Is the Purpose of Taxes to Raise Revenue or Punish the Rich?

On a state basis that might be true, but not on a federal basis. Immigrating to a different country is harder than moving to another state. Though even then there's not much evidence that people are willing to skip states over small changes in the tax code. Even the maryland example that conservatives like to trot out has evidence that makes the conclusion less clear--a lot of those millionaires didn't leave the state, the economic downturn just reduced their income below a million a year.

The actual fact is that raising taxes from very low rates (as in the US) usually does raise revenue, and that small adjustments to the tax code have virtually no impact on economic growth. Indeed, the evidence also suggests that raising tax rates has a positive impact on business investment, because business costs are tax deductible, but still build asset value, so that becomes a reasonable way to shelter income.

The typical liberal would rather the rich go jump off a bridge and leave the rest of us alone.

 

Thats funny coming from the party that promotes a million women a year to kill their babies

 

Taxes need not be raised instead cut spending and have a balanced budget

 

You mean the poor on welfare that have computers and flatscreen tv's and cable tv?

 

Why the (*)(*)(*)(*) should real everyday Americans tolerate cuts in the social services we pay for so that some idle, greedy parasites at the top can scam money and privilege from the government? Let the rich fester in the bed they've made and are too lazy to get out of, but those of us paying our payroll taxes shouldn't have to suffer cuts to medicare and social security to pay for the rich people's luxury and privilege.

 

Unfortunately 80% of the country disagrees. As does every economist.

 

You would rather have unions inflate wages so business goes overseas? Their is a medium and many pay what they can afford

 

Yes. Only unions don't do any of that.

 

Nice spin but how about we cut government waste and stop funding the studies of animals having sex

 

Wait for Obamacare where they say paying for your needs will not improve your life so we will let you die

 

I would rather us raise tariffs on all other countries, then renegotiate free trade agreements that include harmonization of labor standards with our free trade partners. The only reason unionization could drive employers to other countries is if those countries don't have unions and there is no significant tariff on the imports.

There is no excuse for the US to ever enter a free trade agreement with a country who's labor standards are not as strong as ours.

 

Then you must be blind to all the regulations Obama is doing and how they increase costs to business

 

So you are a socialist

 

Those consumer goods are cheap and unimportant. Health care is unaffordable and important. Therefore, by a meaningful measure of quality of life, too many Americans are poor.

 

Well all the facts, data, truth, and reality suggest Democrats arent concerned so much about raising revenue.......

Federal Revenue After The Bush Tax Cuts



Federal Revenue After The Reagan Tax Cuts



Federal Revenue After The JFK/Johnson Tax Cuts


.........its mainly about punishing rich honkeys.
.
.
.
.

 

Exactly.Like Obama didn't take more campaign from Goldman sachs
and BP than did McCain.
Like Wall-Street wasn't invested in Obama's campaign.
Obama is a cheap Liar and Fraud.It's just he has an Entire Mainstream
Media feeding off the Total Investment they made in his Statist mindset.

 

The poor have medicaid which is free

 

It's amazing how you never provide the section of the graph that comes before them.

 

Actually you have to be poor enough for it and the lines are weird. AND it is tax-payer funded. As a liberal that doesn't bother me, but it's definitely not free.

 

blah blah blah the laffer curve just won't die! Multiple fact checking organizations have looked at the claim that cutting taxes increases revenue. And it's false. I don't know why a few people still peddle that on here. You can be a conservative and still agree with what I say. The laffer curve would be true if the tax burden was MUCH higher, but most economists don't believe we are near that point. They estimate it to be around the 60-70% range.

 

Really i thought all liberals thought government funded meant free.

Just wait I know how bad medicaid is my 37 year old autistic son has it.

Obamacare cuts medicare and puts millions on medicaid.

 

Pay up

10char

 

I owe nothing. If you want my special needs son to pay then it is time for the millions on welfare to pay up. I get it government hand outs are only allowed if you are a liberal. More hypocrisy and double standards.

By taking care of our son we lose freedom and income while saving the government thousands a month

 

So you're a conservative who thinks Govt should cut aid to everyone but your son?

 

Delegation of authority. If you have never heard of it, then you have never excelled past a minimum wage job. The owner, who put his entire investment into his business has the biggest risk in the company he created. Therefore it stands to reason, that he is gonna want a larger return on his risk. Which is why he would get more money then the employee he hires.

Managers and owners delegate authority down the food chain. Most managers and owners at one time were at the bottom too. If you had any business sense, you would understand this. A guy working a simple job will never, EVER make what a manager or owner does.

Don't like that? Then take the risk of starting your own company and make it work the way YOU think it should. If not, stop pumping hot air fantasy ideas out your butt and deal with reality.