You may think Alex Jones is on the side of the little guy, because he spends a lot of time selling that image of himself. But an article he published today blows that idea to shreds.…
There, he tells us of reporters informing “liberals” on the street that the upper 1% pay 40% of federal income taxes. Those people on the street are allegedly shocked, with one saying that the “bottom could pay more”.
Jones wants you to believe the wealthy are already paying their fair share and the little guys need to pay more? Wow. Hard to believe he dared to post that. Is it because Jones is now rich from hawking his vitamins and other products and doesn't want his taxes to be raised?
This is lying by statistics and it only works on idiots who don't know how to respond. One way you can respond is that this top 1% is admitted by the mainstream to own over 50% of the wealth in the US. It was reported as 51% in 2018, and it just got much worse in the past 2 years
Even by their own accounting methods, it would be up to around 55% now. But even those numbers are deflated, since they are made up by the government and places like Forbes.
Who owns the government and Forbes? That's right, the very rich. So do you really think they are going to tell you the real numbers? I would guess the top 1% owns more like 80%, with the top 5% owning something like 95%. And even that may be understating it.
But whatever the numbers are, we know the rich are not paying their fair share. Under Trump, the top rate was lowered to 23%, which is lower than the poor are paying. Just so you know, the US once had a top rate of 90%.…
This country had a graduated or progressive income tax until the time of Reagan, when it began to move to a flat tax. But since the rich have many more write-offs, loopholes, and dodges, they end paying far less as a percentage than lower incomes, and sometimes nothing.
In fact, the richer they are, the LESS likely they are to be paying taxes. J. P. Morgan admitted to paying zero taxes in years that he was making millions.
If you don't believe me, you can go to theintercept, where they admit some of this. Problem is, that article is written by Jon Schwarz, one of Michael Moore's proteges. So he is playing the opposition.…
I only send you there because he quickly makes Alex Jones look like a spinner, even while spinning himself. The truth is far worse than Schwarz admits.
We know the middle class is being raped by the billionaires (and upper millionaires) like never before, so we know that focusing on one income tax statistic must be misdirection.
It is true that raising taxes on the wealthy won't solve that, since it is like a band-aid on a decapitation, but it would be a good start. What we have to do after that is get the hands of the top 1% out of the worldwide treasuries, where they are stealing freely.
No one mentions the fact that while the very wealthy may be paying large sums into the treasury, they are taking even greater sums out of it. They are basically stealing your taxes right out of the treasury, and they are taking far more out than they are putting in.
How do you think they continue to get wealthier? That's how. The very rich are scamming the taxpayers in so many ways the list would be endless.
Fake wars, fake science projects, fake research projects, fake stock markets, fake banks, weapons we don't need, a bloated military, an even more bloated Intelligence, fake medical projects (like vaccines and masks), and on and on.
So they forget to tell you that your taxes are going straight to them. Which of course skews all tax statistics. What you forget is that the rich people own the government and ARE the government. So while your taxes go to them, their taxes also go to them. You see how that works?
Everything you read online or in books is misdirection. On the “right”, you are told the rich are paying plenty, while on the “left” you are told taxes need to go up. But you now see how both sides are scamming you.
The very rich don't really care if their taxes go up, because they already have their snorkels in the treasury. Their taxes go to them, so higher taxes on the rich just creates a bigger loop back to them.
But if they can control both sides of the argument, and keep your eyes off the truth, you won't remember that. They want to keep you arguing about the tax structure, and missing these deeper truths.
So whose Side is Alex Jones on? Obviously on the side of the rich. Otherwise he would never publish that article. Which is why he calls himself a conservative.The rich are conservatives, remember? They want to CONSERVE their wealth. That is where the word came from. Look it up.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Goldstein (NON-GMO human)

Goldstein (NON-GMO human) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @MrGoldstein7

3 May
Tucker Carlson has been instructed to appeal to people like me right now, and he is often pretty good at it. His scriptwriters are doing their best to move me to the right, making me think I am a conservative. And in part, they are finding some success. Image
I will never agree to call myself a conservative, but that is almost beside the point. The point is, who are my potential allies. My potential allies are not, in general, people watching CNN or reading the New York Times and believing them.
My potential allies are 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 at Infowars, NaturalNews, Zerohedge, Gateway Pundit, and Fox News. It's strange, but it is true.
Notice I say “the audience” at those places. Not the writers or speakers at those places, who I believe are controlled opposition.
Read 41 tweets
3 May
Daisy Ridley played the lead Rey in a couple of StarWars movies. You may have wondered where she came from. We are told her great-uncle was the British actor William Arnold Ridley, but if you go to his genealogy you hit a dead end. His lineage has been scrubbed. Image
However, I knew where to look, so I bypassed that wall with one leap. On a hunch, all I did was search on “Baronet Ridley”. Guess what I found? Sir Matthew White Ridley, 5th Baronet Ridley, Home Secretary from 1895 to 1900. He was later made Viscount Ridley and Baron Wensleydale. Image
Sir Matthew White Ridley was a Member of Parliament for Northumberland. He was buried at his home in Blagdon Hall, near Seaton Burn, on the northern edge of Tyne and Wear.
Read 172 tweets
2 May
The Mundaka Upanishad is what one might call the moral heart of the Upanishads, since rather than explain who or what Brahman or Atman is, or how the world works, the Mundaka Upanishad recommends or even promotes a response to the world.
It is in this Upanishad that we find Sarva Karma Sannyasa, or the renunciation of all action.
Some will see where I am going with this, and they will try to stop me by saying, “Wait, the Mundaka Upanishad is only promoting that renunciation for monks. The teacher there is responding to monks, so of course he is going to promote their way of life.”
Read 111 tweets
2 May
Nirvana is a death wish, suicide without the knife. The Buddha has defined craving and desire as afflictions. Not just negative cravings or desires, or destructive cravings or desires, but ALL cravings and desires.
A man desiring to kiss his wife: an affliction. A woman desiring to have a child, and to caress that child, and to feed that child: an affliction. A fish craving to eat a fly: afflicted. A dog enjoying a bone: afflicted. A thirsty man drinking from a clear stream: afflicted.
Nirvana is not deathlessness, it is lifelessness. Nirvana is not the opposite of death, life is the opposite of death. Life is deathlessness. But the Buddha has fled from life. He cannot abide it.
Read 65 tweets
2 May
One of the funniest things he says in his manifesto is this:

In spite of all its technical advances relating to human behavior the system to date has not been impressively successful in controlling human beings.

You have to be kidding me!
That is the one thing the US system has been most successful at, precisely because it has spent so much time and energy on it. The US system perfected this control far beyond anything the Nazis, Russians, or Chinese ever imagined.
Only since 911 have the lights begin to flicker, the audience becoming suspicious of the Great Oz behind the curtain.
Read 7 tweets
30 Apr
The governors should want to return to a 1950s style governance, where the population was completely clueless. Trust in government and media was VERY high, because the rulers were almost invisible. Propaganda was actually far lower, because it was less necessary.
People weren't asking questions and weren't suspicious, so they didn't need to be diverted all the time. Three TV stations was enough. So in most ways, the governors have just created their own problems.
They thought technology would help them control us, but technology has allowed us to see through them. In that sense, they don't need to fake an alien invasion, they need to fake a collapse of media somehow. They need to defund 24-hour news, Hollywood, and most TV stations.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!