Reduce taxes on the rich!

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Jackster, Dec 8, 2012.

  1. Jackster

    Jackster New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,276
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    and everyone for that matter! Ill get straight to the point then explain a little more afterwards

    *Individuals taxed on a low flat rate
    *Companies taxed on a sliding scale


    We have both sides of politics bickering about who should pay the bills, all the focus is always on the individual. Why?

    We cant keep increasing govt spending and increasing tax on people, where does it end? It'll destroy capitalism because theres no incentive, we all may as well sunbake on the beaches every day and let the state take care of us. No i cant imagine that lasting, how long until the state puts us to work? I think we can see where this may lead us.

    Theres a number of driving forces today that weren't as predominate earlier, so what worked once may not work again. Such as the baby boomer generation shift in spending, how much they take from healthcare. Our economy boomed on the BBs now they'll become a drain. Meanwhile we cant compete against countries that have no or (*)(*)(*)(*) health/welfare, those with mass poverty who pay basically slave labor rates. My point here is we cant expect to keep spending and somehow we'll get back to the good old days, we need to accept times have changed we face different challenges.

    I think its really a no brainer most people want to see incentive to work, work to be rewarding, high education standards, promote innovation/ competition most want a safety net but not a welfare society and of course freedom.

    Now capitalism in it current state is headed in a direction i dont like either. Since everything is profit driven they ship jobs overseas for one, big companies crush the small ones and few dominate the market to an extent that small business people can not compete. As technology improves, robotics ect the less employees they need. Its not so much capitalism thats the problem, its the globalization - but imo this has come about via greedy people and our (*)(*)(*)(*) poor politicians.

    Maybe just maybe we're looking at this the wrong way. If i were a globalist corporation id be more than happy for people on both sides of politics to be arguing about how much they tax each other, either way i (the global corp) will be a winner long term. They'll have market domination and people working for basically slave labor wages either way, this bickering only causes us to miss the bigger game being played on us imo.

    Smaller/ start up businesses gain a competitive advantage via the tax system, creating jobs, more advancement opportunities for people, more competition, more reward for innovation (rather than it being snapped up by globalists to exploit and manipulate) ect ect ect..... Imagine the banks for example, more of them, more competition for our custom and NOT to big to fail. Allow capitalism to do its thing with smart regulation, min govt size, min individual taxes.

    Sure some companies may move countries, but f*ck free trade, thats such a globalist corporation idea anyway. Has this really done us any good? All ive seen is jobs go OS looking for cheap slave labor rates.
     
  2. Montoya

    Montoya Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    Messages:
    13,827
    Likes Received:
    195
    Trophy Points:
    63
    No sorry taxes must go up on the rich and they must be FORCED to pay their fair share. America has spoken and your right wing ideology has been rejected soundly. The greedy rich will be forced to pay up without deductions.
     
  3. Jackster

    Jackster New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,276
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And where do the rich get all their wealth from? Tax at the corporate level on a sliding scale means it gets harder for say a Microsoft to dominate and control markets, harder for banks ect, their market share becomes more limited which allows opportunity for real competition and real jobs. The globalist are more than happy to see people at each other throats over who pays what tax out of 'their' earning, they dont care if we go socialist/ commi or remain on track, either way they'll dominate markets and drive wages lower for all bar their CEO. managers, board members ect. It will also mean once companies reach a certain size investors will look for more growth opportunities fueling more innovation.
     
  4. LasMa

    LasMa Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,001
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The only problem with this argument is that it's never happened this way. There is no evidence whatsoever that lower taxes on the wealthy produce jobs or GDP or anything else except even more money for those who already have the most. In fact, to the contrary -- throughout our 100-year history of the income tax, higher taxes on the wealthy are actually correlated with a BETTER economy.

    Take a look at the first chart here: http://www.theatlantic.com/business...omic-growth-a-new-65-year-study-finds/262438/ You will notice that economic growth plummeted during the Bush administration -- ESPECIALLY after the second tax cut which he gave to the wealthy. You'll also see that economic growth boomed during the Clinton years, when marginal tax rates were higher (39.6%). The same pattern occurred during the other post-war boom in the 1950s -- except that the marginal tax rate was 90%. That didn't hurt our ecomony one little bit.

    BTW, also notice that the wealthy are now paying historically low taxes. Increasing the rate by 4% -- back to the Clinton-era rate -- is hardly going to throw them into poverty.
     
  5. Jackster

    Jackster New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,276
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Therefor 100% tax should result in the perfect economy? No didnt think so. Its too simplistic to say raising tax here worked, lower it there worked, no period in time is the same they all had varying factors working for and against them. We need to understand the major factors in play right now. Both left and right voters are being taken for a ride (unless your a lefty commi or a right globalist). Im not arguing this method from the left or right, taxing big business harder hurts the rich (the real rich), we know small business employs the bulk of people percentage wise. This method would promote true capitalism that works to serve the people -and capitalism is unquestionably the best model, just regulated capitalism that works for us not against us.

    The UK not long ago tried this tax the rich exercise, want to know the result? "it actually cost the UK £7 billion in lost tax revenue.". Now they are reducing tax on the rich hoping to get that £7 billion back no doubt.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...aires-left-Britain-to-avoid-50p-tax-rate.html
     
  6. Flaming Moderate

    Flaming Moderate New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    2,992
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ... and missed every one of their economics goals as a result. Austerity has proven itself not to work. Not in England, France, Spain, Italy, Ireland, or even the much heralded Germany. All tried it and suffered the consequences. The only people in Europe that still supports the myth is the Bankers getting rich over it, (there's a surprise)
     
  7. ragin cajun

    ragin cajun New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2012
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    the top 10% is already paying 70% of the tax bill, how much more should they pay to make it "fair"? Why is it "fair" that half of america pays no income taxes? Yes, I know they pay other taxes, but the question is on income taxes and "fairness".
     
  8. ragin cajun

    ragin cajun New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2012
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    government revenues went up after the bush tax cuts, thats why obama kept them in place and why he wants to keep them in place now---except for the evil rich. BTW, 250K is not rich. In Houston a family income of 250K is a teacher and a fireman----certainly not the evil rich that obama is determined to destroy.
     
  9. Flaming Moderate

    Flaming Moderate New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    2,992
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Show me the figures. I'll be glad to show you that you are wrong, http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/income_tax_history
     
  10. ragin cajun

    ragin cajun New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2012
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
  11. stonehorse

    stonehorse New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So what does that prove? A chart from some mysterious source, made up by who?

    I think the chart poster's comment says it; "I've been looking for some sort of measure that would prove it. It took a while, but I finally found one."

    I guess you can find anything if you troll right wing sites long enough.

    I notice that after the top tier tax cuts the economy went into the dumpster. So that makes me think the tax cutters are full of it.
     
  12. ragin cajun

    ragin cajun New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2012
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    then I guess that raising everyone's taxes to 100% would make the economy boom, right? let the govt take all of our earnings and then redistribute them as the wizards in DC see fit---------------------------oh, thats what obama wants, isn't it? Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.
     
  13. countryboy

    countryboy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,806
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And there you have it. ;)
     
  14. countryboy

    countryboy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,806
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you can get a lib to give a "fair" number, I'll donate $25 to your favorite charity. But we all instinctively know what that number is.....110% ;)
     
  15. countryboy

    countryboy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,806
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How dare you muddle up a perfectly good lib circle jerk with cold hard facts. Shame on you!!!!!

    [​IMG]
     
  16. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    424
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree. I amounts to this:

    It is up to the majority of Americans, to see to it that those who hold massive UPPER HAND over all others (you know, that 1-2% who have gamed the system to acquire the largest balance of 'wealth')... contribute to bearing the BURDEN of maintaining THIS society which they have benefited enormously from.

    The American people ARE NOT and WILL NOT willing be slaves to those who think they can OWN every darned thing. In fact, in various ways through virtually any era... the American spirit WILL seek out and demand fairness. Not that the wealthiest (especially those who have WORKED for their money) do not deserve to be wealthy... but to consider, even VALUE the reality that their wealth was not obtained in a vacuum. The societal-infrastructure we ALL benefit from, is what that wealth is in VERY large part built upon.

    I've been an entrepreneur myself, and I realize/accept the idea of capitalism; but I'll not ever foolish enough to imagine that this SOCIETY has afforded me the foundation and launchpad to pursue my endeavors and dreams.

    Foolish is the rich person who thinks that they actually DID build it all themselves.

    We would HOPE that all people would do the proper thing and invest in this society and its PEOPLE... but having been a soldier most of my life, I know it is sometimes necessary to compel people to do what is right or beneficial for the whole. And I think requiring that those who are very wealthy to bear their reasonable proportion of the BURDEN to keep this society going, is a good and right thing to do.
     
  17. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    424
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    You are correct. In fact, the opposite is what is largely the actual case.
     
  18. ragin cajun

    ragin cajun New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2012
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    OK, then tell us what is "fair" and "reasonable". How much of the tax burden should the top 5% pay? all of it? 90%? how much? and then explain why its "fair" and "reasonable" for half of the population to pay no income tax.
     
  19. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    424
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah, you ought NOT "think so"... because no reasonable person here has suggested that.

    Even so, it does male sense to look at the REAL trends and see what higher taxes on the wealthy has led to overall.
     
  20. ragin cajun

    ragin cajun New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2012
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    define wealthy. is it donald trump and bill gates, or is it a couple working as waiters in New York with a combined income of 250K? is wealthy a fireman and a teacher living in Houston or LA making a combined income of 250K.

    250K is way too low, make it a million and I don't think anyone would have a problem with it.
     
  21. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    424
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Austerity has its place. But should never have been used to to hold the overall prosperity of working people hostage... as a means to allow the wealthy to become even MORE wealthy. It makes ZERO SENSE, to poop where you have to eat and sleep (if that can truly be avoided). And I think in the U.S.A., that can surely be avoided.
     
  22. countryboy

    countryboy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,806
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then what have "reasonable" people suggested? Give us a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing number already.
     
  23. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    424
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Open your eyes and ears, please. No one (at this point) wants to feed reality to you.
     
  24. countryboy

    countryboy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,806
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And.....the number is?

    What percentage of federal income taxes should people, and small businesses with $250,000+ in gross revenues pay? It is really a simple question. Why can't you simply give us a number?
     
  25. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    424
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    And... you can't see the truth why?
     

Share This Page