You are correct Vac, and it should be pointed out, again, that the upper 20% pay more than 85% of taxes.
|
You are correct Vac, and it should be pointed out, again, that the upper 20% pay more than 85% of taxes.
I don't remember hanging the problems on the rich and pointed out the solution is in the tax code however yeah the rich are honest, but they have more influence on the tax code than the rest of us and that's just a fact and we are all dependent on not just their success, but benevolence as well and no way do you or should you ever thing they will lay you off or close your plant if that's for the good of the bottom line. That just a reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacuum7
I mean come on only a supply sider would even consider a deficit funded tax cut top heavy loaded and permanent during a great business cycle, to simulate a great economy. GDP and wage growth didn't get stimulated and as a fact if states had not mandated a high minimum wage there would be no wage growth, and one time selective bonuses by a very few corporations don't count for much a year later do they?
I thought I was very specific pointing out a few changes in the code would still give rich guys MO'Money, just not as much, nor at the speedy current RATE. What are you guys suggesting they double, triple, or quadruple their profits at taxpayer expense? That, not even hard work and why can't they earn a profit instead of being given one? That's what they tell the workers, at least the ones they don't lay off and quiet as it's kept how would that look to you if after that tax cut they had even a small lay-off? Better wake up and google that because that is already happening.
So fellows we start thinking of transcending the politics. Think about that for a minute before we start a fight. Can't you even envision an economy built on 300M working people, buying stuff, or are you just a happy fat rat with half a potential achieved? The rich would still get richer, but you would be getting MO'MONEY too! EVERYBODY WOULD!
. If you have been specific about anything, I must have missed it. I'm particularly interested in two things.Quote:
I thought I was very specific pointing out a few changes in the code would still give rich guys MO'Money, just not as much, nor at the speedy current RATE
1. How you plan on getting more money to the lower income folks so they can pay more taxes?
2. How you plan on raising a trillion extra dollars to balance the budget?
Who suggested that? I guarantee you it was not me.Quote:
What are you guys suggesting they double, triple, or quadruple their profits at taxpayer expense?
Yeah I guess you did but I'll find it shortly or maybe you reread it. 1. Tweaking the tax code. 2. I honestly have not considered balancing the budget, but paying the debt is a no brainer with more than double the GDP, and an robust expanded macroeconomic in the long term. The key is the time frame and whats a reasonable debt plan that the economics dictates.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Actually you did because you are touting the tax cuts as great. Over time the rich have indeed quadrupled there wealth and you have NOT. I guess you square that with how much taxes they pay as compared to everyone else, but my math says what I just stated. What does yours show? Either over time or the last few years is perfectly acceptable.Quote:
Who suggested that? I guarantee you it was not me.
So by "tweaking" the tax code we can insure that everyone makes more money and everyone pays more taxes? Wow. Please go into detail on that tweak.Quote:
Yeah I guess you did but I'll find it shortly or maybe you reread it.
1. Tweaking the tax code.
So we are going to double the GDP and pay off the national debt all by this tweaking of the tax code? You must explain this!! Details!Quote:
2. I honestly have not considered balancing the budget, but paying the debt is a no brainer with more than double the GDP, and an robust expanded macroeconomic in the long term. The key is the time frame and whats a reasonable debt plan that the economics dictates.
OK. First of all, you have reverted back to your fantasy world where a reduction in income tax rates magically is transformed into a doubling, tripling, or even quadrupling of profits. That's ridiculous. I never said any such thing and that's all there is to it.Quote:
Actually you did because you are touting the tax cuts as great. Over time the rich have indeed quadrupled there wealth and you have NOT. I guess you square that with how much taxes they pay as compared to everyone else, but my math says what I just stated. What does yours show? Either over time or the last few years is perfectly acceptable.
As to the rest, where is your documentation that the wealthy have quadrupled their wealth? How do you know that I have not?
Waiting for you to do the math yourself. That's the only way to disprove my statement. Or verify it.Quote:
Over time the rich have indeed quadrupled their wealth and you have NOT. I guess you square that with how much taxes they pay as compared to everyone else, but my math says what I just stated. What does yours show? Either over time or the last few years is perfectly acceptable.
Talaniman: I 100% agree with you that the RICH will close a plant and let people go if PROFITS AREN'T THERE...and us little guys will get hurt: THIS IS ALL TRUE. But we have a lot of GOOD RICH GUYS IN THE U.S...very innovative RICH create a lot of jobs...I would venture to say that the U.S. has the best of world's BUNCH OF RICH GUYS. I certainly want these RICH to make, as you put it so eloquently, MO' MONEY with the hope that they SHARE some of that "extra" cash...that's my hope....but, to be honest, I have never had real good luck in getting extra cash out of employers because they made extra profits. Unfortunately, that is all we have to go by, Talaniman: the hope that the rich business owners feel somewhat charitable to pass onto us extra compensation when they get it.
there must be something very dysfunctional about your economy if you cannot balance a budget in good economic time, the Trump budget recognises this by making cuts in some programs
They may be good guys, and hope is always a good thing to have but I certainly would hold my breath. You know while I can see a good path forward and have hope it will be achieved, I honestly ain't holding my breath either Vac!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacuum7
So you want me to use math to verify a statement you have not made? OK. That certainly makes perfectly good sense.Quote:
Waiting for you to do the math yourself. That's the only way to disprove my statement. Or verify it.
Well, we'll just tweak the tax code and double the GDP. Yes indeed.
It's won't be cuts in rich guys stuff, just poor people stuff. Now dems like Clinton cut military stuff, but repubs restored it and ONLY cut poor people stuff. so yeah maybe dysfunctional is a good word but civil war is more accurate. Both sides would rather destroy each other than cooperate and relate. Just like on this forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I've seen a lot of budgets Clete, this is no different than others, and the last balanced budget led to the repubs letting big biz go crazy and not just blow the economy apart, but took the world with it. You think the dufus if he gets 4 more years won't do the same thing repubs have always done?
ONE STEP AT A TIME! Verify or disprove my statement and we can proceed with the rest. As facts we can agree on sink in, I'm sure you may be more receptive, and have positive input of your own which I would welcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
What statement are you referring to? You have made many vague statements but nothing that could be verified, so repeat your statement. The only one I can think of is your idea of "tweaking" the tax code so as to provide increased income for everyone and increased tax revenue. It is not possible to verify your "tweaking", and no person on the earth could apply math to it since there are no numbers, so perhaps you would give something more specific to look at?
It's all laid out in post 86. Maybe you missed it.
This? Over what period of time? Who do you define as the rich? Now if you want me to accept the "last few years", then are you saying that the rich have four times as much wealth now as compared, let's say, to five years ago?Quote:
Over time the rich have indeed quadrupled their wealth and you have NOT. I guess you square that with how much taxes they pay as compared to everyone else, but my math says what I just stated. What does yours show? Either over time or the last few years is perfectly acceptable.
Do it any way you want JL, and if it's more than a factor of 4, then its worse than I thought. I tried using the most conservative figure but your methodology is yours to choose from.
I tell you what. I'll make a deal with you. I won't ask you to verify my statements, and then you don't ask me to verify your statements, especially considering that I already verify mine, and this particular statement of yours is so ridiculously vague that it's hopeless anyway.
No deal!
There is for me. I am ALWAYS prepared to back up my statements. You should be as well.
I asked for your input if you got nothing please just say so instead of your usual dodge dismissal and attack some more. The time you wasted you could have gotten the numbers done them and given your analysis.
You didn't ask for input. You asked me to verify your vague and data free statement.
I still want to know what "tweaking" you have in mind for the tax code which is going to double the GDP and solve all the tax and income problems.
Just to inject some reality; a broad based consumption tax has this effect, and you accompany it with a reduction in income tax to make the pill palatable. What it does is solve the problem of fairness because everyone pays the tax, which seems a stumbling block for you when you keep harping on how unfair it is for the top 20% to pay most of the tax. This is not theory, it was done here years ago and the economy took off and the level of tax collections were unexpected. To inject fairness all sales taxes have to be absorbed in the new system and tax revenues shared equitablyQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Of course, the top 20% will still pay most tax because they have greater spending ability but the tax base will be different. I cannot see it getting up there because of states rights
Almost all our states have some sort of consumption tax and an income tax already, Clete, and the ones that don't have their own taxing system that amounts to the same thing. One of the problems with the our tax system and monetary system, are the ways that anybody can get around them and escape through all sorts of loopholes to not just have some money exempted, but half a fortune goes untaxed, and the more you have the more you hide. Mostly in other countries. That doesn't help our economy, and with the landmark decision by SCOTUS that corporations are people too, there is virtually no limits to corporations and their uber rich overseers, to fund candidates that are making laws and policy friendly to maximize their bottom lines. Under such conditions it's very easy to see not just where the real untaxed money is, how it's used, and why half the country is under employed and stuck in a minimum wage that has not changed in decades, and the people stuck at that end of the economy will be there all their natural lives.
So call me a liberal all you want but the fix has been in for so long even conservatives are so dependent on bending the knee to the one that finances their slow trickle so they can essentially reap huge profits for their own personal use. They refuse to see that their liberty and freedom has been subverted by the oligarchs that control the flow of money and the government of the people, and make the least the cause of the problems.
No poor person has ever laid off workers, shut down factories and built new ones somewhere else, or tanked the economy. That's the exclusive domain of the uber rich and the governments they control. Even close examination of wars and trade wars is the underlying international corporate interest doing what it does to make MO'MONEY, and put profits over people and no people are exempt from being exploited for that profit.
No poor person has ever built a factory here, employed many people, paid 85% of the income taxes, contributed heavily to charitable organizations, started universities, funded scholarships for needy students, paid large amounts of property taxes that funded the paving of roads and building of schools, made large purchases of consumer goods that help others have jobs, or funded the building of hospitals and clinics for the sick.
Half of the country works at minimum wage? No. The correct figure is 2%, and most people START and minimum wage and then work their way up to a better position. No one is "stuck" anywhere. The woods are full of people who started small and yet ended up in a good situation. My parents were two of them. My brother in law is another, but all of them were not afraid of work.Quote:
and why half the country is under employed and stuck in a minimum wage that has not changed in decades, and the people stuck at that end of the economy will be there all their natural lives.
Yes used to be a problem here so what we have is a uniform taxation system, it is the same all over the country, no states rights to get in the way, they just argue about the distribution of the revenue. You let SCOTUS screw up your system, making quasi lawsQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
The decision on corporations was a correct one.
Paraclete: In the U.S., SCOTUS makes no LAWS....SCOTUS interprets Constitution and laws.
That is true in theory, but the Roe Wade decision, for example, was not based on existing law.
Wow! Powerful statement from Thomas Sowell!
You are be correct, but minimum wages at $7.25 don't tell the story of those making a buck or two more and trying to manage a family ballooning that 2% by a lot, so lets not be selective specific as it's no wonder that states raised their own minimums as referendums during the last election in effort to raise people from poverty. Yes people do move up the ladder, and even the working poor work hard to be poor, but if almost half the country work low paying jobs paying $18,000 a year, even a two job family is still POOR. Got little or nothing to do with work ethics, but of the value of ones efforts which are set by others for a profit. I often use and still do the Walmart business model of workers low wages subsidized by local government, where two people still can't afford a decent rent nor child care nor shelter, while the corporations using cheap overseas labor for products they sell Americans.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Sure they raised wages and gave bonuses because states wrote a freaking law forcing them too, but that's after making huge profits for decades for the family. That's but ONE example of profits over people and the ones stuck in it. I feel insulted too, in that you list all the good works of corporations and degrade the poor people who CANNOT contribute to those good things, and fail to reveal the tax benefits to rich "philanthropist". Maybe you don't know but I've talked about it enough and the facts are out there, yet you still shill for the uber rich, and berate the poor as you always do.
I just wish you would think for a minute your "they pay 85% of taxes" rant is hiding the fact that's a small part of their wealth being taxed in the first place. Those good deeds you so give them credit for are very profitable for them, or else they wouldn't do it, and don't for those that WORK for them to have that profit.
I ask you to do the math yourself, you balked instead, returning to the same old rag on the poor and glory to the rich guy benefactors and the virtue of hard work and ignoring the ceilings they impose on people. I suppose though you can keep deluding yourself into believing your work ethic got you to a BETTER circumstance than just being poor, and entitles you to denigrate the ones that you left behind. More disgusting is how proud of yourself to do so, and so clueless as to not want to hear truth, and rock your fantasy world about how hard YOU work, and others do not!
I suspect you NEED an excuse to be better than somebody else, and forget that could be you still stuck at the bottom of the pile. Naw you work way too hard to even consider where you came from. Indeed I think while you revel in your own righteousness you fail to see that any and all efforts to help the least is a good thing, and I say that about the rich too even if it gains them profits.
A very achieved conservative libertarian supply sider. No surprise he would tug at your conservative hearts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacuum7
Documentation?Quote:
almost half the country work low paying jobs paying $18,000 a year,
Documentation?Quote:
I just wish you would think for a minute your "they pay 85% of taxes" rant is hiding the fact that's a small part of their wealth being taxed in the first place.
Wealth is not taxed by the feds. Income is taxed. They are not the same thing.
Yeah. That makes a lot of sense. Giving away millions of dollars of income to build a new building at a college is a sure way to make profit. Do you ever really think about what you say?Quote:
Those good deeds you so give them credit for are very profitable for them, or else they wouldn't do it, and don't for those that WORK for them to have that profit.
Why don't you just get over yourself. That old fake news is getting tiresome. There was nothing to do math on, and even at that it's not my job to document your wild statements like the one about half the country making minimum wage when, in fact, it is more like 2%.Quote:
I ask you to do the math yourself,
I thought we don't have to document our statements even though I did, but of course you ignored or dismissed it, so as usual missing the point yet again, on purpose it seems to engage in your usual nonsense BS excuses. Even after I acknowledge you were right about 2% being paid the minimum, you failed to acknowledge the ones who make a dollar above that not being much better.
You flunked math right? You had to because you darn sure can't do it.
The ole comprehension monster has reared its head again. You are supposed to document your own statements. There is no documentation above, so I'll just feel free to dismiss it.Quote:
I thought we don't have to document our statements even though I did,
Flunked math? Can't do it? Aren't you the guy who magically transformed 2% of the country making minimum wage in "half of the country"? I mean two percent become 25 times greater in your system of math, but then you want to question someone else's math? Really? See why I don't trust your statements and ask for documentation?
Of course the ones making a buck above minimum wage aren't much better off. That's kind of blindingly obvious and has not been a matter of disagreement at any time.
You have proven to be the greatest ducker of truth I've ever met, so I can only conclude you have had an awful lot of practice, as well as BS word salad responses. LMAO, as I feel free to dismiss you as ridicules. Please forgive me for bullying you!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I can always tell when you're cornered. You come out swinging with the usual load of nonsense. I'll say it again. You find some data that I've presented which is wrong and we can talk about it. You fussed about the media income data but, as it turned out, it was completely accurate and you didn't understand what a "median" was and so endlessly paraded around the supposed error that (gasp!!) half the country was making below the median. Or in another case, if I have tried to say that half the country is making min wage when it's really only two percent, then we can discuss it, though to your credit you have acknowledged your mistake. Otherwise, your protests are just so much hot air.Quote:
You have proven to be the greatest ducker of truth I've ever met, so I can only conclude you have had an awful lot of practice, as well as BS word salad responses. LMAO, as I feel free to dismiss you as ridicules. Please forgive me for bullying you!
Cornered? Naw, consider it ignoring and dismissing your position as disengenuous and irrelevant, and useful for only the entertainment value of practicing my rock throwing. Excuse me as I gather more rocks.
Like I said. I can always tell you're cornered when you can come up with nothing specific and end up having to refer to being disingenuous, irrelevant, and throwing rocks. Many words but no content.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Then take it for what it is, as a personal rebuke in which it was intended. Makes me no difference whatsoever how you take it or whatever game you think you're playing.
And again, nothing specific, but just these vague generalities about a "personal rebuke", playing games, and so forth. There is nothing specific because, as we both know, you don't have anything. If you did, you would bring it up, so I have no concern about your phony rebuke. I assure you that I am absolutely not playing games. I am dead serious and that's why I come across sometimes as abrasive. It's because these issues are important to me.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:24 PM. |