[jlisenbe]

Because, unlike government debt, it is secured by tangible assets, desirable assets that others are beating a path to our door to buy, in any case, our Gold mines continue to pump out value, our iron and coal are sold on the world stage, and we have untapped wealth, our education system is world class and we educate many overseas students. What this says is it is our wolrd view that will eventually prevail

In what way is the U.S. different? We export petroleum products and coal. Our universities are filled with foreign students. We have enough natural gas in the ground to last over a hundred years. Both countries have the same basic problem, a large liberal class that lives in a fantasy world and threatens to take over. We spend huge sums of money on dead-end green energy ideas. We pay people to sit at home when jobs are abundant and encourage irresponsible lifestyles that are destructive to the family unit. Those are the things that will bring us down.

[talaniman]

The main difference between Australia and the US economies is the Aussies want the rich to pay a fair share and that CAN fund tax breaks for middle and lower classes that actually will circulate funds through the whole economy, boosting overall profits. Our tax cuts sucks trillions from circulation, adds to the debt, which boosts rich guys, but does little for average Americans, except increase debts amid prices rising in needed commodities.

This dynamic only sets up to destroy any wage gains seen in a tight labor market.

[jlisenbe]

The main difference between Australia and the US economies is the Aussies want the rich to pay a fair share and that CAN fund tax breaks for middle and lower classes that actually will circulate funds through the whole economy, boosting overall profits. Our tax cuts sucks trillions from circulation, adds to the debt, which boosts rich guys, but does little for average Americans, except increase debts amid prices rising in needed commodities.

You want the rich to pay a fair share? Are you kidding? The top 5% of taxpayers already pay about 60% of income taxes. The bottom 50% pay basically nothing. How much fairer a system do you want? Do you really believe that stuff?

In what possible way do you believe that tax cuts suck "trillions from circulation"?

[talaniman]

60 corporations paid NO taxes and many filed for a refund and where do you think the debts by the dufus come from? You are lucky it was capped by law, which is exactly why corporate taxes rates were made permanent but ours was NOT. By my logic if the top 5% have whatever amount of the money, should they not pay that percent in taxes?

You really want to keep funding rich guy tax cuts with YOUR money? Do you really think tax havens and rich guy deductions trickle down to YOU? Review YOUR link to Australia's economic plan and READ that Australians agree with ME, and not you!

3. Making multinationals and big business pay their fair share

• $12.9 billion in tax liabilities raised from tax compliance activities since July 2016.
• New funding for the ATO to target tax avoidance by multinationals, big business and high‑wealth individuals

Maybe rich guys paying a fair share doesn't wipe out the debt TODAY, but the Australian model certainly does over time and pays for other important government functions and goals and delivers a tax cut for poor and middle class folks and small businesses.

[jlisenbe]

60 corporations paid NO taxes

There are 1.7 million corporations in our country. That means, by your figure, that 1,699,940 paid taxes and 60 did not.

You are lucky it was capped by law, which is exactly why corporate taxes rates were made permanent but ours was NOT.

I have no idea what you are talking about other than to say there is no such thing as a permanent tax rate. It can be changed in any year by a simple legislative act.

By my logic if the top 5% have whatever amount of the money, should they not pay that percent in taxes?

OK. If we go by your logic, the top 5% make about 35% of the income, so we would need to drastically lower their taxes. You need to stop drinking the liberal Kool Aid and start thinking for yourself.

You really want to keep funding rich guy tax cuts with YOUR money?

Already pointed out that it is actually the other way around. The bottom 50% pay basically nothing, so it is the wealthy who fund them.

Do you really think tax havens and rich guy deductions trickle down to YOU? Review YOUR link to Australia's economic plan and READ that Australians agree with ME, and not you!

For the 79th time, the top 5% pay 2/3 of the income tax. Even with all the deductions, they still pay 2/3 of all federal income tax. And why would I care what some small country thinks of us or worry as to who they might agree with? I like Australia well enough, but I'm not concerned as to whether or not they like what we do. Our government's job is to serve Americans first.

[paraclete]

For the 79th time, the top 5% pay 2/3 of the income tax. Even with all the deductions, they still pay 2/3 of all federal income tax. And why would I care what some small country thinks of us or worry as to who they might agree with? I like Australia well enough, but I'm not concerned as to whether or not they like what we do. Our government's job is to serve Americans first.

Spirious argument, Income tax is predicated on the idea that those who earn income should contribute. It is a liberal idea that tax rates should be progressive to discourage accumulation. Your government is indeed self serving, but does not serve the people. What happens in a smaller economy is that ideas are tested and proven. What do we think of you? Beyond comprehension. What a wasted opportunity. Every time a "leftist" government has been in control they have embarked on costly social reform, I think this might also be your experience. The difference here is that it seems to be enacted without stuffing it up pandering to the market because we are more engaged in the idea of consensus politics than you are. So ignore what has been successful somewhere else and remain in ignorance

[jlisenbe]

So ignore what has been successful somewhere else and remain in ignorance

A little humility would be in order. Sometimes I would love to see the U.S. cut our defense budget in half and tell the rest of the world to take care of itself. If we had done that during the Cold War the world would look much different and much worse with the Soviet Union still in business. It's easier when you are a small country and take care of no one other than yourself. When people need help, they don't turn to Australia.

So yeah, some of your criticism is warranted, but not your constant disparagement.

[paraclete]

A little humility would be in order. Sometimes I would love to see the U.S. cut our defense budget in half and tell the rest of the world to take care of itself. If we had done that during the Cold War the world would look much different and much worse with the Soviet Union still in business. It's easier when you are a small country and take care of no one other than yourself. When people need help, they don't turn to Australia.

So yeah, some of your criticism is warranted, but not your constant disparagement.

As I said reman in ignorance. Australia has stood beside you in conflicts where you are clearly wrong, where your european allies haven't. Other nations of the world know we are reliable, not fair weather friends. I saw a representation in a recent TV series that I thought accurate. Americans, great people but America something else. I feel the same way, so stop taking it personally

This is an example of what I mean

]https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/pa...50b7dec2fbe057

Instead of removing the weapons and therefore opportunity from the community, you teach children to hide in the certainity that some of them are going to face a murderous attack


[/FONT]

[jlisenbe]

As I said reman in ignorance.

Yes, Great Master.

[talaniman]

There are 1.7 million corporations in our country. That means, by your figure, that 1,699,940 paid taxes and 60 did not.
I have no idea what you are talking about other than to say there is no such thing as a permanent tax rate. It can be changed in any year by a simple legislative act.

I forget, with you I have to specify exactly as there are many types of corporations. Some are larger than others. I meant THESE.

OK. If we go by your logic, the top 5% make about 35% of the income, so we would need to drastically lower their taxes. You need to stop drinking the liberal Kool Aid and start thinking for yourself.

My logic says that NO taxes were paid on 80 billion bucks. Don't know what flavor Kool-Aid that is but it can't be good.

Already pointed out that it is actually the other way around. The bottom 50% pay basically nothing, so it is the wealthy who fund them.

Payroll taxes ain't taxes? Okay https://www.theguardian.com/business...-the-bottom-90 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth..._United_States

For the 79th time, the top 5% pay 2/3 of the income tax. Even with all the deductions, they still pay 2/3 of all federal income tax. And why would I care what some small country thinks of us or worry as to who they might agree with? I like Australia well enough, but I'm not concerned as to whether or not they like what we do. Our government's job is to serve Americans first.

Same theory different scale, Circulate the money from the bottom up. Goes right to the economy, and right to the top, just not as fast, but steadily.

[paraclete]

Yes, Great Master.

At last, you have found your place

[jlisenbe]

Payroll taxes ain't taxes?

Social security taxes do not fund the federal government. It's a completely different situation. You're grasping at straws rather than just admit you were wrong.

I forget, with you I have to specify exactly as there are many types of corporations. Some are larger than others. I meant THESE.

If a corporation makes a profit, what do you think happens with those profits?

My logic says that NO taxes were paid on 80 billion bucks. Don't know what flavor Kool-Aid that is but it can't be good.

Why are you changing the subject? You said that your "logic" required that "if the top 5% have whatever amount of the money, should they not pay that percent in taxes?" So are you saying that the top 5% should only pay 35% of the taxes instead of 64%? I'm just following your logic.

Same theory different scale, Circulate the money from the bottom up. Goes right to the economy, and right to the top, just not as fast, but steadily.

I'm not sure what you are asking for. The bottom half already pay basically nothing in federal income tax. The top 5% carry most of the burden. Am I in favor of taking money from wealthy people, most of whom are wealthy because they work hard and smart, and just handing it over to poor people so we can follow your strange economic theory? Well no, I'm not.

[jlisenbe]

At last, you have found your place

You are a citizen of a small country. You have no idea of what it means to carry the burdens the U.S. has to carry. Stop acting like you are some kind of world superpower. It's easy to sit in the safety and security the U.S. has provided for decades and cast stones.

[paraclete]

I'm not sure what you are asking for. The bottom half already pay basically nothing in federal income tax. The top 5% carry most of the burden. Am I in favor of taking money from wealthy people, most of whom are wealthy because they work hard and smart, and just handing it over to poor people so we can follow your strange economic theory? Well no, I'm not.

You have the wrong take on this, the wealthy reap the benefits and should pay for the protection society affords them. Also no one knows whether they will be wealthy tomorrow or not, so not helping the poor is downright disingenuous. The harder you work and the more you accumulate the more you need that protection and buy yourself a gun is not a good option. You have heard the phase but for the grace of God, go I. think on it a while

[jlisenbe]

You have the wrong take on this, the wealthy reap the benefits and should pay for the protection society affords them. Also no one knows whether they will be wealthy tomorrow or not, so not helping the poor is downright disingenuous. The harder you work and the more you accumulate the more you need that protection and buy yourself a gun is not a good option. You have heard the phase but for the grace of God, go I. think on it a while

I don't know what I have to do to get this to sink into your heads. The top 5% pay almost 2/3 of income taxes. That allows the bottom half to pay almost nothing. So the poor do not have to pay taxes. And you don't think that is helping the poor? I'm all for helping the poor, but when governments do it, yours or ours, it quickly degenerates into a "vote for me and I'll give you money" kind of situation. And then you wake up and find yourself 22 tril in debt. As for buying a gun for self protection, it's a great idea. You can easily lose your life waiting on police to arrive. If you want to strip yourselves of the ability to defend yourself and your family, then go ahead, but we choose not to. And I'll say it yet again. You forcing another person to help the poor is not charity, it's robbery.

[paraclete]

I don't know what I have to do to get this to sink into your heads. The top 5% pay almost 2/3 of income taxes. That allows the bottom half to pay almost nothing. So the poor do not have to pay taxes. And you don't think that is helping the poor? I'm all for helping the poor, but when governments do it, yours or ours, it quickly degenerates into a "vote for me and I'll give you money" kind of situation. And then you wake up and find yourself 22 tril in debt. As for buying a gun for self protection, it's a great idea. You can easily lose your life waiting on police to arrive. If you want to strip yourselves of the ability to defend yourself and your family, then go ahead, but we choose not to. And I'll say it yet again. You forcing another person to help the poor is not charity, it's robbery.

You still don't get it, people pay tax because they have income, the means to pay. I agree that taxation is theft but if you elect a government taxes come with it otherwise you will have extortion by the police force, but then you have that too. Instead of bleating like shorn sheep you should be lifting the poor with employment so they can join the ranks of tax payers

You are a citizen of a small country. You have no idea of what it means to carry the burdens the U.S. has to carry. Stop acting like you are some kind of world superpower. It's easy to sit in the safety and security the U.S. has provided for decades and cast stones.

My opinion is no less valid. We don't want to be a superpower, but we are are a power in our part of the world. We don't want to lord it over others, but we too have to project power to keep China out of the small nations of the Pacific. Don't tell us we have no idea of your burdens when we have stood beside you in battle. You were once a leader now you are a despot

[jlisenbe]

Just continue to blissfully sleep under the protection of the most generous despot in history

[talaniman]

Running a deficit to give the rich a windfall is legalized stealing.

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/01/de...ding-tax-line/

Why do these individual tax cuts expire in the law? Republicans say they expect a future Congress will extend those cuts, rather than allowing taxes for many to increase. But in order to pass their tax bill through budget reconciliation, a process requiring only a majority vote in the Senate, Republican lawmakers could not add more than $1.5 trillion to the deficit over 10 years. Nor could they have a bill that added to the deficit beyond that 10-year window.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget calls the expiring cuts “gimmicks.” It notes that “the ‘easy’ options” for Republicans to make the final bill meet those requirements were to have some of the tax cuts expire — and that’s what GOP lawmakers did. While the final bill costs an estimated $1.46 trillion over 10 years, CRFB says the actual cost could end up being $2.2 trillion, when these sunsetting tax cuts are actually extended.

Generous my arse!

[jlisenbe]

Running a deficit to give the rich a windfall is legalized stealing.

I am as against Trump's deficits as I was against Obama's. They are both irresponsible in that regard, but at least Trump has a very healthy economy.

You do realize that your link concluded that democrats have been lying about the Trump tax cuts?

"The Republican tax plan was signed into law just last month, and Democrats already have a well-worn, and misleading, talking point about it: 83 percent of the tax cuts go to the wealthiest 1 percent."

Now when the top 5% pay 2/3 of the taxes, and the bottom 50% pay about nothing, then how do you enact tax cuts that will benefit the bottom 50%?

[paraclete]

then how do you enact tax cuts that will benefit the bottom 50%?

You remove them from the system, then you can deal with inequity in the system