- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 79,903
- Reaction score
- 20,981
- Location
- I love your hate.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
And everyone in the country pays the exact same percentage in income tax then. I paid 35% on everything I earned over 250,000 dollars. It equaled out to 0, but I did pay the correct percentage...
Thanks for arguing that our progressive income tax structure is completely fair...
The most efficient way to raise revenue is to raise people's incomes and reduce unemployment. More people with jobs = more taxpayers.
Didn't even break a sweat on that one.
I'll even give you a concrete example of something we can do. If we were to open up drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska, and do away with silly regulations on hydrofracking in the Marcellus Shale, we would create hundreds of thousands of high paying jobs, infuse trillions of dollars of wealth in to the economy, lower business costs across the board, and have more revenue than we know what to do with... all without having to increase taxes one penny.
"If you wanna protect the environment, go recycle that Coke can. Let the rest of us litter in peace!!" :2mad:
Such a concept is exogenous of the available policy tools that government has at its disposal. If there were a "magic jobs button" i guarantee you that it would have been pressed (repeatedly) by now.
Because it did not address my statement.
The notion that regulation is killing employment opportunities has already been snuffed out. It is obvious to anyone with an objective pair of eyes that our employment shortfall is due to a lack of aggregate demand (which negatively impacts short to medium term investment). If you want to actually address my statement, then by all means go for it. But attempting to interject the notion that pent up supply is a drag on employment (via over-regulation) is nonsense.
Such a concept is exogenous of the available policy tools that government has at its disposal. If there were a "magic jobs button" i guarantee you that it would have been pressed (repeatedly) by now.
No, what he wants is for a major obama slurper to quit being dishonest and put his money where his mouth is (ie firmly planted on obama's posterior)
This is exactly the type of sentiment which so divides the left and the right. Anytime a rightie says something like this you can just visualize all the other warriors of the right standing up to salute ramrod straight and saying YEAH!!!!!! Those of us on the left progressive think it is so silly and stupid because one person writing a check does not even rise to the level of a half-assed substitute for a national tax policy which works for the entire nation.
I will never understand why anyone on the right thinks one person writing a check is a solution for a nation.
Doesn't this come down to, "Do you believe by raising the capital gains tax we will bring more revenue into the Federal Government from this tax?"
Hmm, are you going to argue that the price on products is not driven up by regulatory burden?
Because last time I checked, when you drive price up, demand goes down if everything else stays the same.
Maybe we have a lack of agregate demand because we have higher prices driven by regulatory and tax burdens built into products. Which could also be argued to be driving down wages because of the amount of cost going out per employee, not just their wages, but the tax burden, SS burden, rising disability insurance, mandated health insurance costs...
Im going to argue that the increased tax and regulatory burden (including Obama care) is depressing wages, depressing profits and inhibiting hiring, investment and this is pushing towards less available consumer demand. Hence, oversupply.
The best question IMO, "Is raising taxes, in any capacity, a long term solution to the budget issue?"
Rich guys like Buffet just drive you guys crazy, don't they? Instead of lining up behind all the other fat cats taking their tax write-offs at the expense of the rest of us, they tell it exactly like it is. Given a choice between fat Christie and Buffet, I'll take Buffet.
what I find amusing is how many ne'er do wells and slackers worship BUffett thinking his position is actually based on a desire to help them.
He does this purely to gain more power and influence. You've been played. And he is a class warrior-he represents the uber wealthy who wants to screw over the upper middle class and the somewhat wealthy
I don't see why not. My comment stems from the relationship between savings rates among different income demographics, and how that impacts growth given different effective rate differentials.
In that case, I agree. Eliminating certain exemptions before raising the base rate is, to me, the tax-based equivalent of psychological pricing. People are more likely to adjust political and spending habits when the rate itself is altered than when...say...mortgage interest...is no longer exempt.
The best question IMO, "Is raising taxes, in any capacity, a long term solution to the budget issue?"
Of course it is! Effective taxation is near its historic low. If high taxes is what discourages growth, why has growth been stubbornly anemic when the nations tax burden is relatively low?
Because the government has created so much insecurity in the private sector.
We've all heard the arguments: Regulations are strangling U.S. businesses. It's been a staple in the Republican playbook for years.
But a funny thing happened last week. The American Sustainable Business Council, the Main Street Alliance and the Small Business Majority released a survey blaming the stagnant economy not on onerous regulations but on weak consumer demand.
"The level of government regulation came in [way below] weak demand. When asked what they believe would do the most to create jobs, the majority cited eliminating incentives for employers to move jobs overseas. Next was cutting taxes and then increasing consumer purchasing power. Reducing regulations ranked fifth on their list, behind improving infrastructure," the survey's executive summary said.
The Club for Growth, which describes itself as a national network of thousands of pro-growth Americans, gives Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney high marks for his efforts to reduce regulations in Massachusetts while he was governor, noting the Legislature often quashed his initiatives.
Class envy is such an ugly thing. It's important because we should compare apples to apples.
Rich guys like Buffet just drive you guys crazy, don't they? Instead of lining up behind all the other fat cats taking their tax write-offs at the expense of the rest of us, they tell it exactly like it is. Given a choice between fat Christie and Buffet, I'll take Buffet.
Guys like Turtle - the faux rich - consider Buffet a traitor to his class. In their eyes, that makes him worse than a commoner with little money. They looked at FDR the same way and still have not their hatred for him.
What's your annual salary, Mr. Chief of Staff to a legislature lizard? Mid six figures? Probably just shy of it, at the worst?
Of course it is! Effective taxation is near its historic low. If high taxes is what discourages growth, why has growth been stubbornly anemic when the nations tax burden is relatively low?
Not that I care much about what that fat chump Christie thinks, but... who is Buffet supposed to write his check to? It's not like the IRS has a department open for citizens who want to pay more taxes.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?