Why do liberals hate rich people, especially CEOs?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/20/beck.cities/index.html Give that a read. The places with the highest poverty rates are the ones that most consistently vote democrat. I'm not sure where you got the idea that blue states were richer. California is practically bankrupt and that's the most liberal state in the nation. The few states experiencing growth during this recession are all red states. "No, Liberals do not hate the rich but rich Democrats have social consciences and are willing to give back to their country." Than why is it that charitable giving in red states is much higher than the national average and the opposite is true in most blue states? If that's true, why is it that Obama gives an average of 1% of his income to charity and Biden gives an average of 0.3% while John McCain and Sarah Palin give 27% and 3% respectively?

I also wanted to address the tax breaks for companies moving jobs overseas. "But recent Labor Department data underscore what even Democratic economists have said for some time -- outsourcing jobs overseas, or "offshoring," accounts for just a small fraction of the many millions of jobs that are lost each year even in a good economy. There is indeed a tax break for US-based multinational corporations to locate operations overseas. Bush isn't to blame for it -- it's been there for decades. It's also true that Bush doesn't support Kerry's proposed remedy, which is controversial. But even backers of the Kerry plan concede that eliminating the tax break won't end the offshoring of some US jobs. Multinational businesses build plants in other countries to take advantage of lower wages and to be near their global customers, too, not just for tax reasons." http://www.factcheck.org/kerry_blames_corporate_tax_code_for_shipping.html

Based on the per capita income of the population, Maryland, New Jersey, Connecticut, Hawaii and Massachusetts are the richest states in the union and they are all blue states. Mississippi, West Virginia, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Alabam are the five poorest states in the union and they are all red. The fact that California is bankrupt could have a lot to do with state mismanagement and not necessarily with the wealth of the individuals within that state. Charity is nice but I don't think it should be a sustitute for paying taxes and supporting the government that gave one wealth. Bill Gates and his wife are very charitable and generous but that doesn't change the fact that Mr Gates is using some of the money he saves outsourcing American jobs to build cricket fields for hiss employees in India. I can't seem to open your link but I will try to later. For some reason this computer seems to be sticking a lot today.

Someone who wants to make a profit should burn in hell? Well I guess every hard working person who brings home a paycheck should burn then. Every company must run efficiently to make a consistent profit. Part of efficient operation is to run the company without hiring excessive staff. If you walk into a business and there are people sitting around every day with nothing to do, they are costing the company money without making the company money. It is only logical that they be cut. For most CEOs the bonuses they receive are directly related to the amount of money they save the company or the profits they bring in. The people who should burn are the ones who run their companies into the ground, lie to investors, and THEN take home millions in bonuses. Those CEOs hurt everyone to benefit themselves. Cutting jobs however is just part of keeping expenses down. It sucks, but it's just one way of keeping a company afloat during hard times and actually benefits the workers who stay since they still have jobs that they wouldn't have if the company just went belly up.

Task, you misread what I have written. I am referring to those CEOs who cut headcounts to save money for the company, yet they are awarded millions in bonus. So that there is no saving at all. Cutting jobs is not the best way to run a company, it should be the last resort. A lot of companies in the East, notably in Japan, cuts salary across the board, with senior management suffers deeper cut. If that doesn't work, then job cutting is initiated. By the time a company needs to cut job, CEO should not get huge bonus. CEO should instead be given shares so that his/her performance is linked to company's performance.

I'm sure you're right. It especially bugs me when they claim such CEOs are lazy and do nothing. If all it took to be a CEO was to be lazy and do nothing, wouldn't we all be CEOs by now?

You're right. There is nothing worse than being at the bottom of an income bracket. If you're at the top of your income bracket working harder actually hurts you, because your hard work pays off less when you break that barrier. The people who love excessively taxing the rich are the people who are too lazy to break that barrier so they know the higher taxes will never hurt them.

That's why people like that will never succeed. They think that the government and the wealthy people in this country OWE them something just because they're poor. The simple fact is, nobody has ever gotten rich in this country by just collecting handouts.

I'm not sure if you're for real, or just imitating a liberal as a joke since you are a bit over the top. I'll treat you as genuine though. "The minute the economy sunk they cut all of our benefits and any chances of getting a raise. They are in a position of power and it is only natural for them to abuse it." Would you rather them fire employees? When revenues don't match costs a company needs to compensate. Most do that by firing people. Last year Circuit City compensated by firing long time dependable employees and replacing them with incompetent morons who will work for less. It sounds to me like OfficeMax went out of their way to retain employees. Sounds like the CEO really cares. "Hating walmart is completely legitimate. When Walmart moves into a town they lower their prices until all their competitors are shut down and then they raise the prices back up." Walmart's prices are ALWAYS low. Your claims are bogus and typical liberal spin. Show me one bit of proof if you want to stick to that accusation. "They crush small businesses, underpay their employees and sell terrible quality products made in sweatshops that fall apart after a year and end up rotting in our landfills." Take a good look at their employees. Those people are paid what they're worth. The people who greet customers at the door, check receipts, and bag groceries could be replaced by a trained chimp, or even a trained macaw. Walmart does them, and society a favor by giving them jobs despite a complete lack of marketable skills. Those WITH skills always have the opportunity for advancement since it is a large organization with many management positions at various levels. I don't know what terrible quality products you're talking about. They sell name brand products. I have no complaints about the 32" Westinghouse HDTV I bought there for $100 less than it sold for at Best Buy. The food I buy there is also name brand whether it be Kellogs, Nathans, Arizona Iced Tea, or whatever. "I don't see that these corporations are offering a great service to the American people by providing us with jobs, because if given the choice between working for a corporation and a small locally owned business I would choose the small business anyday." And how many jobs does that locally owned business provide, 5, maybe 6? Walmart provides 4.2 million jobs, more than twice as much as Obama claims his trillion dollar stimulus will create (or save). Good luck getting a promotion at that local business. It's a pretty short ladder if a ladder exists at all. As for "great service" how much money has your locally owned business donated to charities? Walmart comprises more than half the total donations received by Give Kids the World. I don't know about you, but I think granting the wishes of terminally ill children is a great service. http://www.gktw.org/newsletter/mmSummer08.pdf http://www.gktw.org/newsletter/mmFall08.pdf "Why should a CEO get a tax break? Give me a tax break! I work just as hard as anyone and can barely afford to pay for food and rent. Obviously CEO's had to work to get where they are, but in a crisis I think the people with the most to give should give the most not the people who are struggling just to get by." Newsflash. The people with the most ALREADY give the most. The top 5% of earners in this country pay more than 50% of the taxes. The bottom 40% of earners pay NO INCOME TAXES. I see you're only 19. Perhaps you should study government and business a bit more since you're old enough to take part in voting now.