“Tax, Tax, Tax the Rich!" Calls to Tax Wealthy Making Right Wingers Sweat?

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

In general, there is only one way to stop this country from going under. The feds will have to cuts programs and raise taxes. Doing one or the other is not going to sovle the problem. Anyone talking about cutting taxes further or expanding programs is either ignorant of our coutry's situation, or simply unwilling to fix it.

Think about it. Forty to fifty percent of the population pay no income tax. Our sales tax doesn't cover much. Military, medicare, and social security make up more than forty percent of our expenditures. If the feds cut every single program and agency, shut them all down tomorrow except for those three and stopped paying back other debt, the budget still would not balance. Not even close.

The argument in WDC right now is whether or not cutting fifty to sixty Billion dollars is radical. I don't know if it's radical, but I do know that it's a completely insignificant number.

If the government is going to stop the country from complete insolvency and/or bankruptcy, they are going to have to man up, risk their jobs, and cause their constituent some pain. The kind with past politicians' faces on it. Other wise we'd better all prepare for a government breakdown and some riots in the streets.

Kennedy and I agree on something

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[KidWicked 0]

Quote

And when those top 10% close down Apple, IBM, Microsoft etc and move them overseas, then what?

Absolutely preposterous. The management at those companies live in San Francisco, New York, and Seattle and have a very high standard of living. You're saying they are going to up sticks and move... where exactly? Pune? Shanghai? Utter nonsense.

Coreece: "You sound like some skinheads I know, but your prejudice is with Christians, not niggers..."

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

and have a very high standard of living.

So did those English millionaires that moved.

So did those folks in New Jersey.

So did those folks in Maryland.

Quote

You're saying they are going to up sticks and move... where exactly? Pune? Shanghai? Utter nonsense.

The linked examples show that it's NOT 'utter nonsense' -QED.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[tkhayes 348]

And I say - let them go. We can start over with a better financial structure that does not allow the rich to become so rich, give nothing back to the country (jobs) and then fuck off with all the money.

In case you had not noticed - that have ALL the money. We do not have the jobs. The theory perpetrated by the right wing - if we leave them alone, they will create jobs -

THAT is complete bullshit of a theory.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

yeah - that's nuts

Go ahead - feel free to disregard the rest of the post and the questions and ignore the examples that you have failed to provide.

fantasy land.......

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

and have a very high standard of living.

So did those English millionaires that moved.

So did those folks in New Jersey.

So did those folks in Maryland.

Quote

You're saying they are going to up sticks and move... where exactly? Pune? Shanghai? Utter nonsense.

The linked examples show that it's NOT 'utter nonsense' -QED.

To escape federal taxes they have to renounce their citizenship. If their greed exceeds their patriotism, it's probably better that they leave.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

In general, there is only one way to stop this country from going under. The feds will have to cuts programs and raise taxes. Doing one or the other is not going to sovle the problem. Anyone talking about cutting taxes further or expanding programs is either ignorant of our coutry's situation, or simply unwilling to fix it.

Think about it. Forty to fifty percent of the population pay no income tax. Our sales tax doesn't cover much. Military, medicare, and social security make up more than forty percent of our expenditures. If the feds cut every single program and agency, shut them all down tomorrow except for those three and stopped paying back other debt, the budget still would not balance. Not even close.

The argument in WDC right now is whether or not cutting fifty to sixty Billion dollars is radical. I don't know if it's radical, but I do know that it's a completely insignificant number.

If the government is going to stop the country from complete insolvency and/or bankruptcy, they are going to have to man up, risk their jobs, and cause their constituent some pain. The kind with past politicians' faces on it. Other wise we'd better all prepare for a government breakdown and some riots in the streets.

Kennedy and I agree on something

Pretty much everybody (here) agrees on this (with a couple stupid exceptions) - funny how universal this is and how impossible for politicians to execute it.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

yeah - that's nuts

Go ahead - feel free to disregard the rest of the post and the questions and ignore the examples that you have failed to provide........

Your biz is the real life example. Does it not get better than that? So no, not until you cease to disregard the initial point.

Really simple - people don't make more, you pass on your tax increase, they continue to skydive anyway. Do they have less expendable income or not as an indirect result of you being taxed more? Do they buy an many clothes? Do they eat at the same level? What about that restaurant that lost business too - is it in a distant city so it doesn't get the benefit of your biz bringing in more customers?

You are that rich business owner - you said you pass the cost on to your customers. And you advocate taxing people like yourself more to "help the people". Why are you taking offense, then, when the observation I make is pretty apparent?

I get that business is a competition, I agree that you taking revenue from other businesses because your product is in high demand is perfectly appropriate. But you can't say that when the government takes more (but doesn't also spend less) doesn't hurt everyone regardless of who they take it from.

If you prefer that the real life example is someone other than yourself (in order for you to respond without taking it personally, switch the company name, I don't care, the concept remains).

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

But you can't say that when the government takes more (but doesn't also spend less) doesn't hurt everyone regardless of who they take it from.

Depends what it uses the money for.

Building roads is generally to everyone's benefit. Educating children is generally to everyone's benefit. Providing police and fire services is generally to everyone's benefit.

They key is to find a balance, something that hasn't been done for some years.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Ron Paul wants to institute a Value Added Tax. I think this is perhaps the best tool Congress has to tackle the problem (that and about a 25% reduction in the defense budget).
A VAT has several attributes that make it a good idea:
1. It is a flat tax. Spend a buck, throw a nickle in the middle, no exceptions. It does not distort the economy by picking winners and losers.
2. It is taxed when you consume, not when you invest. American individuals need to reign in personal spending while keeping the productive engine flowing.
2. Exports are exempt. America needs to start producing more than they consume to reduce their dependence on rivals picking up their bonds. This is a weakness that eclipses any military threat.
Canada's GST (VAT) is 5%. Most provinces add to that, but that is the Fed's take. If US set theirs there it would not give an advantage to Canada. It would still be lower than every (I think) European country as well as Australia and NZ.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

if we leave them alone, they will create jobs -

THAT is complete bullshit of a theory.

Really? How many jobs did you get from that homeless guy on the street corner?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

If a VAT was *in place of* income tax, I could agree to that. In addition to income tax, nope - there's always creep and just like business taxes, VAT gets passed down the line to the consumer.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,118]

>1. It is a flat tax. Spend a buck, throw a nickle in the middle, no exceptions.

So this is on top of the current income tax?

>It does not distort the economy by picking winners and losers.

That was precisely the idea behind our current system of taxation. Then politics got involved. I see no reason this wouldn't happen with a sales tax. "Greedy Washington politicians want to TAX YOUR BABY'S FOOD! Don't let those greedy callous politicians get away with it; vote for the infant food tax exemption."

>2. It is taxed when you consume, not when you invest. American individuals
>need to reign in personal spending while keeping the productive engine
>flowing.

And - the distortion of the economy (i.e. encouraging investment, discouraging spending) begins. Might not be a bad thing, but it's definitely that social engineering thing again.

By far the fairest tax out there is to tax everyone about $32,000 a year. Everyone who lives here has the _opportunity_ to benefit equally from living here, so they all pay the same amount. No distortion of the economy; it's just a bill everyone pays no matter what else they do, spend or have. It's also completely unworkable, because many people in the US don't even make that much.

So you start with schemes that take a percentage of what people make (flat tax, progressive tax) taxes on what they spend (sales or VAT tax) and taxes on what they own (property and inheritance taxes.) All of those distort the economy to an extent, and all can be labeled as "punishment" for various actions. Indeed, many of the actions that politicians have taken to add exemptions and loopholes are attempts to mitigate this punishment and make things more fair. A few decades of this and you end up with the byzantine structure we have now.

[mirage62 0]

I admire TK passion. I’m not sure if he agrees that he is a “rich” business man or not (I haven’t seen him post that) I’d bet he does pretty good. It no secret that I disagree with a lot of his positions.

The thought that tax’s don’t effect business decisions leads me to believe that if TK is a big “rich” business man it’s a relatively new position for him. Many business plan based on taxes. Purchases are deferred based on tax laws, inventory adjustments are made – or not made, uncertainty in taxes absolutely influences hiring decisions.

I believe that TK’s business is so far out of main stream business that what he is saying may be true for his area of expertise, I just don’t believe it is in the least bit true for “normal business”.

But what do I know I don’t on a mega dz.

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I admire TK passion.

damn straight, he's a heck of a guy from what I can tell - and being a DZO is a thankless job (except when people thank them) but it's fun to debate.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

You are that rich business owner

you are delusional. I have a modest income and a $200K mortgage over my head and I am 50 years old. I have barely $100K in savings for my retirement and I have worked hard and 'done well' all my life.

I am happy. I am MOST DEFINITELY NOT rich or anything even close to it.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

eally? How many jobs did you get from that homeless guy on the street corner?

absolutely NO jobs from the homeless guy. How many jobs are we creating from the top 100 wealthiest people in the country?

Now let's compare the ABILITY OF BOTH the homeless guy and the rich guy to create jobs.

so your point is?

[tkhayes 348]

VAT tax has to do with sales. Income tax has to do with income.

VAT is simple, but yes, I agree that it cannot be in addition to everything we already have, but it could also replace some things, like sales tax that we already have.

I do not see how VAT can replace income tax

[tkhayes 348]

And I just got back from the meeting with the new Congressman Rich Nugent.

All he talked about was how the deficit is going to cripple the country - no shit Sherlock.

Disturbing statements:

"I will vote for nothing that does any harm to Medicare or Social Security" (could be good or bad, everyone in the room thinks this is good)

"The problem is government spending and regulation" (Great, so we have only one solution and we can anticipate more oil disasters and a raping of the entire world as we search for energy, as well as a further division between rich and poor.)

"I will vote for no bill that increases taxes in any way" (I told him that was nuts, to think that we have 3 wars now and we will somehow reign in spending to fix the deficit)

But hey, I would expect NOTHING LESS from a politician.

At least me and Kennedy agree on something - life is looking up.

The good news? Every single person who spoke is/was fed up with Congress and the inability of them to get anything done and they all plan to hold him personally accountable for failure - for whatever that is worth.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

eally? How many jobs did you get from that homeless guy on the street corner?

absolutely NO jobs from the homeless guy. How many jobs are we creating from the top 100 wealthiest people in the country?

Well, Apple has about 37k employees and Microsoft about 88k...feel free to look up the rest if you want.

Quote

Now let's compare the ABILITY OF BOTH the homeless guy and the rich guy to create jobs.

so your point is?

That your 'rich people don't create jobs' rant was bullshit - thanks for proving it for me.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

You are that rich business owner

you are delusional.

no, just making a point that you refuse to acknowledge - when they come after your livelihood (or your kids'), too, for the good of society, you'll see

I bet Dreamdancer thinks you are hugely rich.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

The good news? Every single person who spoke is/was fed up with Congress and the inability of them to get anything done and they all plan to hold him personally accountable for failure - for whatever that is worth.

please let this be true - but it seems that come voting time, people talk the talk, but in the end vote for whoever promises them what benefits them most at the expense of others

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,118]

>The good news? Every single person who spoke is/was fed up with
>Congress and the inability of them to get anything done and they all plan to
>hold him personally accountable for failure . . .

"Throw the bums out! Get new bums!"

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

but in the end vote for whoever promises them what benefits them most at the expense of others

"For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome." - Robert Heinlein

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

no, just making a point that you refuse to acknowledge - when they come after your livelihood (or your kids'), too, for the good of society, you'll see

I already admit that I and the business pay too little, if any taxes. so "you'll see" does not affect me....

I admit that part of the problem is we spend too much without funding it from the tax base. We need to decide WHAT programs we want, and we need to fund them from taxes primarily. Then the "You'll see" moment will be the realization from everyone that Holy Shit, this costs money, and the country will probably prioritize.

And I bet we will prioritize things like, no wars, and more for social security, education and Medicare - i am all for it.

How about a new tax that funds ONLY the military? And we put it into a separate fund. Now there is a tax I would like to see.