Whovian
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,153
- Reaction score
- 2,250
- Location
- dimensionally transcendental
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
If I do not have a fundemental right to every dollar I own, then who does? You?If you think that you have some fundamental right to every dollar you own, that's at least a philosophical difference. (You're wrong, but at least I can understand where you're coming from.)
If I do not have a fundemental right to every dollar I own, then who does? You?
I just posted the statistics showing that tax revenue did indeed decrease following the Bush tax cuts (and to a lesser extent, following the Reagan tax cuts). Try to keep up.
Cool. I find your Gordon Gekko mentality to be disgusting. (However, I'm not so partisan that I would attribute your despicable worldview to ALL conservatives.)
Nobody, its all at least partially shared since it was a joint effort in making it.
I just posted the statistics showing that tax revenue did indeed decrease following the Bush tax cuts (and to a lesser extent, following the Reagan tax cuts). Try to keep up.
Cool. I find your Gordon Gekko mentality to be disgusting. (However, I'm not so partisan that I would attribute your despicable worldview to ALL conservatives.)
What I posted were actual dollars at the time and tax revenue to the U.S. Govt. almost doubled after the Reagan 10-10-5% tax cuts. How can that happen? I understand that the govt. has to be funded but today that means 3.8 trillion dollars and is outside the role of our govt. established by the Founders.
Conservative said:There is nothing dishonest about my claim that the tax rate cuts led to more taxpayers and thus higher tax revenue to the govt. It isn't crap as it is substantiated by the U.S. Treasury and the IRS. Your evidence is typical liberal spin and is nothing more than an attempt to convince people that the govt. needs the revenue more than the American people and that tax cuts are an expense to the govt.
Conservative said:I would worry more about your credibility than mine as mine is backed by actual data that matters, U.S. Treasury and the IRS.
You did not help me make it. Why should you get any of it?
if the parasite label fits wear it. your existence alone is not a just claim on the wealth of others and I suspect I give more to charity than you do and it is well known that rich liberals give far less than rich conservatives. libs tend to believe that voting for socialism fulfills their charitable duties.
You did not help me make it. Why should you get any of it?
TurtleDude Standard Post #3: "Everyone pay attention to me! Look at how rich I am!"
Get some new material.
Oh, really? Where in the Constitution does it say that?
I am a part of an advanced society and I help to maintain that society. The existence of this advanced society created the situation that allowed you to make that dollar. Therefore I am at least partially responsible for you earning it.
TurtleDude Standard Post #3: "Everyone pay attention to me! Look at how rich I am!"
Get some new material.
Again, here are the U.S. Treasury Data which unfortunately do not confirm your claim. The Bush tax rate cuts went into effect in July 2003
Conservative said:Now I am still waiting for you to explain how tax revenue increased AFTER the Bush tax cuts and stop posting what you think they should have been. That flies in the face of logic and common sense because you cannot prove predictions.
actually, given that the rich are also the more productive, they have helped to maintain that society far more than someone who (all else being equal) makes far less. if anything, this logic is reason to have a regressive tax system.
jealous much?
TurtleDude said:I mentioned nothing about my wealth just that I suspect I give more than you do. try again
actually, given that the rich are also the more productive, they have helped to maintain that society far more than someone who (all else being equal) makes far less. if anything, this logic is reason to have a regressive tax system.
Not true, the govenment protects the wealthy far more that they protect the poor.
You are going to have to provide evidence that the rich are more productive and its is not a result of the money they control.
Kandahar;1059054638]Why in the world would you post in the actual dollars at the time, without controlling for inflation? Just because the government takes in more dollars from one year to the next doesn't mean that they actually took in more revenue. Jesus Christ, take a freshman economics class and learn what inflation is.
I see. Controlling for inflation in statistical comparisons of revenue over time = Liberal spin. Got it. :roll:
Actually it's not. I posted the correct data, controlled for inflation. You posted some random **** including "Taxes on production and imports" that was completely unrelated to income tax cuts...and you didn't even control for inflation.
Yeah, you're a statistical genius. Rock on
1. if they are utiilizing their wealth to increase the productivity and strength of society, then that is them being more productive. they are free, if they so wished, to withdraw all that money from the bank and merely stuff it into mattresses. the attempt to split labour income and capital income creates a false dichotomy; both represent an individual utilizing his resources.
2. how the heck do you think they got that money in the first place?
You are going to have to provide evidence that the rich are more productive and its is not a result of the money they control.
1. if they are utiilizing their wealth to increase the productivity and strength of society, then that is them being more productive. they are free, if they so wished, to withdraw all that money from the bank and merely stuff it into mattresses. the attempt to split labour income and capital income creates a false dichotomy; both represent an individual utilizing his resources.
2. how do you think they got that money in the first place? using the new "above $250,000" metric that the Administration seems to have come up with; those people are generally small business owners.
80% of America's Millionaires are First-Generation... most of them are self-made businessmen and women...
It is evidence of their money being productive. Theres a huge difference here.
This still doesn't show that they have an increased contribution to society, only that they made more money. :shrug:
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?