If you own a very large piece of land and you hire outsider to manage
it. The outsider come in, hire your people and pay your people peanuts
to grow crops and raise livestock. And you happily call them "job
providers". They end up selling you the product and keep all the profit,
while you have to go into debt to maintain the roads and fences. Do you
think you should be thankful to such "job providers"?

What is difference from that picture with a gang of roving bandits come
to ransack your village, and hire your villagers to carry your
belongings into their getaway wagons. They pay you 1% of the value of
what you carry from your homes to their getaway wagons. Your villages
happily call them "job providers".
What's wrong with that picture?

[raykeller]

I am sure Mr. Black thinks you don't owe him shit for the use of his
orifices.

[Michael Ejercito]

"raykeller" wrote in message news:Tq71C.323822$Pi3.1...@fx24.fr7...

>Jim Wilkins wrote on 12/28/2017 8:12 AM:
>> "Just Wondering" <JustWo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:vj31C.304018$oE2....@fx33.iad...
>>> On 12/27/2017 4:26 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>
>>>> World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017
>>>
>>> Good for them.
>>
>> They grew rich by selling us what we demanded. If you resent their
>> success you could try to need less or learn to repair (better-built)
>> old things as I do.
>>
>> -jsw

>Do they produce the products without using the country's resources and
>infrastructure?

>Do they transport the products without using the country's resources and
>infrastructure?

>Do they sell the products without using the country's resources and
>infrastructure?

>If they do, why don't they have to pay for consuming the country's
>resources and pay for building and maintaining the country's
>infrastructure?

What if they refuse?


Michael


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[raykeller]

They already did.

In a Communism, the country owns and runs everything.

In a Socialism, they let entrepreneurs run the industries but the
country still owns the underlying land and resources. The entrepreneurs
get to keep a reward.

In a Kleptocracy like we have now, the entrepreneurs pull the strings of
the political system through "political contribution", end up owning the
land and resources of the country and everything within it. We work for
the entrepreneurs and we have no right to anything. We are now the slaves.

[Jim Wilkins]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message
news:Tq71C.323822$Pi3.1...@fx24.fr7...

> Jim Wilkins wrote on 12/28/2017 8:12 AM:
>> "Just Wondering" <JustWo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:vj31C.304018$oE2....@fx33.iad...
>>> On 12/27/2017 4:26 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>
>>>> World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017
>>>
>>> Good for them.
>>
>> They grew rich by selling us what we demanded. If you resent their
>> success you could try to need less or learn to repair
>> (better-built)
>> old things as I do.
>>
>> -jsw
>
> Do they produce the products without using the country's resources
> and infrastructure?
>
> Do they transport the products without using the country's resources
> and infrastructure?
>
> Do they sell the products without using the country's resources and
> infrastructure?
>
> If they do, why don't they have to pay for consuming the country's
> resources and pay for building and maintaining the country's
> infrastructure?
>

They don't any more. That toxic socialist attitude drove manufacturing
to China's infrastructure.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/27/2017 11:14 PM, raykeller wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:46 AM:
>> On 12/27/2017 10:19 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:02 AM:
>>>> On 12/27/2017 9:57 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>> Winston_Smith wrote on 12/28/2017 12:19 AM:
>>>>>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>>>>>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the
>>>>>>> labor
>>>>>>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How much was the combined pay checks for those "laboring people" over
>>>>>> the course of a year?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The "riches of the land" is not community property; it belongs to
>>>>>> whoever owns the land and is willing to pay the bill to extract it.
>>>>>
>>>>> The riches of the land belong to the country and the people.
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>
>>> Then you are just a slave.
>>
>> No.  I own my own person, my own intellect and my own effort.  The
>> latter two are hired from me, and I am paid for them.  I am not a slave.
>
>
> The people in those banana republics down south are their own persons too.
>
> Our corporations hire them to work the land but our corporations keep
> the product and the profit.

Normal business practice throughout the world.

> We pay them barely enough to stay alive to keep working another day.

Bullshit. You have no understanding of how the economy works anywhere.

Go back to beating up on ray-ray. It's the one thing you're good at
doing, and he deserves it. You're leagues out of your depth in economics.

[Rudy Canoza]

No, but it leads to us eating.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/28/2017 6:43 AM, raykeller wrote:
> Jim Wilkins wrote on 12/28/2017 8:12 AM:
>> "Just Wondering" <JustWo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:vj31C.304018$oE2....@fx33.iad...
>>> On 12/27/2017 4:26 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>
>>>>
>>>> World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017
>>>
>>> Good for them.
>>
>> They grew rich by selling us what we demanded. If you resent their
>> success you could try to need less or learn to repair (better-built)
>> old things as I do.
>>
>> -jsw
>
> Do they produce the products without using the country's resources and
> infrastructure?
>
> Do they transport the products without using the country's resources and
> infrastructure?
>
> Do they sell the products without using the country's resources and
> infrastructure?

They pay for all of those.

> If they do,

They use them, and they pay for all of them.

Seriously - you have zero understanding of economics. Go back to
beating up on ray-ray.

[Rudy Canoza]

That's not what drove manufacturing to China.

[raykeller]

Except China, Russia, ...............

China uses a model called "State Capitalism".

China targets heavy industries deemed vital to the country, and other
industries deemed vital to everyday people, to run them as Capitalist
entities but the country owns the majority share (China is the majority
shareholder) and the country calls the shots. That way they have the
best of both worlds. The entrepreneurs can bring in the technology
business management technique to participate, China provide them with
infrastructure and protection. The country (China and the people) always
get to benefit from the windfall.

For fun facts: MacDonald's, Starbucks, KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, GM,
Ford, Mercedes, .... all have "joint venture" in China with China
state-owned entities.

Russia is also going into that model.

In the old days the British Empire also used similar model. The
government owned the major industries vital for the building and
maintenance of the British Empire. Besides the arms industry, the
government also owned shipping, railway, mail, telegraph, telephone,
radio, television, airline .........

Canada used to own CN Rail, CP Rail, Postal Canada, Petrol Canada, Air
Canda, Canadian Pacific Airline, ..........

After the 1980s, due to political pressure from the U.S., most of those
have been "privatized". The U.S. complained that it was "unfair" and
"impossible" for American private entities to compete with those
Canadian "Socialist" entities.

>
>> We pay them barely enough to stay alive to keep working another day.
>
> Bullshit. You have no understanding of how the economy works anywhere.
>
> Go back to beating up on ray-ray. It's the one thing you're good at
> doing, and he deserves it. You're leagues out of your depth in economics.

I am an economist. You are a babbling fool.

[raykeller]

Your employer decides how little you may eat.

So you decide to work for another company which would pay you more.

Then that company merges with your former company and pays you peanuts
again.

So you decide to work for another company which would pay you more.

Then that company merges with your former company and pays you peanuts
again.

And so on and so forth ......

And eventually the country ends up owned by a few gigantic multinational
corporations.

And they all gang up together to pay you peanuts.

So you are right, it leads to eating peanuts.

[raykeller]

That's correct. Big money drove them to China. China uses a "State
Capitalism" model to exploit foreign corporations for mutual financial gain.

Foreign corporations bring in technology and business management
techniques to form "Joint Ventures" in China. China provides them with
infrastructure, protection, and guaranteed market share. The People's
Liberation Army will run down silly "Occupy XXX" protestors with army
tanks if they dare interfere with the gravy train. You can't get better
protection back here at in the USA.

For fun facts: MacDonald's, Starbucks, Burger King, KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco

Bell, GM, Ford, Mercedes, .... all have "joint venture" in China with
China state-owned entities.

If you want to find more, or want to check if I am lying to you, you can
Google using keywords like "XXX joint venture in China", and put the
company name in place of XXX.

[benj]

Massive leftist fantasy by RayKeller.

Monopolies are clearly bad because then prices of everything can be set
by just saying so. This is why there are laws against monopolies. But as
in your your dreams, how about you have a job and get paid peanuts
because that is the value of what you can offer to your employer. So you
decide to quit and go to another company and maybe you get some more,
maybe not, because what you can offer is not worth that much to them
either. It's called "market value".

At this point you can join some liberal group and vote for Bernie and
ask for money to be taken from those with more and be given to you to
compensate you for what you think you deserve, OR you can take a good
look at yourself and the market and develop (by education, training,
whatever) skills that ARE of greater market value and then amazingly not
only your old employer but most potential employers will pay you much
more as well. It's called market value. Even gigantic multinational
corporations have to pay what the market says things are worth so long
as there is competition for them.

[raykeller]

Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 11:52 AM:
> On 12/28/2017 6:43 AM, raykeller wrote:
>> Jim Wilkins wrote on 12/28/2017 8:12 AM:
>>> "Just Wondering" <JustWo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:vj31C.304018$oE2....@fx33.iad...
>>>> On 12/27/2017 4:26 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>
>>>>>
>>>>> World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017
>>>>
>>>> Good for them.
>>>
>>> They grew rich by selling us what we demanded. If you resent their
>>> success you could try to need less or learn to repair (better-built)
>>> old things as I do.
>>>
>>> -jsw
>>
>> Do they produce the products without using the country's resources and
>> infrastructure?
>>
>> Do they transport the products without using the country's resources
>> and infrastructure?
>>
>> Do they sell the products without using the country's resources and
>> infrastructure?
>
> They pay for all of those.

The last time I checked, roads, bridges, schools, and other
infrastructures are built and maintained by the government.

>
>> If they do,
>
> They use them, and they pay for all of them.
>

The last time I checked, roads, bridges, schools, and other
infrastructures are built and maintained by the government.

> Seriously - you have zero understanding of economics. Go back to
> beating up on ray-ray.

You are a fucking idiot. You deserve to be blindsided by bullshit you
were force-fed.

Communism was a model to prevent what had happened to other countries
and what is happening in the US.

That is why the US, run by kleptocrats, has made Communism its arch
enemy, while friendly dictators are OK.

Socialism has worked nicely in some European and Scandinavian Countries,
Great Britain and its Common Wealth Countries (including Canada).

Any competent economist can foresee what disaster the U.S. is heading
into in another 20 years. Numbers and statistics don't lie.

[raykeller]

Please explain this:

"Report: Walmart Workers Cost Taxpayers $6.2 Billion In Public Assistance"

<https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/#3b79f79720b7>

Uncle Sam (means you too) is using debt to fund the profit of Walmart.

Walmart is not the only corporation doing that.

[Rudy Canoza]

Nope - there, too.

> China uses a model called "State Capitalism".

Which makes its citizens poorer than they would be if they had less
state control of the economy.

> Canada used to own CN Rail, CP Rail, Postal Canada, Petrol Canada, Air
> Canda, Canadian Pacific Airline,

And now they don't, and Canada and Canadians are richer as a result

>
>>
>>> We pay them barely enough to stay alive to keep working another day.
>>
>> Bullshit.  You have no understanding of how the economy works anywhere.
>>
>> Go back to beating up on ray-ray.  It's the one thing you're good at
>> doing, and he deserves it.  You're leagues out of your depth in
>> economics.
>
> I am an economist.

No. No, you are not an economist, and you haven't sat in even an
introductory course in economics.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/28/2017 9:41 AM, raykeller wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 11:29 AM:
>> On 12/27/2017 11:17 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:45 AM:
>>>>
>>>> No.� We live principally off of human initiative.
>>>
>>> Can you eat "human initiative"?
>>
>> No, but it leads to us eating.
>
> Your employer decides how little you may eat.

No.

Clearly you are no economist.

[DoD]

"Mr. B1ack" <now...@nada.net> wrote in message
news:8p794dte58a725r2i...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>

>>Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/27/2017 10:29 PM:
>>> Just because you're rich doesn't mean you
>>> don't deserve to get even richer if you are
>>> clever and industrious.
>>>
>>> The idea that success is some kind of crime
>>> was invented by communists who weren't
>>> smart or industrious enough to even hold a
>>> regular job.
>>>
>>
>>

>>The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
>>of the people and the riches of the land.
>>

>>The top 500 people get $1 trillion is excessive. That works out to be
>>about $2 billion for each of the top 500 people.
>>
>>Apparently each of these people did not get $2 billion through salary.
>>Just like Warren Buffett said, his effective tax rate is lower than that
>>of his secretary. So the super rich effective didn't pay any tax.
>>
>>Now Trump has passed another tax bill to give the super rich even more
>>tax loopholes.
>
> Good.
>
> Shouldn't have been nearly so much tax
> to begin with.
>
>>We are setting ourselves up for a revolution. That is not good for
>>anybody.
>
> Only lazy-ass commies want a revolution over
> such shit.
>
> Ya know, I don't think you're actually Ray ...........

He is a fucking retarded bitch boy.... You notice that most of the
billionaires are liberal pricks like suckerberg and
bezos? Why don't this little retarded antifa reject go picket in front of
their mansions instead of bothering us working
class conservatives? Because he is a soulless whiney little pissant...

--
Antikristi i masoni
Komunisti ovi, oni
Sire sotonske fraze
Da nas poraze
E, moj narode, e, moj narode
...
Generacije junaka
I pobjednicka vojska jaka
Jos se brine i gine
Zbog Domovine

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71KWtHZ75tL._SL1000_.jpg

[raykeller]

Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:57 PM:
>
>
>> China uses a model called "State Capitalism".
>
> Which makes its citizens poorer than they would be if they had less
> state control of the economy.

China used to have nothing before the 1980s.

Now they have everything and they also own your ass.

There are more billionaires in China than in the U.S.A.

There are more beggars in the U.S.A. than in India.

That proves you are just a shit-talking idiot.

"Asia Is Now Home To The Most Billionaires, With China Leading The Pack,
Report Says"

<https://www.forbes.com/sites/pamelaambler/2017/10/30/where-young-chinese-billionaires-are-making-their-wealth-and-spending-it/#67312e207fb6>

[raykeller]

[Rudy Canoza]

False. The operation of markets did it.

[Rudy Canoza]

With money collected in part from business firms. Yes.

>
>> Seriously - you have zero understanding of economics.  Go back to
>> beating up on ray-ray.
>
> You are a fucking idiot. You deserve to be blindsided by bullshit you
> were force-fed.
>
> Communism was a model to prevent what had happened to other countries
> and what is happening in the US.

It wasn't. It was kleptocracy, and it was doomed to fail.

[raykeller]

Read this and cry, you fucking idiot:

"Trump just boasted that he pays as little in taxes as possible. Here’s
why."

"TRUMP: I fight very hard to pay as little tax as possible."

"Trump has said this explicitly, arguing that he knows how to deal with
the problem of bought-and-paid-for politicians, since he has personally
bought and paid for them himself."

<https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/05/13/trump-just-boasted-that-he-pays-as-little-in-taxes-as-possible-no-really/?utm_term=.98984709b8c6>



"How Donald Trump could have - legally - paid no taxes"

"Losses can be the gifts that keep on giving when you make your money
the way Donald Trump does."

<http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/02/news/economy/trump-taxes/index.html>



"Donald Trump Acknowledges Not Paying Federal Income Taxes for Years"

<https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/10/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html>



"Donald Trump Acknowledges Not Paying Federal Income Taxes for Years"

<http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/02/news/economy/trump-taxes/index.html>

[DoD]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message
news:MKb1C.363604$SF3.3...@fx28.fr7...

I don't cry like you snowflake...

> "Trump just boasted that he pays as little in taxes as possible. Here’s
> why."
>
> "TRUMP: I fight very hard to pay as little tax as possible."

Big fucking deal???? Just like grab em by the pussy was a big fucking
deal???

You don't think the rest of them try and avoid taxes? You don't think
Hillary did the same?
Obama? Again, you are a retarded antifa reject... go picket in front of
some limousine liberals house
you spineless bitch..

[raykeller]

Go play in traffic, you brainless fuckwit.

[raykeller]

No, your tapeworm did it.

[DoD]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:RYb1C.485339$Cq7.4...@fx01.fr7...

Says the fucking retarded antifa reject that has no spine other than to
troll working class conservatives
in favor of his crooked limousine liberal masters... You lazy little
puppet.. Bet you like having their hands up you
ass, don't ya?

[raykeller]

No, your gonorrhea is going to bloom.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/28/2017 11:22 AM, raykeller wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:57 PM:
>>
>>
>>> China uses a model called "State Capitalism".
>>
>> Which makes its citizens poorer than they would be if they had less
>> state control of the economy.
>
> China used to have nothing before the 1980s.

Then it ditched communism as a form of economic organization (while
retaining totalitarian one party rule, an essential feature of
communism), and it became rich.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/28/2017 11:27 AM, raykeller wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 2:01 PM:
>> On 12/28/2017 9:41 AM, raykeller wrote:
>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 11:29 AM:
>>>> On 12/27/2017 11:17 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:45 AM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No.� We live principally off of human initiative.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you eat "human initiative"?
>>>>
>>>> No, but it leads to us eating.
>>>
>>> Your employer decides how little you may eat.
>>
>> No.
>>
>> Clearly you are no economist.
>
>  China used to have nothing before the 1980s.

You tried this already, and it failed. It still fails.

[Rudy Canoza]

Your graceless concession of defeat is noted and accepted.

[raykeller]

> Yes I am the fucking retard that has no spine other than to
> troll. I am a lazy little puppet. Big Brother has both hands up my ass.
>


Yes, now look at why Uncle Sam is going deeper and deeper in debut:

Socialist countries have progressive tax rate, so that when you are
earning too much in a year, your tax rate is so high that you would
rather pay more to your employees than pay more to the taxman.

There is no cap to ones wealth. The Brits and the Americans used to have
very high progressive tax rate which, I remember, maxed out to 70-90%
range, but now it maxes out to only 40%.

US Maximum Tax Rate:
1950s 84%
1960s 91%
1970s 71%
1980s 70%

2017 40% (now)


"Federal Income Tax Brackets and Maximum Tax Rates: 1950-1980 "
<https://web.stanford.edu/class/polisci120a/immigration/Federal%20Tax%20Brackets.pdf>


"Federal Tax Brackets: 2017 tax brackets (for taxes due in April 17, 2018)"
<https://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/tax-brackets.aspx>


"History of Federal Income Tax Rates: 1913 – 2017"
<https://bradfordtaxinstitute.com/Free_Resources/Federal-Income-Tax-Rates.aspx>

[raykeller]

Yes, because you are a bonehead.

China used to have nothing before the 1980s.

[raykeller]

Who is advocating Communism, bonehead.

China is not Communist anymore.

The model they use is called "State Capitalism".

They are Capitalist now. Pay attention !!!

China used to have nothing before the 1980s.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/28/2017 1:20 PM, raykeller wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 3:34 PM:
>> On 12/28/2017 11:27 AM, raykeller wrote:
>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 2:01 PM:
>>>> On 12/28/2017 9:41 AM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 11:29 AM:
>>>>>> On 12/27/2017 11:17 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:45 AM:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No.� We live principally off of human initiative.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you eat "human initiative"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, but it leads to us eating.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your employer decides how little you may eat.
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> Clearly you are no economist.
>>>
>>>   China used to have nothing before the 1980s.
>>
>> You tried this already, and it failed.  It still fails.
>
> Yes, because

...because you are a bonehead - a fucking moron - and you admit you
never took a single elementary course in economics.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/28/2017 1:24 PM, raykeller wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 3:32 PM:
>> On 12/28/2017 11:22 AM, raykeller wrote:
>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:57 PM:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> China uses a model called "State Capitalism".
>>>>
>>>> Which makes its citizens poorer than they would be if they had less
>>>> state control of the economy.
>>>
>>> China used to have nothing before the 1980s.
>>
>> Then it ditched communism as a form of economic organization (while
>> retaining totalitarian one party rule, an essential feature of
>> communism), and it became rich.
>
> Who is advocating Communism

You.

[raykeller]

Nobody did, bonehead. Pay fucking attention !!!

China is not Communist anymore.

The model they use is called "State Capitalism".

They are Capitalist now. Pay attention !!!

China used to have nothing before the 1980s.

[Mr. B1ack]

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 06:21:51 -0800, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:38:44 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
>wrote:

>He isnt, of course.
>
>He is just a cowardly troll who picked Ray's nym to use.
>
>He will be someone else next week


He's been a dozen people in the groups here
already - including me. Sounds like some kind
of personality disorder ... such a serious lack
of self-esteem and accomplishment that he
can only cope by stealing other peoples faces.

Likely there's an expensive pill for that ...

[raykeller]

Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 4:24 PM:
> On 12/28/2017 1:20 PM, raykeller wrote:
>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 3:34 PM:
>>> On 12/28/2017 11:27 AM, raykeller wrote:
>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 2:01 PM:
>>>>> On 12/28/2017 9:41 AM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 11:29 AM:
>>>>>>> On 12/27/2017 11:17 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:45 AM:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No.� We live principally off of human initiative.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can you eat "human initiative"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, but it leads to us eating.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your employer decides how little you may eat.
>>>>>
>>>>> No.
>>>>>
>>>>> Clearly you are no economist.
>>>>
>>>> China used to have nothing before the 1980s.
>>>
>>> You tried this already, and it failed. It still fails.
>>
>> Yes, because
>

> ...because I am a bonehead - a fucking moron.


OK, quit the self loathing and pay attention !!!

China used to have nothing before the 1980s.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/28/2017 1:48 PM, raykeller wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 4:24 PM:
>> On 12/28/2017 1:20 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 3:34 PM:
>>>> On 12/28/2017 11:27 AM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 2:01 PM:
>>>>>> On 12/28/2017 9:41 AM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 11:29 AM:
>>>>>>>> On 12/27/2017 11:17 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:45 AM:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No.� We live principally off of human initiative.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Can you eat "human initiative"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, but it leads to us eating.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your employer decides how little you may eat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Clearly you are no economist.
>>>>>
>>>>>   China used to have nothing before the 1980s.
>>>>
>>>> You tried this already, and it failed.  It still fails.
>>>
>>> Yes, because
>>

>> ...because you are a bonehead - a fucking moron.
>
>
> OK, I should quit the self loathing and pay attention

You should, but you won't, because you're a bonehead and a fucking moron.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/28/2017 1:45 PM, raykeller wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 4:25 PM:
>> On 12/28/2017 1:24 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 3:32 PM:
>>>> On 12/28/2017 11:22 AM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 1:57 PM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> China uses a model called "State Capitalism".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which makes its citizens poorer than they would be if they had less
>>>>>> state control of the economy.
>>>>>
>>>>> China used to have nothing before the 1980s.
>>>>
>>>> Then it ditched communism as a form of economic organization (while
>>>> retaining totalitarian one party rule, an essential feature of
>>>> communism), and it became rich.
>>>
>>> Who is advocating Communism
>>
>> You.
>
> Nobody did,

You did, you bonehead and fucking moron.

[DoD]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:0dd1C.372912$2X4.3...@fx11.fr7...

wow!!!! Why would anyone take you seriously if you behave like Rudolf?
Answer... Nobody should... The crap you just
posted just became invalid because you have brains of a two year old on a
temper tantrum... Tisk Tisk , baby boy... Sorry
to assume your "gender".

[raykeller]

You decide:

Email Address: raykeller <ray-ray happy & g...@gayfeller.com>

Organization: Ray-Ray 100W-Bulb Gay

[Mr. B1ack]

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 09:47:23 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:

>Michael Ejercito wrote on 12/28/2017 8:15 AM:
>>
>>
>> "Mr. B1ack" wrote in message
>> news:qt794dtn03un6a6ko...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 00:57:19 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:

>>
>>>> Winston_Smith wrote on 12/28/2017 12:19 AM:
>>>>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>>>>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the
>>>>>> labor
>>>>>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>>>>>

>>>>> How much was the combined pay checks for those "laboring people" over
>>>>> the course of a year?
>>>>>
>>>>> The "riches of the land" is not community property; it belongs to
>>>>> whoever owns the land and is willing to pay the bill to extract it.
>>>>
>>>> The riches of the land belong to the country and the people.
>>
>>> No, they belong to the people who EARNED those
>>> riches by whatever clever means.
>>
>>> NOT your money. NOT "everybody's money". They
>>> don't owe you shit.
>>
>> Interesting meme.
>>
>> I wonder if women do NOT owe men the use of their vaginas either.


"Owe" ??? No.

You've gotta get it the old-fashioned way, EARN it.

Or at least PAY for it (well, we do anyway, one way
or another hmm).

[Winston_Smith]

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 03:39:20 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:

>If China "by whatever clever means" managed to get Trump to sell the
>land and riches of USA to China

Hillary did just that selling 20% of our uranium reserves to Putin.

She also tells us Putin worked against her candidacy, favoring Trump
who did NOT sell out to Putin. Confusing, but that's the famous
liberal logic we all hear about.

[raykeller]

How far do you want to go back, and how old-fashioned are you talking about?

All the animals in the zoos and in the wild I have seen never asked when
they mount. They just cum and go in a heated rush. They never call
afterwards either.

"Cum and go in a heated rush"
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2G4NJl-LTLA>

[Just Wondering]

On 12/27/2017 9:32 PM, raykeller wrote:
>
> Now Trump has passed another tax bill

Presidents don't pass bills. Congress does that.

> to give the super rich even more tax loopholes.

Quote the part of the 2017 tax reform law that gives the
"super rich" more tax loopholes. But you won't, because
you can't, because you don't know and are just regurgitating
someone else's bile.

[Just Wondering]

On 12/28/2017 2:48 PM, raykeller wrote:
>
> There are more billionaires in China than in the U.S.A.

There are more people of all sorts in China than in the USA.
There are more poor people there, probably more middle-class people too.

> There are more beggars in the U.S.A. than in India.

If you have proof, let's see it. Just fill in the blanks.
There are ___________ beggars in the USA.
There are ___________ beggars in India.

[Scout]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message
news:Bt_0C.526006$xT3.4...@fx09.fr7...

> Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/27/2017 10:29 PM:
>> Just because you're rich doesn't mean you
>> don't deserve to get even richer if you are
>> clever and industrious.
>>
>> The idea that success is some kind of crime
>> was invented by communists who weren't
>> smart or industrious enough to even hold a
>> regular job.
>>
>
>

> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor of
> the people and the riches of the land.
>

> The top 500 people get $1 trillion is excessive. That works out to be
> about $2 billion for each of the top 500 people.
>
> Apparently each of these people did not get $2 billion through salary.

Gee, you get a return on your investment. Investments which are used to
finance business upgrades, expansions, and a multitude of other things which
help the economy.

> Just like Warren Buffett said, his effective tax rate is lower than that
> of his secretary. So the super rich effective didn't pay any tax.

Going to have to talk to Congress on that one.

>
> Now Trump has passed another tax bill to give the super rich even more tax
> loopholes.

Such as?

> We are setting ourselves up for a revolution. That is not good for
> anybody.

Then maybe Democrats should stop lying so much and start learning that
theirs isn't the only way.

[Scout]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:2521C.489084$675.4...@fx22.fr7...

> Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/28/2017 2:41 AM:
>> On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 00:57:19 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Winston_Smith wrote on 12/28/2017 12:19 AM:

>>>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>>>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the
>>>>> labor
>>>>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>>>>

>>>> How much was the combined pay checks for those "laboring people" over
>>>> the course of a year?
>>>>
>>>> The "riches of the land" is not community property; it belongs to
>>>> whoever owns the land and is willing to pay the bill to extract it.
>>>
>>> The riches of the land belong to the country and the people.
>>
>> No, they belong to the people who EARNED those
>> riches by whatever clever means.
>>
>> NOT your money. NOT "everybody's money". They
>> don't owe you shit.
>>
>

> If China "by whatever clever means" managed to get Trump to sell the land

> and riches of USA to China,

Actually, to date, Obama has done the most to accomplish that end of any
President.

$9 Trillion dollars and a massive long term liability.

>would you be OK to be a slave in your own homeland because "they don't owe
>you shit" ?

Why would he be a slave. Unlike you I bet he owns his home.

[Scout]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:9J%0C.489076$675.1...@fx22.fr7...

> Winston_Smith wrote on 12/28/2017 12:19 AM:
>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
>>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>>
>> How much was the combined pay checks for those "laboring people" over
>> the course of a year?
>>
>> The "riches of the land" is not community property; it belongs to
>> whoever owns the land and is willing to pay the bill to extract it.
>

> The riches of the land belong to the country and the people. The land
> owner has to pay for extraction of the riches.
>
> According to you, if you own 100 thousand acres of land, and you get to
> keep everything from using the land for cattle and crops. You then use the
> new money to buy more land and get to keep everything from using the new
> land for cattle and crops. Eventually the whole country will be owned by
> people like you, the rest of the people will just be serfs.

If everyone else is stupid enough to sell everything to you...why shouldn't
you own everything?

[Scout]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:ey21C.426685$iM5.3...@fx05.fr7...

> Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/28/2017 2:38 AM:
>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>>

>>> Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/27/2017 10:29 PM:
>>>> Just because you're rich doesn't mean you
>>>> don't deserve to get even richer if you are
>>>> clever and industrious.
>>>>
>>>> The idea that success is some kind of crime
>>>> was invented by communists who weren't
>>>> smart or industrious enough to even hold a
>>>> regular job.
>>>>
>>>
>>>

>>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
>>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>>>

>>> The top 500 people get $1 trillion is excessive. That works out to be
>>> about $2 billion for each of the top 500 people.
>>>
>>> Apparently each of these people did not get $2 billion through salary.

>>> Just like Warren Buffett said, his effective tax rate is lower than that
>>> of his secretary. So the super rich effective didn't pay any tax.
>>>

>>> Now Trump has passed another tax bill to give the super rich even more
>>> tax loopholes.
>>

>> Good.
>>
>> Shouldn't have been nearly so much tax
>> to begin with.
>

> So you are saying that they don't have to pay enough to work for them.
>
> In the old days a slave owner had to house and feed the slave.
>
> But now you are OK to house and feed yourself to serve your slave master.
> (The country is going in debt to maintain infrastructure and subsidize
> workers to make money for Walmart, Amazon and other big corporations)

Which sounds like a problem with the government....not the corporations.

[Scout]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:MKb1C.363604$SF3.3...@fx28.fr7...
> DoD wrote on 12/28/2017 2:16 PM:
>> "Mr. B1ack" <now...@nada.net> wrote in message
>> news:8p794dte58a725r2i...@4ax.com...

>>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:32:26 -0500, raykeller <"ray-ray happy &
>>> gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/27/2017 10:29 PM:
>>>>> Just because you're rich doesn't mean you
>>>>> don't deserve to get even richer if you are
>>>>> clever and industrious.
>>>>>
>>>>> The idea that success is some kind of crime
>>>>> was invented by communists who weren't
>>>>> smart or industrious enough to even hold a
>>>>> regular job.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the labor
>>>> of the people and the riches of the land.
>>>>
>>>> The top 500 people get $1 trillion is excessive. That works out to be
>>>> about $2 billion for each of the top 500 people.
>>>>
>>>> Apparently each of these people did not get $2 billion through salary.
>>>> Just like Warren Buffett said, his effective tax rate is lower than
>>>> that
>>>> of his secretary. So the super rich effective didn't pay any tax.
>>>>
>>>> Now Trump has passed another tax bill to give the super rich even more
>>>> tax loopholes.
>>>
>>> Good.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't have been nearly so much tax
>>> to begin with.
>>>

>>>> We are setting ourselves up for a revolution. That is not good for
>>>> anybody.
>>>

>>> Only lazy-ass commies want a revolution over
>>> such shit.
>>>
>>> Ya know, I don't think you're actually Ray ...........
>>
>> He is a fucking retarded bitch boy.... You notice that most of the
>> billionaires are liberal pricks like suckerberg and
>> bezos? Why don't this little retarded antifa reject go picket in front
>> of their mansions instead of bothering us working
>> class conservatives? Because he is a soulless whiney little pissant...
>>
>
> Read this and cry, you fucking idiot:
>

> "Trump just boasted that he pays as little in taxes as possible. Here’s
> why."

So do I. I hardly find that something to cry over.

> "TRUMP: I fight very hard to pay as little tax as possible."

As do we all.

If you don't like the tax code, then blame government.

[Scout]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:0dd1C.372912$2X4.3...@fx11.fr7...

Thus according to you the USA is a socialist country since we have a
progressive tax rate.

But I still don't see where anyone should pay more in taxes than they are
legally obligated to do.

[Scout]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:Tq71C.323822$Pi3.1...@fx24.fr7...

> Jim Wilkins wrote on 12/28/2017 8:12 AM:
>> "Just Wondering" <JustWo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:vj31C.304018$oE2....@fx33.iad...
>>> On 12/27/2017 4:26 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>
>>>> World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017
>>>
>>> Good for them.
>>
>> They grew rich by selling us what we demanded. If you resent their
>> success you could try to need less or learn to repair (better-built)
>> old things as I do.
>>
>> -jsw
>
> Do they produce the products without using the country's resources and
> infrastructure?

Which they pay for.

> Do they transport the products without using the country's resources and
> infrastructure?

Which they pay for.

> Do they sell the products without using the country's resources and
> infrastructure?

Which they pay for.

> If they do, why don't they have to pay for consuming the country's
> resources and pay for building and maintaining the country's
> infrastructure?

They do.

[Scout]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:nFa1C.702199$TX5.3...@fx13.fr7...

> Rudy Canoza wrote on 12/28/2017 11:52 AM:
>> On 12/28/2017 6:43 AM, raykeller wrote:

>>> Jim Wilkins wrote on 12/28/2017 8:12 AM:
>>>> "Just Wondering" <JustWo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:vj31C.304018$oE2....@fx33.iad...
>>>>> On 12/27/2017 4:26 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> Good for them.
>>>>
>>>> They grew rich by selling us what we demanded. If you resent their
>>>> success you could try to need less or learn to repair (better-built)
>>>> old things as I do.
>>>>
>>>> -jsw
>>>
>>> Do they produce the products without using the country's resources and
>>> infrastructure?
>>>

>>> Do they transport the products without using the country's resources
>>> and infrastructure?
>>>

>>> Do they sell the products without using the country's resources and
>>> infrastructure?
>>

>> They pay for all of those.
>
> The last time I checked, roads, bridges, schools, and other
> infrastructures are built and maintained by the government.

and paid for by who?

Oh, that's right, the people who pay taxes and the more you make the more
you pay......

[Scout]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:xX71C.221956$Qb5....@fx18.fr7...
> Michael Ejercito wrote on 12/28/2017 9:50 AM:
>>
>>
>> "raykeller" wrote in message news:Tq71C.323822$Pi3.1...@fx24.fr7...

>>
>>> Jim Wilkins wrote on 12/28/2017 8:12 AM:
>>>> "Just Wondering" <JustWo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:vj31C.304018$oE2....@fx33.iad...
>>>>> On 12/27/2017 4:26 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017
>>>>>
>>>>> Good for them.
>>>>
>>>> They grew rich by selling us what we demanded. If you resent their
>>>> success you could try to need less or learn to repair (better-built)
>>>> old things as I do.
>>>>
>>>> -jsw
>>
>>> Do they produce the products without using the country's resources and
>>> infrastructure?
>>
>>> Do they transport the products without using the country's resources
>>> and infrastructure?
>>
>>> Do they sell the products without using the country's resources and
>>> infrastructure?
>>

>>> If they do, why don't they have to pay for consuming the country's
>>> resources and pay for building and maintaining the country's
>>> infrastructure?

>> What if they refuse?
>>
>
> They already did.
>
> In a Communism, the country owns and runs everything.
>
> In a Socialism, they let entrepreneurs run the industries but the country
> still owns the underlying land and resources. The entrepreneurs get to
> keep a reward.

Translation: You're a share cropper and the government gets to decide how
much of what you produce you will be allowed to keep.

Meanwhile we see the wonderful result of Socialism taking place in
Venezuela.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/28/2017 1:48 PM, raykeller wrote:

>

>  There are more beggars in the U.S.A. than in India.

That's a lie.

[raykeller]

Just Wondering wrote on 12/29/2017 12:08 AM:
> On 12/28/2017 2:48 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>
>> There are more billionaires in China than in the U.S.A.
>
> There are more people of all sorts in China than in the USA.
> There are more poor people there, probably more middle-class people too.
>

China has about 4 times the population of the U.S.

The amazing part is that they had practically nothing in 1980. Can you
imagine how well they will do in another 20-30 years?

>> There are more beggars in the U.S.A. than in India.
>
> If you have proof, let's see it. Just fill in the blanks.

There are 3,500,000 beggars in the USA.
There are 413,670 beggars in India.

India also has about 4 times the population of the U.S.

If you factor in the population, the U.S. has 33 times more beggars per
capita than India.

Please note that in the linked article, that number written in Indian
tradition is: 4,13,670

"Homelessness in the United States"
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States>

"Over 4 Lakh Beggars in India, West Bengal Tops the List Among States"
<https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/over-4-lakh-beggars-in-india-west-bengal-tops-the-list-among-states-1207034>

"Indian numbering system"
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_numbering_system>

[DoD]

"raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message

news:pKl1C.492036$675.3...@fx22.fr7...

> Just Wondering wrote on 12/29/2017 12:08 AM:
>> On 12/28/2017 2:48 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>
>>> There are more billionaires in China than in the U.S.A.
>>
>> There are more people of all sorts in China than in the USA.
>> There are more poor people there, probably more middle-class people too.
>>
>
> China has about 4 times the population of the U.S.

You have roughly 1/4 the size of a normal human brain... What is your
issue?

[raykeller]

That's even worse than a negro. In the good old days the slave owner had
to house the negro. Our modern slave has to house himself.

[raykeller]

Al Capone had ways to make people sell their business to him.

If you have grown wealthy enough, you can use money and power to make
people sell their land to you. Then you become wealthier and more
powerful, and you can make more people sell their land to you. And so on.

[raykeller]

[raykeller]

Yes, Trump said he is not stupid. He won't pay more taxes when the tax
laws allow him to pay less taxes. He said he is going to take full
advantage of it.

I remember he said something to that effective in a video-taped
interview during his election campaign.

[raykeller]

Our current maximum 40% is not really "progressive". That's why the
country is going deeper and deeper in debt.

The maximum tax rate should be back to 90% in order to get out of debt.

[raykeller]

The rich people should be in a much higher tax bracket than you. They
are the ones benefiting the most from the infrastructure to conduct
their business, the policing so they won't be robbed of their wealth,
the military so there won't be a revolution to cart them off in a
tumbrel to the guillotine.

>
> If you don't like the tax code, then blame government.

It is not the government.

We have too many brainless people saying that we should not tax the "job
providers".

Many people applauded Trump's recent tax cut to the rich. I bet you are
one of them.

[raykeller]

You must be dumb and blind. Your own northern neighbor, Canada, is
Socialist.

<http://blog.peerform.com/top-ten-most-socialist-countries-in-the-world/>

Top 10 Most Socialist Countries in the World

Below, you will see some of the most socialistic nations in the world today:

China
Denmark
Finland
Netherlands
Canada
Sweden
Norway
Ireland
New Zealand
Belgium

[raykeller]

I finally got through your thick skull.

[raykeller]

Scout wrote on 12/29/2017 12:35 AM:
>
>
> "raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message
> news:Tq71C.323822$Pi3.1...@fx24.fr7...
>> Jim Wilkins wrote on 12/28/2017 8:12 AM:
>>> "Just Wondering" <JustWo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:vj31C.304018$oE2....@fx33.iad...
>>>> On 12/27/2017 4:26 PM, raykeller wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5215353/Worlds-richest-1-trillion-richer-2017.html>
>>>>>
>>>>> World's wealthiest became $1 TRILLION richer in 2017
>>>>
>>>> Good for them.
>>>
>>> They grew rich by selling us what we demanded. If you resent their
>>> success you could try to need less or learn to repair (better-built)
>>> old things as I do.
>>>
>>> -jsw
>>
>> Do they produce the products without using the country's resources and
>> infrastructure?
>
> Which they pay for.

Not nearly enough. They are the ones who benefit the most.

>
>> Do they transport the products without using the country's resources
>> and infrastructure?
>
> Which they pay for.

Not nearly enough. They are the ones who benefit the most.

>
>> Do they sell the products without using the country's resources and
>> infrastructure?
>
> Which they pay for.

Not nearly enough. They are the ones who benefit the most.

>
>> If they do, why don't they have to pay for consuming the country's
>> resources and pay for building and maintaining the country's
>> infrastructure?
>
> They do.

Not nearly enough. They are the ones who benefit the most.

[Gunner Asch]

On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 16:47:10 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
wrote:

>On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 06:21:51 -0800, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:38:44 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
>>wrote:

>>He isnt, of course.
>>
>>He is just a cowardly troll who picked Ray's nym to use.
>>
>>He will be someone else next week
>
>
> He's been a dozen people in the groups here
> already - including me. Sounds like some kind
> of personality disorder ... such a serious lack
> of self-esteem and accomplishment that he
> can only cope by stealing other peoples faces.
>
> Likely there's an expensive pill for that ...


The administrator of the mental hospital he is incarcerated in should
be notified.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[rbowman]

On 12/28/2017 10:17 PM, Scout wrote:
>
> "raykeller" <"ray-ray happy & gay"@gayfeller.com> wrote in message
> news:Bt_0C.526006$xT3.4...@fx09.fr7...
>> Mr. B1ack wrote on 12/27/2017 10:29 PM:
>>> Just because you're rich doesn't mean you
>>> don't deserve to get even richer if you are
>>> clever and industrious.
>>>
>>> The idea that success is some kind of crime
>>> was invented by communists who weren't
>>> smart or industrious enough to even hold a
>>> regular job.
>>>
>>
>>
>> The GDP of the US is about $16.5 trillion. The GDP comes from the
>> labor of the people and the riches of the land.
>>
>> The top 500 people get $1 trillion is excessive. That works out to be
>> about $2 billion for each of the top 500 people.
>>
>> Apparently each of these people did not get $2 billion through salary.
>
> Gee, you get a return on your investment. Investments which are used to
> finance business upgrades, expansions, and a multitude of other things
> which help the economy.

So it says in the grade school version of capitalism. Investment
certainly does that but how much of that wealth is non-productive? Have
Sam Walton's heirs produced anything lately? Or ever?

I have nothing against the guy, just using him for an easy example, but
much of Bill Gates' wealth is Microsoft stock. Just what is that? If
there is a market correction today he could lose millions. Or gain
millions. What are those millions? More pointedly, what the hell is
behind a Bitcoin millionaire?

I have nothing against the grade school version of capitalism. Finance
capitalism is something else.

[rbowman]

The corporations are the government. The rules on carried interest were
modified rather late in the process of writing the tax bill. Do you
think hedge fund managers had no part in 'advising' the congressmen? The
rent-seekers have no input?

[rbowman]

What is the government if you can buy elections?

[rbowman]

Latin American cultures fuck up capitalism and socialism with equal skill.

[Gunner Asch]

On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 07:50:55 -0700, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
wrote:

>>
>> Gee, you get a return on your investment. Investments which are used to
>> finance business upgrades, expansions, and a multitude of other things
>> which help the economy.
>
>So it says in the grade school version of capitalism. Investment
>certainly does that but how much of that wealth is non-productive? Have
>Sam Walton's heirs produced anything lately? Or ever?

Good question. Have you discussed their investments with their
brokers?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111904823804576500813872123254

[Gunner Asch]

On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 07:10:17 -0800, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 07:50:55 -0700, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Gee, you get a return on your investment. Investments which are used to
>>> finance business upgrades, expansions, and a multitude of other things
>>> which help the economy.
>>
>>So it says in the grade school version of capitalism. Investment
>>certainly does that but how much of that wealth is non-productive? Have
>>Sam Walton's heirs produced anything lately? Or ever?
>
>Good question. Have you discussed their investments with their
>brokers?
>
>https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111904823804576500813872123254
>
>

https://www.joshuakennon.com/walton-enterprises-llc-holding-company/

http://blog.waltonfamilyfoundation.org/2016/february/3rd-generation-of-walton-family-makes-sharp-turn-in-giving

[Winston_Smith]

After said "Negro" built the house. Shack actually. With the materials
provided. In the time allotted. With what tools they had. Using
whatever "design" they could come up with on the fly. Yeah, true
luxury. Unappreciated for unknown reasons.

Moreover. "Had to"? I doubt there was any law.