Tax cuts for the wealthiest 1%
0
Tegumi
"im always cute"
Gambler wrote...
Looking at it from a non-economic perspective, I sometimes wonder if politicians from one party oppose another mainly for their own interests.I don't think you even need to wonder about that one.
Gambler wrote...
Shouldn't they be working together to overcome problemsThey should.
Gambler wrote...
although saying it in such simple terms is definitely far too idealistic?Yeah, it probably is.
0
Tsurayu wrote...
neko-chan wrote...
I understand that it seems horrible that we would give rich people tax breaks when others are in finical difficulties, but the burden is not theirs alone to bare nor should we punish them for being rich by asking them to contribute more than everyone else.That is the idea of a progressive tax structure. The more you make the more you pay. The rich have been weaseling their way out of their bracket essentially every time the Republicans have been in power. Of course their should be a limit, but like Flaser pointed out there is a significant difference between the middle class and the rich, and the rich are hardly paying the tax bracket that they should be paying.
Then a restructuring of the tax bracket should be in order then, not an unfair targeting of people who make more than middle class workers.
People forget that $250,000 doesn't make you wealthy, even an even million dollars doesn't - not in america anyways. These people are the ones that hire plummers, handy men, buy new cars (honestly, how many times do you know people who bought new instead of used?), and sponsor local sports teams and school activities.
I'm not a republican, but I do like the current republican proposed idea of raising the tax bracket of "wealthy" people from $250,000 to 1 million. People who make between those numbers are usually the backbone for local businesses and sponsors for local events and charities.
0
animefreak_usa
Child of Samael
>implying there a middle class anymore.
We're a nation of dreamers and complainer's. Come to America, the land of opportunity, where if work hard you be wealthy, with streets of gold and land of plenty food.
Reality... only a few people make to the rich column. My fore fathers came for mexico in the 1820's back went mexico was new spain and settle in a crap hole called Los Banos. If you know Spanish it slang for the bathroom(The Baths). Raise cattle and farmed Until my uncle die's he the last of the Maldonado farmers. My mom side came from Catalonia to be rich in the diamond fields of Arkansas... didn't pan out so moved to madera in the 1950's and didn't nothing.
Mess up thing is my dad's father is rich as hell and lives an a 12,000 sq foot house in mexico and fresno.... literally can buy a that house on that private island in washington state(mile long by 3 miles wide house, docks, 4.4 mill).
Most people are jaded by winning the lottery or get rich schemes, very little are willing to work hard to be successful in whatever they want to do. College psst half the people with degrees don't work on what they studied and just get by on crap work and paying student loans... i have a M.F.A and i work whatever i can find until i get a art gig... like 5 a year at most because no one can afford a train photographer for their weddings, ect ect when others who buy a camera and think they can do it for cheaper.. i got off the topic.
We need to teach our kids that no one going to give you want to want and you have to work for what you need, and get lucky on the side if you want to be a millionaire.
We're a nation of dreamers and complainer's. Come to America, the land of opportunity, where if work hard you be wealthy, with streets of gold and land of plenty food.
Reality... only a few people make to the rich column. My fore fathers came for mexico in the 1820's back went mexico was new spain and settle in a crap hole called Los Banos. If you know Spanish it slang for the bathroom(The Baths). Raise cattle and farmed Until my uncle die's he the last of the Maldonado farmers. My mom side came from Catalonia to be rich in the diamond fields of Arkansas... didn't pan out so moved to madera in the 1950's and didn't nothing.
Mess up thing is my dad's father is rich as hell and lives an a 12,000 sq foot house in mexico and fresno.... literally can buy a that house on that private island in washington state(mile long by 3 miles wide house, docks, 4.4 mill).
Most people are jaded by winning the lottery or get rich schemes, very little are willing to work hard to be successful in whatever they want to do. College psst half the people with degrees don't work on what they studied and just get by on crap work and paying student loans... i have a M.F.A and i work whatever i can find until i get a art gig... like 5 a year at most because no one can afford a train photographer for their weddings, ect ect when others who buy a camera and think they can do it for cheaper.. i got off the topic.
We need to teach our kids that no one going to give you want to want and you have to work for what you need, and get lucky on the side if you want to be a millionaire.
0
Some people seem to forget that in the Bush terms the rich got a tax cut.
All this tax raise would do would be to set the tax rate back to how it originally was when Clinton was president.
A lot of the rich find ways around paying taxes anyway.
They will even go to such lengths as setting their address on some island out of jurisdiction to not pay taxes.
If you look through the past 100 years it seems like when the Rich were being taxed significantly the economy was doing much better.
Although it would be a fallacy to assume that is the main reason.
One of the big reasons we are in this mess (besides the war) is because we allowed the high position people in banks to gamble with our money and take no responsibility for their actions.
If they lose all our money it wouldn't matter because it wasn't theirs.
They make more of a profit for themselves when they take bigger risks.
Also we had scum like CEO of Countrywide who stole hundreds of millions of our money and got away with it. And in the process helped cause an economic crash.
The worst part is that we are most definitely going to experience another crash much worse. The great depression will be small compared to it.
We need a whole change to the system. America is so corrupt that it's hard to believe how it got that way.
There are so many things that need to be changed.
I could point out a few.
One is to stop throwing money into foreign business and banks.
They gave over 600 billion to foreign banks alone.
That money could of been spent on much better things.
Another is to have high tarrifs for foreign products.
American companies will have their products manufactured somewhere else and we have to make it more profitable to produce them in America.
America is 80% serviced based. We need to get back to actually manufacturing things.
We also have to set laws against certain bribery that has corrupted just about any government official. Most have their pockets full with another corporation's cash before they even enter office.
Regulators scratch the backs of a large corporation and as a reward they obtain a high position in that company after they retire. They should have something that restricts them from working for any of those companies for around 10-15 years.
There is so much more that can be said though.
I am hoping that something happens so that pisses off enough Americans that they start a riot and over throw the government and every corrupt official in it.
Even the President is useless. There will be no change in the next two year and things will continue to get worse.
All this tax raise would do would be to set the tax rate back to how it originally was when Clinton was president.
A lot of the rich find ways around paying taxes anyway.
They will even go to such lengths as setting their address on some island out of jurisdiction to not pay taxes.
If you look through the past 100 years it seems like when the Rich were being taxed significantly the economy was doing much better.
Although it would be a fallacy to assume that is the main reason.
One of the big reasons we are in this mess (besides the war) is because we allowed the high position people in banks to gamble with our money and take no responsibility for their actions.
If they lose all our money it wouldn't matter because it wasn't theirs.
They make more of a profit for themselves when they take bigger risks.
Also we had scum like CEO of Countrywide who stole hundreds of millions of our money and got away with it. And in the process helped cause an economic crash.
The worst part is that we are most definitely going to experience another crash much worse. The great depression will be small compared to it.
We need a whole change to the system. America is so corrupt that it's hard to believe how it got that way.
There are so many things that need to be changed.
I could point out a few.
One is to stop throwing money into foreign business and banks.
They gave over 600 billion to foreign banks alone.
That money could of been spent on much better things.
Another is to have high tarrifs for foreign products.
American companies will have their products manufactured somewhere else and we have to make it more profitable to produce them in America.
America is 80% serviced based. We need to get back to actually manufacturing things.
We also have to set laws against certain bribery that has corrupted just about any government official. Most have their pockets full with another corporation's cash before they even enter office.
Regulators scratch the backs of a large corporation and as a reward they obtain a high position in that company after they retire. They should have something that restricts them from working for any of those companies for around 10-15 years.
There is so much more that can be said though.
I am hoping that something happens so that pisses off enough Americans that they start a riot and over throw the government and every corrupt official in it.
Even the President is useless. There will be no change in the next two year and things will continue to get worse.
0
Ironytaken wrote...
Another is to have high tarrifs for foreign products.Tarrifs on goods make other countries retaliate with their own tariffs. In the end, business have to pay the price, not governments.
American companies will have their products manufactured somewhere else and we have to make it more profitable to produce them in America.
America is 80% serviced based. We need to get back to actually manufacturing things.
We focus on serviced based industry because our economy is Post-industrial. We aren't in the 20th century where a single car and 3 bedroom home was the dream. Serviced based jobs are the highest paying, finical planners, educators, entertainers, bankers, analyst, basically anyone who works with people is going to get paid more than someone who works building or sewing things.
That said, America is still the biggest manufacturer in the world. We just don't make cheap things like shirts or shoes or plastic sewing machines - the money these things make wouldn't justify people's pay.
But we do make the world's planes, heavy equipment, medical tools, mining tools, factory equipment, chemicals, gasoline (we import oil, export the gas), cigarettes, cars, and scientific equipment not to mention we have Microsoft and Apple.
Manufacturing jobs are disappearing but that is because they aren't good jobs in the first place - Americans need to become smarter so they can take the hundreds of thousands of high paying jobs that are open right now that no one can fill because they aren't qualified.
0
Flaser
OCD Hentai Collector
neko-chan! What exactly are these "service" jobs that are so well paying?
Movie stars? Talking heads on TV? Chefs?
Those people are in entertainment. Most jobs in "service" are just pumping gas, serving a table or flipping burgers... and they earn even less then if they'd been manning a manufacturing line.
People need to do two jobs, where one used to suffice.
So no, service is *not* the answer.
Manufacturing is still done, and done with human labor, it's just done elsewhere where people can be even more exploited.
Movie stars? Talking heads on TV? Chefs?
Those people are in entertainment. Most jobs in "service" are just pumping gas, serving a table or flipping burgers... and they earn even less then if they'd been manning a manufacturing line.
People need to do two jobs, where one used to suffice.
So no, service is *not* the answer.
Manufacturing is still done, and done with human labor, it's just done elsewhere where people can be even more exploited.
0
Personally I have to agree with Flaser on that one, Neko. You arguably just did the same thing I did a couple of days ago and spat out what the economists want the status quo to be pictured as. I mean don't get me wrong. I want that to be the case, but it just isn't.
Service jobs can't be considered the mainstay jobs, or the jobs of the future where they are some of the lowest paying jobs available. It's sad and all, but just a reality we all have to live with. Otherwise teachers should be on the level of doctors and lawyers and entertainment stars (such as Hollywood and sports stars) should make considerably less than they do.
Service jobs can't be considered the mainstay jobs, or the jobs of the future where they are some of the lowest paying jobs available. It's sad and all, but just a reality we all have to live with. Otherwise teachers should be on the level of doctors and lawyers and entertainment stars (such as Hollywood and sports stars) should make considerably less than they do.
0
My father used to work a job at a Warehouse around 30 or so years ago.
he made around 20 dollars an hour and had health coverage up to one million.
He actually used 750,000 of that when my brother had kidney failure and was in intensive care.
He also used it for me and my brother when we needed to get heart surgery.
So he got just about full coverage for all of that.
In the present day 30 years or more later the same warehouse job pays 16-20 dollars and hour with barely any medical benefits.
Seems kind of odd to be making the same or less after 30 years and receiving barely any medical coverage.
My father could support a family with his job even if it was working a lot of hours.
he made around 20 dollars an hour and had health coverage up to one million.
He actually used 750,000 of that when my brother had kidney failure and was in intensive care.
He also used it for me and my brother when we needed to get heart surgery.
So he got just about full coverage for all of that.
In the present day 30 years or more later the same warehouse job pays 16-20 dollars and hour with barely any medical benefits.
Seems kind of odd to be making the same or less after 30 years and receiving barely any medical coverage.
My father could support a family with his job even if it was working a lot of hours.
0
The tax cuts for the richest absolutely need to return to the rates under Clinton, possibly higher. They were the height of irresponsibility. Government needs to close the widening gap between the rich and the poor that has been in part exacerbated by the Bush tax cuts. As an aside, I'd also like to see surcharge on all financial transactions; disappointing that the deficit commission didn't include that as a proposal.
0
I'm not sure that tax cuts for the wealthy will have the effects that proponents claim they will have. Additionally, if the pols are serious about the debt/deficit, then extending the tax cuts would be a counterproductive move.
Really though, the debt/deficit is dependent on a number of things. Probably the best way to address it would be to make some changes involving spending that more realistically address the purposes of government programs and the state of the world today.
For Social Security
-raise the retirement age to reflect that people live longer
-establish a means test
-change the indexing of benefits to more accurate reflect the prices of things that the elderly without other income or extensive savings are likely to buy/need
Tax policy
-alter/remove the cap on payroll tax. It's extremely regressive and there really isn't any rationale for its existence
-Change the homeowner tax credit to only apply to first homes/not apply to extremely expensive homes, as it is supposed to help people who would otherwise not be able to buy houses to afford them, not create tax breaks for people buying mansions
Ultimately, we need to eliminate tax breaks and spending that provide people benefits which they are used to getting but which don't really serve the intended purpose of those programs, which is difficult, because people don't like getting stuff taken away. At the rate we are going, it might take a massive disaster on a state(like a state declaring bankruptcy) level to get people to really realize how serious this is.
Really though, the debt/deficit is dependent on a number of things. Probably the best way to address it would be to make some changes involving spending that more realistically address the purposes of government programs and the state of the world today.
For Social Security
-raise the retirement age to reflect that people live longer
-establish a means test
-change the indexing of benefits to more accurate reflect the prices of things that the elderly without other income or extensive savings are likely to buy/need
Tax policy
-alter/remove the cap on payroll tax. It's extremely regressive and there really isn't any rationale for its existence
-Change the homeowner tax credit to only apply to first homes/not apply to extremely expensive homes, as it is supposed to help people who would otherwise not be able to buy houses to afford them, not create tax breaks for people buying mansions
Ultimately, we need to eliminate tax breaks and spending that provide people benefits which they are used to getting but which don't really serve the intended purpose of those programs, which is difficult, because people don't like getting stuff taken away. At the rate we are going, it might take a massive disaster on a state(like a state declaring bankruptcy) level to get people to really realize how serious this is.
0
I find it ridiculous that the republicans are so intent on giving tax breaks to the %1 that they would hold tax cuts and unemployment benefits for the middle class hostage. Seriously, if giving tax breaks to the wealthiest americans worked so well, the economy wouldn't be in the mess it is now
0
Flaser wrote...
[quote="Tsurayu"]You do realize that pretty much anything that one of the members of Fakku "spouts off" is going to be based only on what they've heard or studied because I seriously doubt any of us are Macroeconomics majors who really have a firm grasp of all the workings of the economy, including you. 'Nuff said. but seriously if we don't tax the people who have 95% of the wealth how in the hell are we supposed to pay for firemen and police officers and all the other amenities we take for granted?
0
"The wealthy pay none of the taxes, do none of the work. Middle class pays all of the taxes, does all of the work. The lower class is really just there to scare the shit out of the middle class".
-George Carlin-
-George Carlin-
0
Just read this article:
http://www.politicususa.com/en/why-tax-cuts-for-the-rich-killed-the-economy-in-1929-and-are-killing-us-again
http://www.politicususa.com/en/why-tax-cuts-for-the-rich-killed-the-economy-in-1929-and-are-killing-us-again
In 1925-26 the top marginal income tax was DROPPED from 73% to 25%. This caused the greatest disparity in income in our history until today.
The rich KEPT most of their money and it wasn’t distributed through out the economy.
What happens here is a smaller pool of people are HOLDING a larger share of the wealth.
This essentially puts a strain on DEMAND for products. The wealthiest can only consume so much and we all know it is CONSUMPTION that drives our economy. In fact it is 2/3rds of our economy...Essentially the majority of the wealth they [the richest 2%] are keeping is sitting in banks or stocks and even in the Cayman Islands. It is not creating demand, which puts people to work.
The rich KEPT most of their money and it wasn’t distributed through out the economy.
What happens here is a smaller pool of people are HOLDING a larger share of the wealth.
This essentially puts a strain on DEMAND for products. The wealthiest can only consume so much and we all know it is CONSUMPTION that drives our economy. In fact it is 2/3rds of our economy...Essentially the majority of the wealth they [the richest 2%] are keeping is sitting in banks or stocks and even in the Cayman Islands. It is not creating demand, which puts people to work.