Stop Coddling the Super-Rich

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"] I don't know what statistics you used, but states that rely off of heavily taxing the rich (such as California) are in an economic disaster. High cost of living, high unemployment, and a low quality of life. Whereas states that have less spending, less taxes for everyone are better off economically. For example, Texas.DroidPhysX

1. Rick Perry has almost doubled the size of Texas government to $90 billlion
2. Rick Perry has doubled the Texas debt
3. Rick Perry has repeatedly raised taxes in Texas

Texas is a nice example.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"] I don't know what statistics you used, but states that rely off of heavily taxing the rich (such as California) are in an economic disaster. High cost of living, high unemployment, and a low quality of life. Whereas states that have less spending, less taxes for everyone are better off economically. For example, Texas.Syk0_k03r

1. Rick Perry has almost doubled the size of Texas government to $90 billlion
2. Rick Perry has doubled the Texas debt
3. Rick Perry has repeatedly raised taxes in Texas

Texas is a nice example.

The political system is run by the wealthy. Most treasury secretaries and cabinet members were from the big banks. The only branch that has yet to be fully taken over by the wealthy elite is the judicial branch.

DroidPhysX

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

I used statistics provided by the IRS. Also, we are talking about FEDERAL TAXES...not state...these are across the board for all states. You can look at tax rates vs jobless rates, gdp, and other statistics over the course of many years.

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"] no. cut spending to only the bare necessities, THEN abolish the income tax.Syk0_k03r

Our defense budget alone is like 30% of our total taxes...

Your idea would only work in fantasy land.

No, not because of all the wars. Our defense budget is like 20%-25% without all the spending on wars. There's a million and a half US military personnel that have to get paid whether they are in the states or in another country fighting. Aside from that, there's equipment, facilities (hospitals, ect), housing, defense research, intelligence, and other costs like pensions and other reoccurring costs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces#Budget

Your idea is simply not based on reality.

Ah, it's Buffet. Both he and Bill Gates have said this before[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

The political system is run by the wealthy. Most treasury secretaries and cabinet members were from the big banks. The only branch that has yet to be fully taken over by the wealthy elite is the judicial branch.

markop2003

Ah, it's Buffet. Both he and Bill Gates have said this before[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

The political system is run by the wealthy. Most treasury secretaries and cabinet members were from the big banks. The only branch that has yet to be fully taken over by the wealthy elite is the judicial branch.

markop2003

The rich get taxed fairly over here in the UK, I think it reaches a maximum 50%.

tax whomever you want at what ever rate you want you wont get over 18% of GDP and there is no way to make up the short falls when you are spending 28% of GDP outside of debt. all the class warfare in the world wont change the historical ceiling for governmental revenues.

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"][QUOTE="Renevent42"]

Our defense budget alone is like 30% of our total taxes...

Your idea would only work in fantasy land.

Renevent42

No, not because of all the wars. Our defense budget is like 20%-25% without all the spending on wars. There's a million and a half US military personnel that have to get paid whether they are in the states or in another country fighting. Aside from that, there's equipment, facilities (hospitals, ect), housing, defense research, intelligence, and other costs like pensions and other reoccurring costs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces#Budget

Your idea is simply not based on reality.

Bill Clinton's flourishing economy had higher tax rates and job growth.

Maybe we should mimic him?

Supposedly this is the wealth distribution in the US

A Harvard business prof and a behavioral economist recently asked more than 5,000 Americans how they thought wealth is distributed in the United States. Most thought that it's more balanced than it actually is. Asked to choose their ideal distribution of wealth, 92% picked one that was even more equitable.

tax whomever you want at what ever rate you want you wont get over 18% of GDP and there is no way to make up the short falls when you are spending 28% of GDP outside of debt. all the class warfare in the world wont change the historical ceiling for governmental revenues.

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"] Because of the useless wars we are involved in. Ending all US foreign intervention would cut alot from the defense budget, but will still efficiently defend this country.Syk0_k03r

No, not because of all the wars. Our defense budget is like 20%-25% without all the spending on wars. There's a million and a half US military personnel that have to get paid whether they are in the states or in another country fighting. Aside from that, there's equipment, facilities (hospitals, ect), housing, defense research, intelligence, and other costs like pensions and other reoccurring costs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces#Budget

Your idea is simply not based on reality.

Defense budget was low and affordable before the iraq war. without spending on the wars, we will not need to spend as much on everything you listed, bringing the budget down to below 20%

Before the war our defense budget was about the same % of taxes as it is now...the things I listed do not change much as war spending is outside the general budget for the department of defense. Before the war our defense spending was still more than practically all the other countries in the world defense budget added together. You simply have no idea what you are talking about.

Even if you cut our forces in half, pulled all our troops out of foreign countries, slowed research, cut services and pensions, and whatever other ideas you have floating around in your head the defense budget would STILL be hundreds of billions of dollars.

And that's just defense alone...which only accounts for about 20%-40% (depending how you look at it) of our total tax expenditure...

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

tax whomever you want at what ever rate you want you wont get over 18% of GDP and there is no way to make up the short falls when you are spending 28% of GDP outside of debt. all the class warfare in the world wont change the historical ceiling for governmental revenues.

-Sun_Tzu-

Seriously though, why 18%?

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

tax whomever you want at what ever rate you want you wont get over 18% of GDP and there is no way to make up the short falls when you are spending 28% of GDP outside of debt. all the ****warfare in the world wont change the historical ceiling for governmental revenues.

-Sun_Tzu-

It's better to cut spending, balance the budget, and abolish the income tax.Syk0_k03r

How do you balance the budget AND abolish the income tax? Cut spending to zero?

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

tax whomever you want at what ever rate you want you wont get over 18% of GDP and there is no way to make up the short falls when you are spending 28% of GDP outside of debt. all the ****warfare in the world wont change the historical ceiling for governmental revenues.

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"] Because of the useless wars we are involved in. Ending all US foreign intervention would cut alot from the defense budget, but will still efficiently defend this country.Syk0_k03r

No, not because of all the wars. Our defense budget is like 20%-25% without all the spending on wars. There's a million and a half US military personnel that have to get paid whether they are in the states or in another country fighting. Aside from that, there's equipment, facilities (hospitals, ect), housing, defense research, intelligence, and other costs like pensions and other reoccurring costs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces#Budget

Your idea is simply not based on reality.

You listen to alot of talk radio don't you? Yeah you do:). Yeah you do:P. I recognize the talking points. Who's your favorite. Personally, I'm a bit partial to Neal Boortz here in ATL.

Most of the "super-rich" got there through hard work and education. Why should the poor people (who don't have as good education and are probably lazier) take some of their money?

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"][QUOTE="Renevent42"]

No, not because of all the wars. Our defense budget is like 20%-25% without all the spending on wars. There's a million and a half US military personnel that have to get paid whether they are in the states or in another country fighting. Aside from that, there's equipment, facilities (hospitals, ect), housing, defense research, intelligence, and other costs like pensions and other reoccurring costs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces#Budget

Your idea is simply not based on reality.

Renevent42

Defense budget was low and affordable before the iraq war. without spending on the wars, we will not need to spend as much on everything you listed, bringing the budget down to below 20%

Before the war our defense budget was about the same % of taxes as it is now...the things I listed do not change much as war spending is outside the general budget for the department of defense. Before the war our defense spending was still more than practically all the other countries in the world defense budget added together. You simply have no idea what you are talking about.

Even if you cut our forces in half, pulled all our troops out of foreign countries, slowed research, cut services and pensions, and whatever other ideas you have floating around in your head the defense budget would STILL be hundreds of billions of dollars.

And that's just defense alone...which only accounts for about 20%-40% (depending how you look at it) of our total tax expenditure...

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Why is it impossible to get over 18%? -Sun_Tzu-

Supposedly this is the wealth distribution in the US

A Harvard business prof and a behavioral economist recently asked more than 5,000 Americans how they thought wealth is distributed in the United States. Most thought that it's more balanced than it actually is. Asked to choose their ideal distribution of wealth, 92% picked one that was even more equitable.

EsYuGee

Does that mean the majority of americans are closet communists? :P

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] its an historic ceiling dont ask me why we have not been able to cross it link

surrealnumber5

and in that time span no we have not...

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"]

Defense budget was low and affordable before the iraq war. without spending on the wars, we will not need to spend as much on everything you listed, bringing the budget down to below 20%Syk0_k03r

Before the war our defense budget was about the same % of taxes as it is now...the things I listed do not change much as war spending is outside the general budget for the department of defense. Before the war our defense spending was still more than practically all the other countries in the world defense budget added together. You simply have no idea what you are talking about.

Even if you cut our forces in half, pulled all our troops out of foreign countries, slowed research, cut services and pensions, and whatever other ideas you have floating around in your head the defense budget would STILL be hundreds of billions of dollars.

And that's just defense alone...which only accounts for about 20%-40% (depending how you look at it) of our total tax expenditure...

Even if you cut welfare and SS to zero, reduce the defense budget by 90% (not realistic), and cut from every other aspect of government you will still have a federal budget that's tens (if not hundreds) of billions of dollars.

It's just not realistic...the only way you could get rid of income tax is to replace it with something else...like a consumption tax or heavy federal taxes on property sales, ect.

Make everyone pay similar rates regardless of income. It's the only "fair" way to do it. Billionnaires shouldn't pay less than the poor, but the percentile range should be (nearly) equal for everyone. Essentially a progressive tax resembling a flat tax would be great and stop many people from bickering over this. Income tax in general has created more problems than it's solved and honestly needs some reform.

However then the government would be getting less money - which in the eyes of the rich politicians who live off this money (and the services it provides such as "free" healthcare) is a bad thing. If the government would stop spending so damn much all the time for no real reason, this wouldn't be a problem. Creating short-term programs that benefit people yet leaving them to run long past their usefulness is a drain on the economy and the funds of the government. Not to mention the absolutely inane conflicts in the Middle East...

[QUOTE="EsYuGee"]

Supposedly this is the wealth distribution in the US

A Harvard business prof and a behavioral economist recently asked more than 5,000 Americans how they thought wealth is distributed in the United States. Most thought that it's more balanced than it actually is. Asked to choose their ideal distribution of wealth, 92% picked one that was even more equitable.

kuraimen

Does that mean the majority of americans are closet communists? :P

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]How can it be a ceiling if it's been over 18% a number of times for the past 50 or so years?chessmaster1989

it is not like there is any way to convince either of you that taxing infinite will not bring endless glory.

surrealnumber5

If you really think that's what I believe, then you haven't been paying any attention to my posts here...

Make everyone pay similar rates regardless of income. It's the only "fair" way to do it. Billionnaires shouldn't pay less than the poor, but the percentile range should be (nearly) equal for everyone. Essentially a progressive tax resembling a flat tax would be great and stop many people from bickering over this. Income tax in general has created more problems than it's solved and honestly needs some reform.

However then the government would be getting less money - which in the eyes of the rich politicians who live off this money (and the services it provides such as "free" healthcare) is a bad thing. If the government would stop spending so damn much all the time for no real reason. Creating short-term programs that benefit people yet leaving them to run long past their usefulness is a drain on the economy and the funds of the government. Not to mention the absolutely inane conflicts in the Middle East...

Saturos3091

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"][QUOTE="Renevent42"]

Before the war our defense budget was about the same % of taxes as it is now...the things I listed do not change much as war spending is outside the general budget for the department of defense. Before the war our defense spending was still more than practically all the other countries in the world defense budget added together. You simply have no idea what you are talking about.

Even if you cut our forces in half, pulled all our troops out of foreign countries, slowed research, cut services and pensions, and whatever other ideas you have floating around in your head the defense budget would STILL be hundreds of billions of dollars.

And that's just defense alone...which only accounts for about 20%-40% (depending how you look at it) of our total tax expenditure...

Renevent42

Even if you cut welfare and SS to zero, reduce the defense budget by 90% (not realistic), and cut from every other aspect of government you will still have a federal budget that's tens (if not hundreds) of billions of dollars.

It's just not realistic...the only way you could get rid of income tax is to replace it with something else...like a consumption tax or heavy federal taxes on property sales, ect.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

it is not like there is any way to convince either of you that taxing infinite will not bring endless glory.

chessmaster1989

If you really think that's what I believe, then you haven't been paying any attention to my posts here...

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"] which is why we should not only cut defense. Cutting defense, medicaid, social security, amnesty, federal bailouts, and foreign aid would drastically decrease government spending allowing the budget to balance out within time. I admit I am a noob to economics, but this all has potentialSyk0_k03r

Even if you cut welfare and SS to zero, reduce the defense budget by 90% (not realistic), and cut from every other aspect of government you will still have a federal budget that's tens (if not hundreds) of billions of dollars.

It's just not realistic...the only way you could get rid of income tax is to replace it with something else...like a consumption tax or heavy federal taxes on property sales, ect.

Make everyone pay similar rates regardless of income. It's the only "fair" way to do it. Billionnaires shouldn't pay less than the poor, but the percentile range should be (nearly) equal for everyone. Essentially a progressive tax resembling a flat tax would be great and stop many people from bickering over this. Income tax in general has created more problems than it's solved and honestly needs some reform.

However then the government would be getting less money - which in the eyes of the rich politicians who live off this money (and the services it provides such as "free" healthcare) is a bad thing. If the government would stop spending so damn much all the time for no real reason, this wouldn't be a problem. Creating short-term programs that benefit people yet leaving them to run long past their usefulness is a drain on the economy and the funds of the government. Not to mention the absolutely inane conflicts in the Middle East...

Saturos3091

A flat tax like that sounds good on paper, but then you realize that the higher up you go in the financial food chain the more you benefit from gov't resources. They benefit more from good infrastructure, stable institutions, protection of physical and intellectual property, a military to back up your shipping, etc. The bottom line is the rich benefit more from a stable US that the lower cl@ss. They invest and live here because the system is stable. Capital if very mobile. If tax rates were such a problem, the "rich" would have moved their capital from the US a long time ago.

Simple. End the wars, cut ALL foreign aid, cut all amnesty, privatize social security, take the government out of healthcare, end the fed, end US funding for the UN, and stopping corporate welfare should be our first step. Keep taxes at the same level they are now until we are no longer in debt, and no longer have a deficit. Once that is all over, abolish the income tax, as it is unconstitutional and is thievery. With small government and low spending, the government can run off of property and sales tax.Syk0_k03r

You are repeating the same stuff when it's already been shown that even after all that, you can't just abolish income tax.

By the way, property and sales taxes are STATE taxes...not federal. In the case of property tax it is usually at the county/municipality level. So there would have to be an ADDITIONAL federal property and sales tax which is basically just taking income tax and reallocating it to another place where we will have to pay anyways...you simply changed where it's derived from.

This is the second time you've confused the two...do you understand there is both federal and state taxes? Each state also has a seperate state budget used to run the state (and all it's services).

Let me ask you a question...are you a current home owner?

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

it is not like there is any way to convince either of you that taxing infinite will not bring endless glory.

surrealnumber5

If you really think that's what I believe, then you haven't been paying any attention to my posts here...

But they need that money to outsource more jobs to india!

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

If you really think that's what I believe, then you haven't been paying any attention to my posts here...

-Sun_Tzu-

But they need that money to outsource more jobs to india!

CaveJohnson1

@ EsYuGee Simple. End the wars, cut ALL foreign aid, cut all amnesty, privatize social security, take the government out of healthcare, end the fed, end US funding for the UN, and stopping corporate welfare should be our first step. Keep taxes at the same level they are now until we are no longer in debt, and no longer have a deficit. Once that is all over, abolish the income tax, as it is unconstitutional and is thievery. With small government and low spending, the government can run off of property and sales tax.Syk0_k03r

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"]@ EsYuGee Simple. End the wars, cut ALL foreign aid, cut all amnesty, privatize social security, take the government out of healthcare, end the fed, end US funding for the UN, and stopping corporate welfare should be our first step. Keep taxes at the same level they are now until we are no longer in debt, and no longer have a deficit. Once that is all over, abolish the income tax, as it is unconstitutional and is thievery. With small government and low spending, the government can run off of property and sales tax.CaveJohnson1

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

[QUOTE="Syk0_k03r"]@ EsYuGee Simple. End the wars, cut ALL foreign aid, cut all amnesty, privatize social security, take the government out of healthcare, end the fed, end US funding for the UN, and stopping corporate welfare should be our first step. Keep taxes at the same level they are now until we are no longer in debt, and no longer have a deficit. Once that is all over, abolish the income tax, as it is unconstitutional and is thievery. With small government and low spending, the government can run off of property and sales tax.Renevent42

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

it is not like there is any way to convince either of you that taxing infinite will not bring endless glory.

surrealnumber5

If you really think that's what I believe, then you haven't been paying any attention to my posts here...