• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Angry Rich

Gibberish

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
1,269
Location
San Diego, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Anger is sweeping America...No, I’m not talking about the Tea Partiers. I’m talking about the rich.

Young people can’t find jobs; laid-off 50-somethings fear that they’ll never work again. Yet if you want to find real political rage — the kind of rage that makes people compare President Obama to Hitler, or accuse him of treason — you won’t find it among these suffering Americans. You’ll find it instead among the very privileged, people who don’t have to worry about losing their jobs, their homes, or their health insurance, but who are outraged, outraged, at the thought of paying modestly higher taxes.

When the billionaire Stephen Schwarzman compared an Obama proposal to the Nazi invasion of Poland, the proposal [he was lobbying against] would have closed a tax loophole that specifically benefits fund managers like him.

Republicans are pushing the line that raising taxes at the top would hurt small businesses, but their hearts don’t really seem in it. Instead, it has become common to hear vehement denials that people making $400,000 or $500,000 a year are rich. I mean, look at the expenses of people in that income class — the property taxes they have to pay on their expensive houses, the cost of sending their kids to elite private schools, and so on. Why, they can barely make ends meet.

And when the tax fight is over, one way or another, you can be sure that the people currently defending the incomes of the elite will go back to demanding cuts in Social Security and aid to the unemployed. America must make hard choices, they’ll say; we all have to be willing to make sacrifices.

But when they say “we,” they mean “you.” Sacrifice is for the little people.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/opinion/20krugman.html?_r=2


I for one have no problem with letting the temporary tax decrease Bush enforced expire. I will see my taxes raised for this but it will have little impact on my income in comparison to those that lost their jobs, homes, and ability to provide for their family.

At the same time I will gladly stand up and demand tax cuts and hopefully the eradication of social security along with a revamp of the welfare system.
 
Last edited:

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
82,804
Reaction score
37,289
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There's an article floating around where a guy describes how he only has a "few hundred dollars a month in discretionary income" from the $450k/year him and his wife make.

Apparently a large house, two cars, a nanny, a housekeeper, and a gardener don't count as "discretionary." Look, buddy, you live better than 99% of Americans and 99.99999% of the world. Just because you can't manage your money properly doesn't mean you aren't rich. Stop comparing yourself to 7/8-figure salary earners and start looking at the rest of us and maybe you'll get some perspective. I have a "few hundred dollars" in discretionary income per month and I make less than 1/10 of that.

I know you pay a lot of taxes. But you have two cars, a gardener, a nanny, and a housekeeper. A 3% increase in your income over $250k is really going to sink you, eh?
 
Last edited:

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
There's an article floating around where a guy describes how he only has a "few hundred dollars a month in discretionary income" from the $450k/year him and his wife make.

Apparently a large house, two cars, a nanny, a housekeeper, and a gardener don't count as "discretionary." Look, buddy, you live better than 99% of Americans and 99.99999% of the world. Just because you can't manage your money properly doesn't mean you aren't rich. Stop comparing yourself to 7/8-figure salary earners and start looking at the rest of us and maybe you'll get some perspective. I have a "few hundred dollars" in discretionary income per month and I make less than 1/10 of that.

I know you pay a lot of taxes. But you have two cars, a gardener, a nanny, and a housekeeper. A 3% increase in your income over $250k is really going to sink you, eh?

The article I think you're referring to:

We are the Super Rich - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

A discussion:

Earning $250,000 Does Not Make You Rich, Not in My Town « Above the Law: A Legal Tabloid - News, Gossip, and Colorful Commentary on Law Firms and the Legal Profession
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
268,818
Reaction score
85,376
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
There's an article floating around where a guy describes how he only has a "few hundred dollars a month in discretionary income" from the $450k/year him and his wife make.

Apparently a large house, two cars, a nanny, a housekeeper, and a gardener don't count as "discretionary." Look, buddy, you live better than 99% of Americans and 99.99999% of the world. Just because you can't manage your money properly doesn't mean you aren't rich. Stop comparing yourself to 7/8-figure salary earners and start looking at the rest of us and maybe you'll get some perspective. I have a "few hundred dollars" in discretionary income per month and I make less than 1/10 of that.

I know you pay a lot of taxes. But you have two cars, a gardener, a nanny, and a housekeeper. A 3% increase in your income over $250k is really going to sink you, eh?

when are the wealth stealers going to figure out that the Obama clinton tax hikes is going to mean people are going to have to pay alot more than 3% more in taxes

why do the wealth stealers pretend others can afford a tax hike yet they cannot? Why don't you agree to pay the same increased tax percentage as those you want to soak?
 

Councilman

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
4,454
Reaction score
1,655
Location
Riverside, County, CA.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It is very easy to sit back and say yea go ahead tax the hell out of the rich give them hell.

But unfortunately those who make the most money already pay most of the taxes and create most of the jobs.

Idiots like Obama and most of the Radical Socialists/Marxists he has made Czars and advisers are in the I got mine screw you club. They are on the PUBLIC dole and most never had a real Job like Obama himself.

Redistribution of wealth is a self destructive system because it eventually removes all the incentive from those who work hard because they so those who do nothing taking their hard earned money.

I don't blame them for being pissed off. Obama is an idiot and he is by the way a millionaire who is partying like no one ever before on your dime. He's been on 7 vacation trips since April.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
50,379
Reaction score
30,043
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I found this quote from an article today

Some Rich Dude said:
The rhetoric in Washington about taxes is about millionaires and the super rich, but the relevant dividing line between millionaires and the middle class is pegged at family income of $250,000. (I’m not a math professor, but last time I checked $250,000 is less than $1 million.) That makes me super rich and subject to a big tax hike if the president has his way.

I’m the president’s neighbor in Chicago, but we’ve never met. I wish we could, because I would introduce him to my family and our lifestyle, one he believes is capable of financing the vast expansion of government he is planning. A quick look at our family budget, which I will happily share with the White House, will show him that like many Americans, we are just getting by despite seeming to be rich. We aren’t.

I, like the president before me, am a law professor at the University of Chicago Law School, and my wife, like the first lady before her, works at the University of Chicago Hospitals, where she is a doctor who treats children with cancer. Our combined income exceeds the $250,000 threshold for the super rich (but not by that much), and the president plans on raising my taxes. After all, we can afford it, and the world we are now living in has that familiar Marxian tone of those who need take and those who can afford it pay. The problem is, we can’t afford it. Here is why.

The biggest expense for us is financing government. Last year, my wife and I paid nearly $100,000 in federal and state taxes, not even including sales and other taxes. This amount is so high because we can’t afford fancy accountants and lawyers to help us evade taxes and we are penalized by the tax code because we choose to be married and we both work outside the home. (If my wife and I divorced or were never married, the government would write us a check for tens of thousands of dollars. Talk about perverse incentives.)

Our next biggest expense, like most people, is our mortgage. Homes near our work in Chicago aren’t cheap and we do not have friends who were willing to help us finance the deal. We chose to invest in the University community and renovate and old property, but we did so at an inopportune time.

We pay about $15,000 in property taxes, about half of which goes to fund public education in Chicago. Since we care the education of our three children, this means we also have to pay to send them to private school. My wife has school loans of nearly $250,000 and I do too, although becoming a lawyer is significantly cheaper. We try to invest in our retirement by putting some money in the stock market, something that these days sounds like a patriotic act. Our account isn’t worth much, and is worth a lot less than it used to be.

Like most working Americans, insurance, doctors’ bills, utilities, two cars, daycare, groceries, gasoline, cell phones, and cable TV (no movie channels) round out our monthly expenses. We also have someone who cuts our grass, cleans our house, and watches our new baby so we can both work outside the home. At the end of all this, we have less than a few hundred dollars per month of discretionary income. We occasionally eat out but with a baby sitter, these nights take a toll on our budget. Life in America is wonderful, but expensive.

If our taxes rise significantly, as they seem likely to, we can cut back on some things. The (legal) immigrant from Mexico who owns the lawn service we employ will suffer, as will the (legal) immigrant from Poland who cleans our house a few times a month. We can cancel our cell phones and some cable channels, as well as take our daughter from her art class at the community art center, but these are only a few hundred dollars per month in total. But more importantly, what is the theory under which collecting this money in taxes and deciding in Washington how to spend it is superior to our decisions? Ask the entrepreneurs we employ and the new arrivals they employ in turn whether they prefer to work for us or get a government handout.

If these cuts don’t work, we will sell our house – into an already spiraling market of declining asset values – and our cars, assuming someone will buy them. The irony here, of course, is that the government is working to save both of these industries despite the impact that increasing taxes will have.

The problem with the president’s plan is that the super rich don’t pay taxes – they hide in the Cayman Islands or use fancy investment vehicles to shelter their income. We aren’t rich enough to afford this – I use Turbo Tax. But we are rich enough to be hurt by the president’s plan. The next time the president comes home to Chicago, he has a standing invitation to come to my house (two blocks from his) and judge for himself whether the Xxxxxxxxxs are as rich as he thinks.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
82,804
Reaction score
37,289
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
when are the wealth stealers going to figure out that the Obama clinton tax hikes is going to mean people are going to have to pay alot more than 3% more in taxes

why do the wealth stealers pretend others can afford a tax hike yet they cannot? Why don't you agree to pay the same increased tax percentage as those you want to soak?

If you can't manage your financial situation on $450k/year, you're an idiot, plain and simple.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
268,818
Reaction score
85,376
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
If you can't manage your financial situation on $450k/year, you're an idiot, plain and simple.

yeah class envy has nothing to do with that. making judgments like that is silly. especially if you cannot earn as much as they do but that is a great point that man makes in the clip posted above. NOthing bothers me more than listening to those who aren't willing to pay more claiming others need to pay more.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
If you can't manage your financial situation on $450k/year, you're an idiot, plain and simple.

I'm not going to say it's impossible to survive on $450k, but it's not exactly rolling in money like you might think.

In NYC, a married couple with a gross annual income of $450k pays $193,000 in taxes. That leaves $257k takehome. As the guy's article noted, from there you have lots of other expenses.

*$42k/year to rent a mediocre 1000 sq ft 2 BR apt.
*$60k/year in student loan payments if you have the kind of debt that this guy and his wife have.
*$40k/year for retirement, because SS will be means tested long before most young earners retire.
*$30k/year in childcare, because the only way you're earning that $450k is if both parents are working ridiculous hours.
*$15k/year for groceries, because food isn't cheap in major metro areas.
*$15k/year for a car/gas/parking space, because not every job is accessible by public transit.

I haven't even touched on the costs of raising those kids, health insurance, down/mortgage payments if the family actually decides to buy or live in something other than a shoebox, costs for primary education, college costs (no need-based aid for these kids), and the thousands of other day-to-day expenses that families incur. It's certainly not poor, but it ain't Warren Buffet.

Now turn around and pretend we're dealing with a family making $250k with the same level of expenses. In no way, shape, or form is that "rich."
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
268,818
Reaction score
85,376
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I'm not going to say it's impossible to survive on $450k, but it's not exactly rolling in money like you might think.

In NYC, a married couple with a gross annual income of $450k pays $193,000 in taxes. That leaves $257k takehome. As the guy's article noted, from there you have lots of other expenses.

*$42k/year to rent a mediocre 1000 sq ft 2 BR apt.
*$60k/year in student loan payments if you have the kind of debt that this guy and his wife have.
*$40k/year for retirement, because SS will be means tested long before most young earners retire.
*$30k/year in childcare, because the only way you're earning that $450k is if both parents are working ridiculous hours.
*$15k/year for groceries, because food isn't cheap in major metro areas.
*$15k/year for a car/gas/parking space, because not every job is accessible by public transit.

I haven't even touched on the costs of raising those kids, health insurance, down/mortgage payments if the family actually decides to buy or live in something other than a shoebox, costs for primary education, college costs (no need-based aid for these kids), and the thousands of other day-to-day expenses that families incur. It's certainly not poor, but it ain't Warren Buffet.

Now turn around and pretend we're dealing with a family making $250k with the same level of expenses. In no way, shape, or form is that "rich."

I ask the wealth stealers why that couple should have to pull their kids from say a private school (which in chicago runs about 20K a year) to pay for the Obama tax hike. normally you get psychobabble back. the fact is the rich or the people targeted by Obama as rich, already pay far far more than they should while those who want to jack up the taxes usually don't
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,009
Reaction score
9,886
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I'm not going to say it's impossible to survive on $450k, but it's not exactly rolling in money like you might think.

In NYC, a married couple with a gross annual income of $450k pays $193,000 in taxes. That leaves $257k takehome. As the guy's article noted, from there you have lots of other expenses.

*$42k/year to rent a mediocre 1000 sq ft 2 BR apt.
*$60k/year in student loan payments if you have the kind of debt that this guy and his wife have.
*$40k/year for retirement, because SS will be means tested long before most young earners retire.
*$30k/year in childcare, because the only way you're earning that $450k is if both parents are working ridiculous hours.
*$15k/year for groceries, because food isn't cheap in major metro areas.
*$15k/year for a car/gas/parking space, because not every job is accessible by public transit.

I haven't even touched on the costs of raising those kids, health insurance, down/mortgage payments if the family actually decides to buy or live in something other than a shoebox, costs for primary education, college costs (no need-based aid for these kids), and the thousands of other day-to-day expenses that families incur. It's certainly not poor, but it ain't Warren Buffet.

Now turn around and pretend we're dealing with a family making $250k with the same level of expenses. In no way, shape, or form is that "rich."

You're basically giving a very worst case scenerio and inflating living expenses in my opinion, and even then these people would do perfectly fine, though they might have to drive the same car for two or three years before getting a new one.

The overwhelming majority of people earning over 250000 don't pay 60000 in student loans and the average cost of rent is way, way, way below 42k a year for a dinky apartment. Even then if you earn 300000 your taxes go up 3% on 50k making them pay a mere 1500 dollars a year more. That ain't breaking the bank and you know it. At the most, a three percent raise in the top marginal tax rate would make a tiny, miniscule number of people look at their budgets and see if they're wasting money on useless stuff.

And if you're trying to argue that making 250,000 doesn't make you rich, that's all well and good, but it doesn't matter because you're taxes wouldn't go up a single penny unless you happen to make 250001 dollars and you pay 3 cents more.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
268,818
Reaction score
85,376
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
You're basically giving a very worst case scenerio and inflating living expenses in my opinion, and even then these people would do perfectly fine, though they might have to drive the same car for two or three years before getting a new one.

The overwhelming majority of people earning over 250000 don't pay 60000 in student loans and the average cost of rent is way, way, way below 42k a year for a dinky apartment. Even then if you earn 300000 your taxes go up 3% on 50k making them pay a mere 1500 dollars a year more. That ain't breaking the bank and you know it. At the most, a three percent raise in the top marginal tax rate would make a tiny, miniscule number of people look at their budgets and see if they're wasting money on useless stuff.

And if you're trying to argue that making 250,000 doesn't make you rich, that's all well and good, but it doesn't matter because you're taxes wouldn't go up a single penny unless you happen to make 250001 dollars and you pay 3 cents more.

wrong again. If they have mainly dividend income they are going to really see their taxes jump way up.

tell me why should those people pay even 3 cents more--what do they get that you do not get from the GOVERNMENT for paying over 100K in federal income taxes?
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
It is very easy to sit back and say yea go ahead tax the hell out of the rich give them hell.

But unfortunately those who make the most money already pay most of the taxes and create most of the jobs.

Idiots like Obama and most of the Radical Socialists/Marxists he has made Czars and advisers are in the I got mine screw you club. They are on the PUBLIC dole and most never had a real Job like Obama himself.

Redistribution of wealth is a self destructive system because it eventually removes all the incentive from those who work hard because they so those who do nothing taking their hard earned money.

I don't blame them for being pissed off. Obama is an idiot and he is by the way a millionaire who is partying like no one ever before on your dime. He's been on 7 vacation trips since April.


I just saw Donald Trump on,( I think it was) Wolfe Blitzer. He's none too happy with the way things are going and it sounds like he has angry friends that are talking of leaving. When asked if it was just because of the possible tax increase. he said that was part of it but also because one friend just found out the HC bill is going to cost him 100 million dollars. He says he has always made sure his empoyees had excellent health care. With the HC bill and raising taxes, we are going to see a lot of the wealthy leaving for more business friendly countries.
The Republicans Pledge to America, has all kinds of goodies for businesses. Hope it's not too late. This president hates anyone trying to make a profit.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
268,818
Reaction score
85,376
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I just saw Donald Trump on,( I think it was) Wolfe Blitzer. He's none too happy with the way things are going and it sounds like he has angry friends that are talking of leaving. When asked if it was just because of the possible tax increase. he said that was part of it but also because one friend just found out the HC bill is going to cost him 100 million dollars. He says he has always made sure his empoyees had excellent health care. With the HC bill and raising taxes, we are going to see a lot of the wealthy leaving for more business friendly countries.
The Republicans Pledge to America, has all kinds of goodies for businesses. Hope it's not too late. This president hates anyone trying to make a profit.


libs have never figure out that wealthy people tend to be more mobile than most others
 

ender1

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
646
Reaction score
142
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I ask the wealth stealers why that couple should have to pull their kids from say a private school (which in chicago runs about 20K a year) to pay for the Obama tax hike. normally you get psychobabble back. the fact is the rich or the people targeted by Obama as rich, already pay far far more than they should while those who want to jack up the taxes usually don't

I see you complain a lot about the rich paying to much. I never see you offer solutions. Maybe I missed it. The problem is we need money. Both conservatives and Liberals are to blame for running up Trillions. Even if we cut spending we still need a functioning government and to pay back what we owe. What do YOU think would be a fair way to pay it back. Please take into consideration that one out of seven Americans is now considered poor with an income of less than $20k. Far from the $450k you say is not enough to live on.

PS. RightinNYC You should fire your tax guy. The math is all wrong. The max in fedral taxes you would pay on $450k for 2010 is $127,808. Not sure your including State taxes but if so you should have stated it. Thats before those tax deductions for kids, school, childcare and your retirement shelters. You are taking deductions and sheltering your retirement right? A good tax person should get you under or around $100k. I just saved you $93,000 WOOT WOOT
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
268,818
Reaction score
85,376
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I see you complain a lot about the rich paying to much. I never see you offer solutions. Maybe I missed it. The problem is we need money. Both conservatives and Liberals are to blame for running up Trillions. Even if we cut spending we still need a functioning government and to pay back what we owe. What do YOU think would be a fair way to pay it back. Please take into consideration that one out of seven Americans is now considered poor with an income of less than $20k. Far from the $450k you say is not enough to live on.

PS. RightinNYC You should fire your tax guy. The math is all wrong. The max in fedral taxes you would pay on $450k for 2010 is $127,808. Not sure your including State taxes but if so you should have stated it. Thats before those tax deductions for kids, school, childcare and your retirement shelters. You are taking deductions and sheltering your retirement right? A good tax person should get you under or around $100k. I just saved you $93,000 WOOT WOOT

yeah I have some solutions-make the federal government live within the proper boundaries of what was delegated to it in the constitution and respect the tenth amendment. and I have the best tax attorneys money can hire and a brother who graduated in the top ten of a top 5 business school. But lots of rich people don't have that sort of firepower and that is no reason why they ought to be raped.

I am tired of being told I owe the unproductive and unambitious a living. What sort of libertarian are you? this board has more than a few who are essentially socialists who pretend to be libertarians. Having once Run the Clark Campaign (New Haven, 1980) for President I have a rather well grounded understanding of what libertarian means.
 

ender1

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
646
Reaction score
142
Political Leaning
Libertarian
yeah I have some solutions-make the federal government live within the proper boundaries of what was delegated to it in the constitution and respect the tenth amendment. and I have the best tax attorneys money can hire and a brother who graduated in the top ten of a top 5 business school. But lots of rich people don't have that sort of firepower and that is no reason why they ought to be raped.

I am tired of being told I owe the unproductive and unambitious a living. What sort of libertarian are you? this board has more than a few who are essentially socialists who pretend to be libertarians. Having once Run the Clark Campaign (New Haven, 1980) for President I have a rather well grounded understanding of what libertarian means.

I did not ask you what to cut. I asked you for how you would tax the people. You will get no argument from me about out of control spending. ON BOTH SIDES. The tax statement was directed at RightinNYC and I stand by my math.

I think the 98% of Americas who do not make $250k a year would be insulted by you calling them unproductive and unambitious.

I am a voting Libertarian. I believe in freedom and being free to live my life without the government telling me what I can and cant do. I am not stupid though and understand that if you owe something you must pay it back. Its the how that I am asking your opinion on.

On another note, please dont bring up the Bill of Rights. I may start to cry :(
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,009
Reaction score
9,886
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
What sort of libertarian are you? this board has more than a few who are essentially socialists who pretend to be libertarians.
We also have a boatload of conservatives that have no idea what socialism is or means.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
268,818
Reaction score
85,376
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I did not ask you what to cut. I asked you for how you would tax the people. You will get no argument from me about out of control spending. ON BOTH SIDES. The tax statement was directed at RightinNYC and I stand by my math.

I think the 98% of Americas who do not make $250k a year would be insulted by you calling them unproductive and unambitious.

I am a voting Libertarian. I believe in freedom and being free to live my life without the government telling me what I can and cant do. I am not stupid though and understand that if you owe something you must pay it back. Its the how that I am asking your opinion on.

On another note, please dont bring up the Bill of Rights. I may start to cry :(

those who don't pay taxes yet demand the rich pay more are parasites in my book, those who are working hard and don't expect others to carry their share of the load are respectable and honest people to be commended.

I have asked for months what someone paying 200-400K a year in taxes (which is what the majority of the top 2% pay-most of the top 2% are not billionaires) get in increased benefits from the government that those paying less than 5K a year do?

the best they can come up with is some vague and vacuous nonsense that the rich "get more" from the government which just a guess while we can prove that the poor get far more direct stuff from the government.

I prefer a consumtpion or sales taxes mainly to take away the power from the government. Congress got a huge amount of extra constitutional power from the 16th Amendment by being able to play low income or low bracket tax payers against high bracket tax payers. look at the last campaigns-dems were going on and on about the rich needing to pay more and the GOP was going on and on how the taxpayers pay too much.

a NST would castrate congress and that is why I like the concept
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
268,818
Reaction score
85,376
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
We also have a boatload of conservatives that have no idea what socialism is or means.

every aspect of socialism? probably true. most know that the democrats have socialist tendencies or seek to advance some of the goals of socialism. and socialism in popular terminology means giving the wealth of some to others though that's technically closer to communism.
 

ender1

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
646
Reaction score
142
Political Leaning
Libertarian
those who don't pay taxes yet demand the rich pay more are parasites in my book, those who are working hard and don't expect others to carry their share of the load are respectable and honest people to be commended.

I have asked for months what someone paying 200-400K a year in taxes (which is what the majority of the top 2% pay-most of the top 2% are not billionaires) get in increased benefits from the government that those paying less than 5K a year do?

the best they can come up with is some vague and vacuous nonsense that the rich "get more" from the government which just a guess while we can prove that the poor get far more direct stuff from the government.

I prefer a consumtpion or sales taxes mainly to take away the power from the government. Congress got a huge amount of extra constitutional power from the 16th Amendment by being able to play low income or low bracket tax payers against high bracket tax payers. look at the last campaigns-dems were going on and on about the rich needing to pay more and the GOP was going on and on how the taxpayers pay too much.

a NST would castrate congress and that is why I like the concept

Thank you for answering. A consumption tax or sales tax is a progressive tax. If studies I have seen are accurate we would need to set a consumption tax to about 20% for our current budget. That is twice the rate for the lowest bracket. This also encourages savings. Our economy runs on consumptiontion of goods and services. If we did that we would most likely see a significant contraction of the US economy.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
268,818
Reaction score
85,376
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Thank you for answering. A consumption tax or sales tax is a progressive tax. If studies I have seen are accurate we would need to set a consumption tax to about 20% for our current budget. That is twice the rate for the lowest bracket. This also encourages savings. Our economy runs on consumptiontion of goods and services. If we did that we would most likely see a significant contraction of the US economy.

it beats the progressive income tax which has no limit on the top brackets and no end in class warfare. If I were God I'd appoint judges who say have the political philosophy of people who see the tenth amendment as extremely important. The commerce clause and its rape by FDR has caused massive expansions of the federal government. If those who use lots of government services saw their net income decrease from supporting reckless spending politicians they might start voting for more frugal politicians

sadly the dems and the New Deal have created 75 years of creating addicts.

I know the top 2% are not the driving force behind massive government. the uber rich yes-those in the 200K to a couple million no
 

ender1

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
646
Reaction score
142
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I meant REGRESSIVE tax not Progressive tax.
 

ender1

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
646
Reaction score
142
Political Leaning
Libertarian
it beats the progressive income tax which has no limit on the top brackets and no end in class warfare. If I were God I'd appoint judges who say have the political philosophy of people who see the tenth amendment as extremely important. The commerce clause and its rape by FDR has caused massive expansions of the federal government. If those who use lots of government services saw their net income decrease from supporting reckless spending politicians they might start voting for more frugal politicians

sadly the dems and the New Deal have created 75 years of creating addicts.

I know the top 2% are not the driving force behind massive government. the uber rich yes-those in the 200K to a couple million no

Oh dont just blame the Dems. Republicans pushed through massive spending bills with no contest from 2000 -2007. They raised the tax burdon from about 5 Trillion to close to 9 trillion in that time. The difference is they handed the money to Exxon, Monsanto, Enron, halberton ect. . . not to mention a war that killed thousands of Americans and over 100K Iraqis for .. . well we may never know why we did it. It is sad to talk about money when so many lives were lost but how much did that cost us. Probably enough to fund all of those addicts for a long time. No, the Republicans have lost all credibility on being fiscally responsible. Its just finger pointing when you bring up class warfare and redistribution of wealth.

The problem with the 10th amendment is that the south lost. Its a shame that we have lost all but maybe one of the first 10 amendment rights.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
50,379
Reaction score
30,043
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
If you can't manage your financial situation on $450k/year, you're an idiot, plain and simple.

In this case, I agree. In the quoted article above, there are multiple things that jump out at me that can easily be reduced. For example the private schooling, the gardener, and the maid. These people will be just fine.
 
Top Bottom