[rktman]

Hmmmm. I wonder if obxxx has reached his level yet. You know the 'Sooner or later you have enough money' point.

[Yo-Yo]

OK, let’s start by confiscating all of George Soros’ assets.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

“A recent report reveals the world’s nearly 3,000 billionaires increased their wealth by $5 trillion last year....Which prompts Mark Whitaker to ask: When is more than enough, enough?,” host Jane Pauley announced at the top of the segment.

Right - keeping the super-productive from growing wealth to benefit others and (of course) themselves has always worked out so well in the past. Just ask all of the millions who lived such great lives under Stalin and Mao.

[Bayard]

Conceptually yes, you can be too rich, but practical controls on personal wealth would be offensive.

[PeterPrinciple]

Big Govt, Big buisiness and super wealthy are all dependent on each other.

[skeeter]

I’m all out of sympathy for the Warren Buffets, Jeff Bezoses & Mark Zuckerbergs out there. I wouldn’t utter a syllable in their defense.

But I know billionaires aren’t who the Marxist media and their political kleptocratic cohorts are really targeting here.

[bray]

Bet he isn’t giving away half his wealth.

[Golden Eagle]

We might one day soon actually see a populist candidate for President who runs on this as one of the main issues of his platform. There’s a lot of people who voted for Trump who might one day vote to take down the Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg types, for example. It would be just further expose that the real fight in this country is not between Republicans and Democrats, but more between those that want their freedom, and those that want to control us.

[JesusIsLord]

Our government reps are owned by super rich oligarchs. There is little chance that the super rich will be taxed like they were in the 40s 50s 60s. We are trillions in debt. A rational way to address the debt is to tax the super rich at the 90% level & simultaneously reduce gov spending by 50% every year until our debt is paid.

[Tell It Right]

Which Jane would you rather get your news from?

Jane Pauley?

Or Jane Curtain? LOL

[clintonh8r]

My takeaway: Jane Pauly is still around?

[rightwingcrazy]

‘Maybe You Can Be Too Rich’
‘Maybe You Too Can Be Rich’

A small shift in a single word transforms the message from one of envy to one of hope.

[CrappieLuck]

So they are not really offended by how much money some people have. They just want to confiscate come of it to fund their Climate Change BS. Not feed the poor, not cancelling college debt, money for illegals or hats for bats or any other marxist wealth redistribution scheme. Nope. it needs to be confiscated and given to government to “Control the weather”.

They never seem to be offended by how much money Government has.....

[kiryandil]

“Lame” Pauley, postergirl for the too-rich.

[Kevmo]

The best way to have the “rich pay their fair share” of taxes [hint: they already pay more taxes than the poor, by far] is to implement a flat tax with an exponential rise.

from my home page

___________________________________________________________________

I proposed a Shallow Exponent Flat Tax.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4006199/posts
Something like Tax = 10% X {[Income]^1.05}
but with the flat tax coefficient more like 2.4 and the exponent more like 1.13......

___________________________________________________________________

[DennisR]

None of there business!

[muir_redwoods]

I simply despair at the ignorance people have regarding economics. What possible disadvantage do I have if my neighbor is rich? Even if my neighbor is extremely rich, what impact does that have on me?

Wealth is not equal to currency. Wealth is not limited. It is theoretically possible that wealth could increase by a factor of a thousand or more.

Ask yourself this. Is the world wealthier today than it was ten thousand years ago? Wealth disparity is not a problem for anyone.

[The Great RJ]

Trouble is the elites advocating socialism seem to avoid having their wealth confiscated and redistributed. I imagine Jane Pauley is making some pretty good bucks and lives a lavish lifestyle compared to us poor schlubs. Maybe if Jane Pauley were to give up some of her money and move to a three bedroom home in Norfolk, Nebraska and pack up her family in a Ford SUV to take her family vacations in the Black Hills ofSouth Dakota or at a modest resort on a lake in northern Minnesota she would have more credibility.

[ctdonath2]

The mere existence of ultra-rich threatens Progressives’ god of government, single-handedly creating jobs, enabling charities, pursuing peaceful international diplomacy, and creating society-advancing wealth benefiting all - without subservience to the 534 high priests.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

[SMARTY]

‘Maybe You Can Be Too Rich’

Liberals think that if you have a job, you’re RICH