This question is for the liberals on this site: If we were to
raise taxes on the rich tomorrow would it end there? I don’t think it would.
The govt would keep frivolously spending the new found money and after a while
they would have to raise taxes again. This is why raising taxes isn’t the
solution. Cutting spending is the solution. If we cut spending tomorrow we will
still get the taxes we are getting today.
I’ve arrived at the conclusion that the fiscally liberal
people in this forum, and everywhere else in the country for that matter, are
strictly for taxing rich people because of social justice. It goes something
like this: “You have stuff that I don’t have so you shouldn’t have that stuff
either.” We have all heard the term before “Deficits and the debt doesn’t
matter.” If that is the case then why tax rich people more?
The reason I say that is this. There is no way anyone could
possibly think that taxing rich people will help the debt. It won’t put a dent
in it. So let’s eliminate that thought.
This question is for the liberals on this site: If we were to
raise taxes on the rich tomorrow would it end there? I don’t think it would.
The govt would keep frivolously spending the new found money and after a while
they would have to raise taxes again. This is why raising taxes isn’t the
solution. Cutting spending is the solution. If we cut spending tomorrow we will
still get the taxes we are getting today.
I’ve arrived at the conclusion that the fiscally liberal
people in this forum, and everywhere else in the country for that matter, are
strictly for taxing rich people because of social justice. It goes something
like this: “You have stuff that I don’t have so you shouldn’t have that stuff
either.” We have all heard the term before “Deficits and the debt doesn’t
matter.” If that is the case then why tax rich people more?
The reason I say that is this. There is no way anyone could
possibly think that taxing rich people will help the debt. It won’t put a dent
in it. So let’s eliminate that thought.
Having the government run something is a disaster: Social
Security, Medicare, Amtrak, Post Office, Welfare. Most recently we had the
stimulus (unemployment is worse), Solyndra, auto bailout, etc. Obamacare is going
to be a nightmare once it is implemented.
If a private sector company was this incompetent they would
go out of business. That is why they make budgets, trim wasteful spending, and
maximize their profit. Individuals risk their own money in the private sector
(except when you get a govt bailout). The government risks other people’s
money. They have no incentive to make a budget or trim wasteful spending. Their
answer is to tax the rich more. And when they start spending more and more
their answer is to tax the rich again.
I can tell a lot of you are smart. I’m sure a lot of the
President’s administration, him as well, could go on Jeopardy and kick ass. I’m
being sincere. No patronizing. Why, in my opinion, are you guys lacking in this
economic theory? I think the reaason is social justice.
Having the government run something is a disaster: Social
Security, Medicare, Amtrak, Post Office, Welfare. Most recently we had the
stimulus (unemployment is worse), Solyndra, auto bailout, etc. Obamacare is going
to be a nightmare once it is implemented.
If a private sector company was this incompetent they would
go out of business. That is why they make budgets, trim wasteful spending, and
maximize their profit. Individuals risk their own money in the private sector
(except when you get a govt bailout). The government risks other people’s
money. They have no incentive to make a budget or trim wasteful spending. Their
answer is to tax the rich more. And when they start spending more and more
their answer is to tax the rich again.
I can tell a lot of you are smart. I’m sure a lot of the
President’s administration, him as well, could go on Jeopardy and kick ass. I’m
being sincere. No patronizing. Why, in my opinion, are you guys lacking in this
economic theory? I think the reaason is social justice.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: I think we need to have both right now -- new taxes and significant spending cuts. It would get us closer to our break even point faster, which is really the goal. Once we get there we can work on further reducing our obligations to help alleviated the overall tax burden on the populace.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: I think we need to have both right now -- new taxes and significant spending cuts. It would get us closer to our break even point faster, which is really the goal. Once we get there we can work on further reducing our obligations to help alleviated the overall tax burden on the populace.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: I think we need to have both right now -- new taxes and significant spending cuts. It would get us closer to our break even point faster, which is really the goal. Once we get there we can work on further reducing our obligations to help alleviated the overall tax burden on the populace.
That is the goal. If the govt could get a balanced budget started and tell us "this is what we need to cut and this is what we need to raise taxes to then I am for that." Just blindly raising taxes on the rich won't do anything.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: I think we need to have both right now -- new taxes and significant spending cuts. It would get us closer to our break even point faster, which is really the goal. Once we get there we can work on further reducing our obligations to help alleviated the overall tax burden on the populace.
That is the goal. If the govt could get a balanced budget started and tell us "this is what we need to cut and this is what we need to raise taxes to then I am for that." Just blindly raising taxes on the rich won't do anything.
And BTW - its great to think that the "free market' will take care of deregulation of everything. But it doesnt work. People dont behave well when there are no rules.
This is short term thinking for long term humanity.
I never met a hater better than me. I am on twitter
And BTW - its great to think that the "free market' will take care of deregulation of everything. But it doesnt work. People dont behave well when there are no rules.
This is short term thinking for long term humanity.
Look at the budget, and tell me SPECIFICALLY what you would cut, and what that would amount to.
How about just FAIR taxes on the rich and corporations? How about FAIR taxes on religious organizations?
Lets start there. Fair taxes (defined as paying equal share) is not raising taxes.
Significant reduction in spending can really only be attained if you cut (pretty significantly) from the defense budget, Social Security, and Medicare, which I believe are by far the three largest federal obligations. People don't want to acknowledge this reality but the numbers don't lie.
Look at the budget, and tell me SPECIFICALLY what you would cut, and what that would amount to.
How about just FAIR taxes on the rich and corporations? How about FAIR taxes on religious organizations?
Lets start there. Fair taxes (defined as paying equal share) is not raising taxes.
Significant reduction in spending can really only be attained if you cut (pretty significantly) from the defense budget, Social Security, and Medicare, which I believe are by far the three largest federal obligations. People don't want to acknowledge this reality but the numbers don't lie.
And isn't the amount of "fair" taxes, no matter how you determine it, as a whole set in large part based upon the debts of the government and the money they need to expend to keep the beast running? Why not reduce the tax burden on everyone but having some real discussions about significantly reducing spending in those three areas previously listed.
And isn't the amount of "fair" taxes, no matter how you determine it, as a whole set in large part based upon the debts of the government and the money they need to expend to keep the beast running? Why not reduce the tax burden on everyone but having some real discussions about significantly reducing spending in those three areas previously listed.
And BTW - its great to think that the "free market' will take care of deregulation of everything. But it doesnt work. People dont behave well when there are no rules.
no doubt the last few years have proven this. fuckin financial institutions went nuts with deregulation.
And BTW - its great to think that the "free market' will take care of deregulation of everything. But it doesnt work. People dont behave well when there are no rules.
no doubt the last few years have proven this. fuckin financial institutions went nuts with deregulation.
The difference between liberals and conservatives is this and there ain't no getting 'round it: Liberals assume money generated by individuals and businesses belongs to the govt and the govt allows individuals and businesses to keep some. Conservatives assume money generated by individuals and businesses belongs to them and they give some back to the govt in the form of taxes.
Liberals will sometimes make the argument that because businesses and even religion (Check out Van's 218 reasons to vote for Obama) use govt services (I assume highway, water, etc) then they should pay taxes for that. Someone is already paying for those services. Who are the people paying for those services?
The difference between liberals and conservatives is this and there ain't no getting 'round it: Liberals assume money generated by individuals and businesses belongs to the govt and the govt allows individuals and businesses to keep some. Conservatives assume money generated by individuals and businesses belongs to them and they give some back to the govt in the form of taxes.
Liberals will sometimes make the argument that because businesses and even religion (Check out Van's 218 reasons to vote for Obama) use govt services (I assume highway, water, etc) then they should pay taxes for that. Someone is already paying for those services. Who are the people paying for those services?
And BTW - its great to think that the "free market' will take care of deregulation of everything. But it doesnt work. People dont behave well when there are no rules.
This is short term thinking for long term humanity.
Name me two rules that we currently have in place, that keep you, vanzack, from harming society. You claim that without rules, you would behave badly, so it should be easy to list two laws that protect me from your potential bad behaviour
And BTW - its great to think that the "free market' will take care of deregulation of everything. But it doesnt work. People dont behave well when there are no rules.
This is short term thinking for long term humanity.
Name me two rules that we currently have in place, that keep you, vanzack, from harming society. You claim that without rules, you would behave badly, so it should be easy to list two laws that protect me from your potential bad behaviour
And BTW - its great to think that the "free market' will take care of deregulation of everything. But it doesnt work. People dont behave well when there are no rules.
This is short term thinking for long term humanity.
Simple concept that seems to fly over the heads of many.
I point most of the ills we are dealing with directly at the corporations including our current political quagmire.
Government is an easy target, very general and simplistic, but when you find out WHY government is flawed you can usually trace it back to money and corruption..political influence purchased by what groups?
The money and power is held by one group and that group holds the power and control.
And BTW - its great to think that the "free market' will take care of deregulation of everything. But it doesnt work. People dont behave well when there are no rules.
This is short term thinking for long term humanity.
Simple concept that seems to fly over the heads of many.
I point most of the ills we are dealing with directly at the corporations including our current political quagmire.
Government is an easy target, very general and simplistic, but when you find out WHY government is flawed you can usually trace it back to money and corruption..political influence purchased by what groups?
The money and power is held by one group and that group holds the power and control.
Simple concept that seems to fly over the heads of many.
I point most of the ills we are dealing with directly at the corporations including our current political quagmire.
Government is an easy target, very general and simplistic, but when you find out WHY government is flawed you can usually trace it back to money and corruption..political influence purchased by what groups?
The money and power is held by one group and that group holds the power and control.
Maybe i'm just stoned as a kite, but i think i agree with what you are saying here. So, what next?
Simple concept that seems to fly over the heads of many.
I point most of the ills we are dealing with directly at the corporations including our current political quagmire.
Government is an easy target, very general and simplistic, but when you find out WHY government is flawed you can usually trace it back to money and corruption..political influence purchased by what groups?
The money and power is held by one group and that group holds the power and control.
Maybe i'm just stoned as a kite, but i think i agree with what you are saying here. So, what next?
Agree with alot of stuff here by all you guys & wish we could just piecemeal some of it together but with the almost childish, divisive partisanship these days, it's akin to impossible. Beyond that, some of the complexity that BE is always talkin about would limit the major good stuff from happenin (at least anytime soon) even if they could or would get together on some structural legislation which is likely to never happen anyway. Too much money, power & prestige in play & moreso nowadays than ever - on both sides.
Agree with alot of stuff here by all you guys & wish we could just piecemeal some of it together but with the almost childish, divisive partisanship these days, it's akin to impossible. Beyond that, some of the complexity that BE is always talkin about would limit the major good stuff from happenin (at least anytime soon) even if they could or would get together on some structural legislation which is likely to never happen anyway. Too much money, power & prestige in play & moreso nowadays than ever - on both sides.
Well lets look back at the golden Clinton years. Taxes was way higher back then, but the fiscal house was in order.
Good point & of course the 'pubs like to give credit to Newt & the repub controlled congress. And if that's seen thru, then it's the high tech bubble which at least has some credibility. Truth is taxes wouldn't need to be raised if all the loopholes & havens for large corps (& the super wealthy) were eliminated along with some major deductions. But that's not likely to happen so it's insane for all these huge, line-in-the-sand philosophical arguments to be going on about just going back to Clinton rates on only over $250K or $1M while the repubs scream about the debt. Like Kapono said, we need both - major cuts in spending & higher taxes on the wealthiest & Obama shouldn't need to be talking about what is "fair" or using the term, "fair share".
Well lets look back at the golden Clinton years. Taxes was way higher back then, but the fiscal house was in order.
Good point & of course the 'pubs like to give credit to Newt & the repub controlled congress. And if that's seen thru, then it's the high tech bubble which at least has some credibility. Truth is taxes wouldn't need to be raised if all the loopholes & havens for large corps (& the super wealthy) were eliminated along with some major deductions. But that's not likely to happen so it's insane for all these huge, line-in-the-sand philosophical arguments to be going on about just going back to Clinton rates on only over $250K or $1M while the repubs scream about the debt. Like Kapono said, we need both - major cuts in spending & higher taxes on the wealthiest & Obama shouldn't need to be talking about what is "fair" or using the term, "fair share".
Lets close loopholes for corporations AND people that don't pay taxes should not get returns. I'm talking people that don't make enough to pay taxes but maybe have alot of kids or something that would allow them to get a significant return.
Lets close loopholes for corporations AND people that don't pay taxes should not get returns. I'm talking people that don't make enough to pay taxes but maybe have alot of kids or something that would allow them to get a significant return.
Having the government run something is a disaster: Social
Security, Medicare, Amtrak, Post Office, Welfare. Most recently we had the
stimulus (unemployment is worse), Solyndra, auto bailout, etc. Obamacare is going
to be a nightmare once it is implemented.
If a private sector company was this incompetent they would
go out of business. That is why they make budgets, trim wasteful spending, and
maximize their profit. Individuals risk their own money in the private sector
(except when you get a govt bailout). The government risks other people’s
money. They have no incentive to make a budget or trim wasteful spending. Their
answer is to tax the rich more. And when they start spending more and more
their answer is to tax the rich again.
I can tell a lot of you are smart. I’m sure a lot of the
President’s administration, him as well, could go on Jeopardy and kick ass. I’m
being sincere. No patronizing. Why, in my opinion, are you guys lacking in this
economic theory? I think the reaason is social justice.
For some reason this doesn't seem completely true to me.
Having the government run something is a disaster: Social
Security, Medicare, Amtrak, Post Office, Welfare. Most recently we had the
stimulus (unemployment is worse), Solyndra, auto bailout, etc. Obamacare is going
to be a nightmare once it is implemented.
If a private sector company was this incompetent they would
go out of business. That is why they make budgets, trim wasteful spending, and
maximize their profit. Individuals risk their own money in the private sector
(except when you get a govt bailout). The government risks other people’s
money. They have no incentive to make a budget or trim wasteful spending. Their
answer is to tax the rich more. And when they start spending more and more
their answer is to tax the rich again.
I can tell a lot of you are smart. I’m sure a lot of the
President’s administration, him as well, could go on Jeopardy and kick ass. I’m
being sincere. No patronizing. Why, in my opinion, are you guys lacking in this
economic theory? I think the reaason is social justice.
For some reason this doesn't seem completely true to me.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.