Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
RavenHawk

Taxing the Rich

226 posts in this topic

So you don't think that the top 10% paying 70% of the tax burden is fair? BTW, the tax rate of the rich in the 50s and 60s ranged in the 70% to 90%.

YES!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall, the poorest end up with about the same amount of breaks in the tax rate that the top 1% do. I'm not looking at the data right now, but both get about a 12% break off of their tax bracket.

as with political terminology, it seems you have zero understanding of taxes as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your household does not print money for one thing.

actually my goverment doesn't print money either the federal reserve does. Don't let the name fool you. Old Ben might be appointed by the prez. but he don't answer to him and given your history of coming to the gun fight with out any bullets I don't figure to get into any deep meaningful conversation with you about the whole utter unconstitutionality of the federal reserve system.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does that work exactly???? The fed is issued bonds ...for it's permission.. to let the Treasury Dept. print money? Can anyone explain the process simply???? PLEASE!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Central bank

Further information: Central bank

In its role as the central bank of the United States, the Fed serves as a banker's bank and as the government's bank. As the banker's bank, it helps to assure the safety and efficiency of the payments system. As the government's bank, or fiscal agent, the Fed processes a variety of financial transactions involving trillions of dollars. Just as an individual might keep an account at a bank, the U.S. Treasury keeps a checking account with the Federal Reserve, through which incoming federal tax deposits and outgoing government payments are handled. As part of this service relationship, the Fed sells and redeems U.S. government securities such as savings bonds and Treasury bills, notes and bonds. It also issues the nation's coin and paper currency. The U.S. Treasury, through its Bureau of the Mint and Bureau of Engraving and Printing, actually produces the nation's cash supply and, in effect, sells the paper currency to the Federal Reserve Banks at manufacturing cost, and the coins at face value. The Federal Reserve Banks then distribute it to other financial institutions in various ways.[35] During the Fiscal Year 2008, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing delivered 7.7 billion notes at an average cost of 6.4 cents per note.[36]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

National economics are in no way comparable to your household budget.

You are seriously in err. Economics...is economics. Government Contracts have to be paid...with real money...so does the debt...it has to be paid back with real money. Government doesn't make money...we do! Government prints paper..WE make money happen.

Is it totally necessary that one completely disengage themselves from logic to be a liberal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know Joc, but it sure seems that so many on the Far Religious Right are completely disengaged from logic and critical thinking.... :innocent:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know Joc, but it sure seems that so many on the Far Religious Right are completely disengaged from logic and critical thinking.... :innocent:

The same can be said for the Far Religious Left.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it totally necessary that one completely disengage themselves from logic to be a liberal?

Have you seen proof to the contrary?

Quinn's law~ liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent. Example: the Great Society Program- beneficiaries of such things have devolved their communities into the most heinous eye sores on American soil. Nothing great about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahahahahahahahahahah...............Silver Thong was right. I am dying here, breathe, breathe..............hahahahahahahahahah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are seriously in err. Economics...is economics.

I'm sorry but they are in no way the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets not forget that under Obama the debt has increased over a trillion dollars a year, which I'm sure will continue for the duration of his term. Bush left him 10T, he'll leave 20T.

I've always enjoyed thinking of a nice even flat tax, no more de-ductions, no more loop holes. Ya make a dollar the gov gets a dime. period. Ya make a million dollars the gov gets a million dimes.period.

And please don't freak out, I just picked a dime to illustrate the point, make it a quarter or 1 dime, 2 nickles, & 3 pennies,whatever,just keep it simple.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always enjoyed thinking of a nice even flat tax, no more de-ductions, no more loop holes. Ya make a dollar the gov gets a dime. period. Ya make a million dollars the gov gets a million dimes.period.

I think a flat tax would be wonderfully instructive experiment. Assuming every state and locality got the same spending, based on population, we'd get to see which idiology manages and arranges a set budget better.

Edited by DieChecker
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you seen proof to the contrary?

Quinn's law~ liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent. Example: the Great Society Program- beneficiaries of such things have devolved their communities into the most heinous eye sores on American soil. Nothing great about that.

Yeah... why is that??? If these people are being helped so well, why are they perpetually poor, and why are their neighborhoods crisis zones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah... why is that??? If these people are being helped so well, why are they perpetually poor, and why are their neighborhoods crisis zones?

Because it was probably planned that way.

Lets not forget that under Obama the debt has increased over a trillion dollars a year, which I'm sure will continue for the duration of his term. Bush left him 10T, he'll leave 20T.

I've always enjoyed thinking of a nice even flat tax, no more de-ductions, no more loop holes. Ya make a dollar the gov gets a dime. period. Ya make a million dollars the gov gets a million dimes.period.

And please don't freak out, I just picked a dime to illustrate the point, make it a quarter or 1 dime, 2 nickles, & 3 pennies,whatever,just keep it simple.

On top of that I'd like to add that each years budget be planned according to only the money brought in from last years taxes, minus a little bit for an accruing rainy day fund.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it was probably planned that way.

On top of that I'd like to add that each years budget be planned according to only the money brought in from last years taxes, minus a little bit for an accruing rainy day fund.

Wait a minute...you can't do that!! That would bring prosperity to everyone. What is wrong with you people???

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait a minute...you can't do that!! That would bring prosperity to everyone. What is wrong with you people???

I'm treasury secretary. That's what I was hired for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so basically you're admitting that the timetables that you use to justify your ranting in this thread are meaningless. Thanks. 75B is 75B. It's not zero.

It’s not meaningless – get a clue. The 10 year time frame is what Washington establishes, i.e. not meaningless. $75B is my calculation, but I’ve seen others put it at about $80B. Yes, $80B is not zero, very good for you. But $80B does nothing to bring down the debt. What is needed is more like $500B per year. Yes, that is an arbitrary number. If you want try $300B or $700B or whatever is fine, but this is the kind of numbers you need to seriously attack the debt. Some brought up that that $80B was but only a portion of cutting a million here and there. All I asked was, then where are all of these other millions? Show me the rest (the $420B or whatever) that compliments the $80B, then I could see a raising of taxes to add the $80B to the $420B. But if you don’t have this $420B, then what good does the $80B do for you?

If spending isn’t controlled, then on 1 January there will be a $1.2T cut across the board over the next decade. That’s $120B per year. What’s interesting is that the Whitehouse claims that letting the Bush tax cuts expire for the top 2% will raise $120B. We’ve already seen that they will be short but what’s really interesting is that what is expected from taxes nulls out the cuts. So if the “deal” is made, nothing changes. This is not a cliff. This is not a deal. We’re in the same place. Do you understand that? It is all a created crises made up by this Administration to hide the real reasons. The Bush tax break only amounted to about $300 for the average person. Repealing the tax cuts isn’t going to send anyone over the cliff. When the tax cuts were first established, people were complaining that $300 wasn’t enough, so how is it a cliff now? I guess people become dependent on the money they earn themselves.

I had listed these other reasons in another post and I will list them here again:

1) Vilify the Conservatives (they get blamed either way if we go over or not on this non cliff).

2) To wrestle the power of the purse from the House, in order to raise the debt limit (to start).

3) Repeal of the 22nd Amendment (via some artificial crises).

4) Pull the wool over our eyes (or at least to about half).

5) By blaming the GOP, it will hide all the new taxes for Obamacare (minimum of $2000 per family).

Do you get it? Taxes are going up for everyone anyway. Not the $300 from letting the Bush tax cuts expire but the $2000 + for Obamacare. So if we go over this cliff, you’ll hear this Administration try to blame the GOP for causing taxes to go up in the thousands, not by $300 or $600. If the GOP caves, Obama gets control of the debt ceiling, will not cut spending and will blame the GOP for taxes going up anyway. That is my prediction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. That is my prediction.

which are notoriously inaccurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright ninja, you're in debt. You've been spending a $100,000 a year for decades. Next year you force you're friends and family to give you $7500 all together for the next ten years to pay down your debt but you never stop spending a $100,000 a year anyways so what do you achieve? More debt you say? Hmmm. Now your friends and family are p***sed. Wonder how they'll feel in another couple years when you force them into giving you money again? That's what the politicians are doing, have been doing and always will do so long as folks like you remain complacent. Why don't you care? Because you find the big cheese so dreamy? He truly is your density. Yes, I meant density.

[media=]http://youtu.be/KFlkr9GBs0k[/media]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright ninja, you're in debt. You've been spending a $100,000 a year for decades. Next year you force you're friends and family to give you $7500 all together for the next ten years to pay down your debt but you never stop spending a $100,000 a year anyways so what do you achieve? More debt you say? Hmmm. Now your friends and family are p***sed. Wonder how they'll feel in another couple years when you force them into giving you money again? That's what the politicians are doing, have been doing and always will do so long as folks like you remain complacent. Why don't you care? Because you find the big cheese so dreamy? He truly is your density. Yes, I meant density.

You are missing something huge here. Forget logic! There is only one answer to every question...Government! That's it. That's the answer...the only answer...the eternal answer. Well wait...there is one question that doesn't answer that way...What is the problem with America?

Edited by joc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are missing something huge here. Forget logic! There is only one answer to every question...Government! That's it. That's the answer...the only answer...the eternal answer. Well wait...there is one question that doesn't answer that way...What is the problem with America?

Well a Republican government would be horrible, so the answer is not government.

The answer is taxes. Lots of hidden taxes to milk the money from the middle class that the Dems are not honest enough to demand openly.

(For Liberals...)

Spending Up = Good

Spending Down = Bad

Though many Liberals claim to be Keynesians, almost none of them practice the Saving side of Keynesian Economics....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YES!!!

So you think that the top 10% paying 70% of the tax burden is fair? I’m sure that you wouldn’t lose sleep if their tax bracket was 90%, eh? I really hope you are not a judge, because you are totally clueless as to what is fair. Just out of curiosity, why do you consider this fair anyway? And please doesn’t use the lame excuse that because they have more money. That is not a reason to tax someone more. People have more because they work harder or are more talented. That is not an excuse for wealth envy.

Just because there was a 90% tax bracket in the 50s does not mean that we have the same situation now that we did then that allowed such a policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as with political terminology, it seems you have zero understanding of taxes as well.

I do? Just because you don’t try to understand, you have no room to say anything. All you know is tax and spend. You’re part of the apparatus, so you would defend such an ideology anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

which are notoriously inaccurate.

Hehehe…and they are? Obama is a politician and a Socialist. If you think like a Socialist, this is the order of battle. I understand that what he is doing, he believes is best for America, but over 50% of the population knows he’s doesn’t have the best interests of this nation at heart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.