[Texdentist]

This graph gives us a very clear picture of what is happening in America. The right graph is the important one. The top 5% control 72% of the financial assets. The top 10% control 84% of the financial assets.

Middle class income is completely stagnent, middle class debt has been increasing for decades. I am all for equality in taxation, but right now its not equal at all.

Your statement shows how nothing ever changes. These were exactly the same points being made by the Trotskyites and Marxists in 1917 when the "proletariat" decided to confiscate everything the rich had and kill them. Something like 30 million people were killed by their own government in the next 50 years. This sinister hate for those who have accumulated wealth can lead to very bad things. It starts with the assumption that economics is a zero sum game, which it is not. The very rich can prosper greatly while the middle class also prospers. In fact, the middle class cannot prosper if the rich do not since most jobs are made by the rich. Like I said earlier, shove the rich down and see what happens to the middle class average lifestyle. It will go down.

 

[ArKay99]

We have quite enough taxes, no need for income taxes on people making less than $10 million. The need is a reduction in spending. Tax abuse created this country, tax abuse will bring it down.

Wait. I propose eliminating the income tax and going to a consumption tax, so even dune would pay taxes, drug dealers, welfae recipients, etc. The income tax would only come into effect if you earn say $1million or more per year.

Couple this with a real moratorium on discretionary spending coupled with an elimination of most of the government's agency's that have been set up as a tax sink, dismantle the FED, yada, yada...

The problem with the current logic is they say, "we can't give the tax cuts for the wealthy because that will add to the deficit". The real problem is, they will spend like a rabid junkie, whether the get the tax money or not. Gotta cut the head off the snake before any real defecit reform is accomplished. They just keep making the hole in the bottom of the pool bigger. At some point it becomes larger than the pool itself and swallows the whole thing... effing idjits.

 

[grumpyvette]

"you mis-titled your thread...

Republicans Hold Senate Ransom for Rich Tax Cut

Should be:

Republicans Hold Senate Ransom to prevent more tax hikes.

 

[Double_Take]

Your analogy is incorrect. There never was a tax cut. Once the initial rate was exceeded, everything afterward was a hike. This was a reduction in that hike and not extending it is another hike because it moves opposite of the initial rate.

:cheers:

Regardless of how you look at it, the spending must be balanced by the income. Reduce income, reduce spending....

Your statement shows how nothing ever changes. These were exactly the same points being made by the Trotskyites and Marxists in 1917 when the "proletariat" decided to confiscate everything the rich had and kill them. Something like 30 million people were killed by their own government in the next 50 years. This sinister hate for those who have accumulated wealth can lead to very bad things. It starts with the assumption that economics is a zero sum game, which it is not. The very rich can prosper greatly while the middle class also prospers. In fact, the middle class cannot prosper if the rich do not since most jobs are made by the rich. Like I said earlier, shove the rich down and see what happens to the middle class average lifestyle. It will go down.

There is a big difference between your example and what I am talking about. I am saying that since a significant amount of wealth and assets (stocks, bonds, mutual funds etc) are taxed at a lower rate than normal income. Since the rich own almost all of these assets they are being taxed unfairly low when compaired to a middle income family making the same amount of money in the form of a pay check. For example, if someone makes $50k a year, they get taxed ~25%. If a rich guy makes $50k after the sale of stock, he pays ~15%. Both are forms of income, why are they taxed at different levels?

 

[grumpyvette]

its not a tax CUT, its a TAX increase!
politicians ALWAYS SPEND more MONEY than the taxes collected REGARDLESS of the totals, saying the increase will be used to pay down the debts a ridiculous statement, its never happened in the past and never will, POLITICIANS spend ANY increased revenues, collected plus more
SHOW ME A SINGLE YEAR IN THE LAST 100 YEARS WHERE THE USA SPENT less THAN THE TAXES COLLECTED

 

[Texdentist]

For example, if someone makes $50k a year, they get taxed ~25%. If a rich guy makes $50k after the sale of stock, he pays ~15%. Both are forms of income, why are they taxed at different levels?

Because tax law is routinely used to encourage behavior that is good for the overall economy. Investment is extremely good for the economy, so the government has decided to encourage it with a lower tax rate. There have been eternal arguments over that and always will be. Same for mortgage interest deduction. Why do homeowners get off easy on that? Because government wants to encourage home ownership for the many good things (construction jobs, social stability, etc. ) it brings to society.

 

[vfpreacher111]

oops

 

[Vette_Newb]

Wait. I propose eliminating the income tax and going to a consumption tax, so even dune would pay taxes, drug dealers, welfae recipients, etc. The income tax would only come into effect if you earn say $1million or more per year.

But.. anytime you give the government a source of income they can raise as needed, they will. That's why we are in the mess we are in, the leviathan is insatiable. Give them $1, they will spend $3. The fed has created this never ending debt situation through a practice known as fractional banking. We can never ever get ahead of it, no matter how high taxes are. That is why tax rates have constantly been adjusted and why we were took off the gold standard.

The only answer is to eliminate their source of revenue. Some people take issue with me wanting to starve the leviathan to death, but as you can see now, it's him or us.

 

[DarthAWM]

This graph gives us a very clear picture of what is happening in America. The right graph is the important one. The top 5% control 72% of the financial assets. The top 10% control 84% of the financial assets.

Middle class income is completely stagnent, middle class debt has been increasing for decades. I am all for equality in taxation, but right now its not equal at all.

Income on stocks is taxed at a mere 15%. Since the top 10% own ~81% of stocks it is unfair to tax this income at a rate below what the middle class would pay on regular income. If you really want to remove the progressive tax then all income must be taxed at the same level.

When R's passed the tax cut it was unfunded. All of the tax cuts have added to the deficit. If you call yourself a fiscal conservative then extending the tax cuts or making them perminant must be offset by reducing spending. Since the tax cuts for families making over $250000 will cost this country $700,000,000,000 over 10 years where will the money come from? If you have a solution for that, then I am all for the tax cuts, but good luck finding a free $70B a year.



Source of graphs

Exatly how do you "fund" an adjustment in taxation? If you must fund a tax cut does this mean you unfund a tax hike?:huh:

 

[C5sarge]

Exatly how do you "fund" an adjustment in taxation? If you must fund a tax cut does this mean you unfund a tax hike?:huh:

Exactly. Cart before the horse analogy. Libs are always on that word play. The problem lies in the spending. Not the income. But they always want to say it's an income problem verses a spending problem. Emotional thinking always clouds reality. Liberal thinking is done through emotions not common sense. Envy has them using words and phrases like "the rich" and "equality" ect... blah, blah, blah. No substance.

 

[ArKay99]

But.. anytime you give the government a source of income they can raise as needed, they will. That's why we are in the mess we are in, the leviathan is insatiable. Give them $1, they will spend $3.

:agree: x1000. THAT is the problem. 535 running the US into the ground with their only purpose to serve special interests.
The founders never envisioned this when they gave the general public the right to redress grievance. Something must be done to limit special interest influence. As it is now, special interests run the country with little regard to the majorities benefit.

The fed has created this never ending debt situation through a practice known as fractional banking. We can never ever get ahead of it, no matter how high taxes are. That is why tax rates have constantly been adjusted and why we were took off the gold standard.

The only answer is to eliminate their source of revenue. Some people take issue with me wanting to starve the leviathan to death, but as you can see now, it's him or us.

You may have the only viable solution there, but it's not going to end well for a lot of people. Unfortunately, I don't think that will work either. The middle class will be thrust into poverty, and the will return us to serfdom. The bad actors of the world will use the opportunity to invade and take over the resources. I can't believe most people don't see this as a very real possibility. The dominoes are falling in the EU, starting from Greece...How long before they start falling here...starting with California?

 

[Double_Take]

Because tax law is routinely used to encourage behavior that is good for the overall economy. Investment is extremely good for the economy, so the government has decided to encourage it with a lower tax rate. There have been eternal arguments over that and always will be. Same for mortgage interest deduction. Why do homeowners get off easy on that? Because government wants to encourage home ownership for the many good things (construction jobs, social stability, etc. ) it brings to society.

I can make the same argument about a progressive tax. A progressive tax gives a break to the people with less money to encourage them to spend money. The economy is driven by middle and lower class spending, putting more money in their pockets will encourage spending and help the overall economy. There are 2 sides to every argument.

Exatly how do you "fund" an adjustment in taxation? If you must fund a tax cut does this mean you unfund a tax hike?:huh:

You dont fund a tax cut necessarily. My first comment was directed towards budget hawks. If we are to balance the budget and reduce the deficit the government needs to spend less than it brings in. If tax revenue decreases, we must decrease spending by at least that much. Its not funding a tax cut, but rather finding expenses that can be removed.

 

[duneripperxx]

Because tax law is routinely used to encourage behavior that is good for the overall economy. Investment is extremely good for the economy, so the government has decided to encourage it with a lower tax rate. There have been eternal arguments over that and always will be. .

With overseas investors, sure.
Other than that, you only add wealth to the top 2 percent and tie up local money in paper in banks.

 

[duneripperxx]

"Boehner blamed President Barack Obama's economic stimulus package and Democratic tax policies for the high unemployment rate, which rose to 9.8 percent in the government's latest monthly report issued earlier in the day"



wow...

Soooo...
The current Bush tax breaks.............AND........tax breaks that were part of President Barack Obama's massive economic recovery package...........


are killlin the economy........

:laughing:


kay........:laughing:

 

[Vette_Newb]

........tax breaks that were part of President Barack Obama's massive economic recovery package...........

I don't what is funnier, this line, or the fact that there are people out there dumb enough to believe it... despite all the evidence to the contrary.. :laughing::crazy:

 

[duneripperxx]

I don't what is funnier, this line, or the fact that there are people out there dumb enough to believe it... despite all the evidence to the contrary.. :laughing::crazy:

Ya know....they were light on the details, so I agree with your doubt, but then again...

My company had the bush tax cuts, a targeted tax cut from the state for their market and location due to the automotive problems, and supposedly an obama economic tax cut...

and they still went out of business.:laughing:


But they were idiots tho......:laughing:

 

[ArKay99]

I don't know what is funnier, this line, or the fact that there are people out there dumb enough to believe it... despite all the evidence to the contrary.. :laughing::crazy:

Don't go all Obama and try to pick a winner, just laugh at the whole concept, equally. :rolling:

What I find deplorable and especially unethical is that because of some preconcived disdain for the successful and wealthy in this country that somehow their success doesn't belong to them, a very few people, namely the left in congress is willing to put the entire economy of the US on the brink.

Sad...

 

[Poncherello]

Sad...

You forgot:

goes to ** Bush/Cheney/Neocons**

 

[ArKay99]

You forgot:

goes to ** Bush/Cheney/Neocons**

:laughing: Did I somehow tug at your heartstrings? :laughing:

 

[duneripperxx]

You forgot:

goes to ** Bush/Cheney/Neocons**

Ya know... I really have nothing relevant to add here.