Republicans Push $269 Billion Handout For Milliona

[n david]

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

It adds to the debt. Both parties refuse to cut spending at all. How is that not at the expense of the majority?

Are taxes raised on the majority? In fact, haven't taxes also been cut for the middle class? The answer to the first is no, and the answer to the second is yes.

Spending is what adds to the deficit, not cutting taxes.

The reason the deficit increased under Reagan is because of the increased amount of spending -- education, defense, farm and foreign aid etc. Liberals like to point to his tax cuts, but if Reagan had cut taxes and not doubled the spending on education, not increased foreign aid by $12 billion, not had a 140% increase in farm aid -- the spending is what caused the Reagan deficits, not his tax cuts.

The reason the deficit increased under GWB is due to the same -- Medicare prescription drug expansion, defense, wars. Also, especially towards the end of his presidency, the recession caused a large increase in the debt.

[Originalist]

Why not eliminate ALL Federal taxes on ALL forms of income, both corporate and private? What business is it of the Federal Government to know how much money someone makes?

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

David please correct any of my assumptions with facts.

Typical liberal thinking. You made assumptions and then expect someone else to prove you wrong. How about you prove your assumptions are correct, instead?

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

Say whatever you want about Clinton, the economy was good. We had a surplus.

Only on paper, there was no true surplus. And while Clinton may not have been as liberal with the economics as Obama is being, it was primarily due to a Republican held congress keeping him in check.

Also, don't forget that the "dot-com" bubble burst under Clinton's presidency. I'm saying he was to blame, just saying that not everything was sunshine and rainbows under the Clinton's.

It's ironic that Bush inherited that legacy from Clinton (we were already in a decline towards a recession before the Sep. 11th attacks occurred), yet you never heard him whine about what he had to deal with. Obambi, on the other hand, whined constantly for years about the "mess" he inherited from Bush.

[Walks_in_islam]

We should be honest. Money supply is finite. Therefore accumulation of wealth by the rich is in fact at the expense of the poor.

[shazeep]

i still see accumulation by the rich at the expense of the poor, but under Zirp the money supply has--temporarily, at least--become effectively infinite. It is just becoming more and more removed from the real economy. Banks now are saying that they don't want depositors, and don't want to make main st. loans. The chasm between rich and poor, financial sector v main st., is in a bubble. This is going to have huge repercussions on the poor and working poor--which i think is the idea. With the CA drought, produce is about to double again, prolly; but the rich don't care, of course.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Why not eliminate ALL Federal taxes on ALL forms of income, both corporate and private? What business is it of the Federal Government to know how much money someone makes?

none whatsoever--and this is posited as a chief reason for ww1; to justify an income tax. i just read a treatise on 1913, thriving, pre-tax America.

i think something that has not really sunk in yet is that, with +- 100 million americans not working, the tax collections are going to be down a lot; but they apparently don't really care about tax collections anymore, either; except as a way to turn more middle-class people into working poor.

[deacon blues]

How many jobs have the Hilton's created? How do people get rich off of the poor? How many poor people buy cars? How many poor build homes or buy a home? How many poor travel and stay in hotels? How many poor buy appliances and manufactured goods?

If they poor---they HAVE LITTLE TO NO MONEY---how does one get rich off of people who have nothing?

So illogical. So unreasonable. So moronic.

Yet the brainwashed libs of this world parrot the old class warfare rhetoric. It's stupid. Tax the rich. Yeah. Tax the wealth creators and the inventors of new products and medicines and technologies that lift people up, create jobs, and pull people out of poverty.

What does the government do with that money? Waste waste waste. Here's a fine example; the state of New York invested $622k in job creation and created 76 jobs in a program last year. They spent $53million advertising it. Hmmmm. $755K per job. That's how effective taxpayer dollars are in the hands of government.

That much money in the hands of an entrepreneur? Many many more jobs and efficiency.

But that's too logical. It's easier for some to embrace the liberal mantra for the past 100 years.

[Walks_in_islam]

One gets rich off the poor like this. It's easy to do it.

1. Reduce corporate income taxes at the expense of raising personal income taxes
2. Reduce capital gains taxes at the expense of raising personal income taxes
3. Incorporate companies that provide basic needs (food, healthcare, utilities, insurance) as public companies who operate with a goal to maximize value for their shareholders
4. Legislate mandatory participation in the above

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/04...tes-1916-2010/

Years ago it was unheard of for insurance companies to issue stocks and pay shareholders with premiums collected for the purpose of covering losses. Now, it is unheard of them not to. So if I want to get rich off the poor I will force them by legislation to not only pay the premium that covers their losses, I will tack on what I need to give myself and my shareholders a nice profit.

Do you get it or do you need more examples? We have traded corporate and capital gains taxes for personal income taxes encouraging companies to maximize profits by using cheaper labor thus paying an overall lower tax rate.

Our greatest growth and strongest middle class occurred when these policies were reversed. So says the data. The biggest outcry when this is brought up is not from the people, it is from corporations.

The last way to get rich off the poor is to pay a few cents an hour to them in some overseas location and then bring the products tax-free back to the US to sell them at fantastic profits. In addition to the above tax policy deficiencies, those products need a nice levy when they cross our borders which will either encourage products to be made in the US or will halt the transfer of wealth to countries like China. The US has the consumers, which gives the US the upper hand. We need to use that upper hand.

[shazeep]

i think this hand is now exposed, and has become irrelevant to the financial juggernaut which grew from it. Fascism has obviously become a global market.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

One gets rich off the poor like this. It's easy to do it.

1. Reduce corporate income taxes at the expense of raising personal income taxes
2. Reduce capital gains taxes at the expense of raising personal income taxes
3. Incorporate companies that provide basic needs (food, healthcare, utilities, insurance) as public companies who operate with a goal to maximize value for their shareholders
4. Legislate mandatory participation in the above

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/04...tes-1916-2010/

Years ago it was unheard of for insurance companies to issue stocks and pay shareholders with premiums collected for the purpose of covering losses. Now, it is unheard of them not to. So if I want to get rich off the poor I will force them by legislation to not only pay the premium that covers their losses, I will tack on what I need to give myself and my shareholders a nice profit.

Do you get it or do you need more examples? We have traded corporate and capital gains taxes for personal income taxes encouraging companies to maximize profits by using cheaper labor thus paying an overall lower tax rate.

Our greatest growth and strongest middle class occurred when these policies were reversed. So says the data. The biggest outcry when this is brought up is not from the people, it is from corporations.

The last way to get rich off the poor is to pay a few cents an hour to them in some overseas location and then bring the products tax-free back to the US to sell them at fantastic profits. In addition to the above tax policy deficiencies, those products need a nice levy when they cross our borders which will either encourage products to be made in the US or will halt the transfer of wealth to countries like China. The US has the consumers, which gives the US the upper hand. We need to use that upper hand.

Your first two points are moot since the bottom half of Americans pay no income taxes at all.

Publicly held companies depend on shareholders investments to grow their companies, research a develop new products, manufacture more goods, hire more people, create more jobs. Shareholders don't sit around receiving something they aren't entitled to. They put their own money at risk in order to get a return on their investment. Many shareholders lose money as well as earn money.

Look, communism failed. Socialism is a failure---look at the mess it got Greece, Spain, and Italy in. In spite of our confiscatory tax policies, in spite of having the highest corporate tax in the world, in spite of liberals continuously fighting against a free market---America still thrives as the best economy in the world!

Yet we can do better. Certainly taxing the estates of people who have worked hard, invested, won/lost, built a business or company, paid millions in taxes already only to get taxed again is at best stupid and at worst immoral.