Richest Are Leaving Even the Rich Far Behind

[Steve]

That's 266.07%

rpm are you serious?

[rpm]

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by oboe
Are you asking me to design my own tax code?   What I think it should look like?

So far all I've done is explain why I believe its fair that the wealthy should pay a higher percentage of taxes than the poor, and you've produced statistics which seem to indicate that they do.   Agreed?

My first quick answer would be to ask as much of them as before the Bush tax cuts.    But I'll think harder on it.    Right now, I gotta go out and mow my grass.

No matter what they (the "wealthy") pay in taxes, it will NEVER be enough in the eyes of those like you, EVER. It's called redistribution of wealth, AKA socialism. It's also called legalized stealing. The money DOES NOT belong to the government. It belongs to the person or persons who earn it.

This whole thing amazes, amuses, and deeply saddens me. The economy is not ZERO based. There is no finite amount of wealth. Just because Sam Walton made $X billion over his life time does not mean that "Joe S--T The Rag Man" was deprived of his "rightful opportunity to acquire wealth". It means Sam Walton did a better job. Just think of all the jobs in all the places all over the world that exist because people who created great wealth for themselves created those jobs in the process. Just exactly why is it that a person or persons who create or acquire wealth by legitimate means should be taxed at a higher rate than those who simply wander along aimlessly, never getting anywhere?

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." --Ronald Reagan

You can add to that the liberal view of how to deal with the wealthy, and fund their excess government: "If they make money, tax it. If they keep making money, tax it more. If they die, tax what they leave their heirs. If they complain about the ridiculous taxes, call them racists, elitists, evil, and greedy.
And if the excess taxes stop growth and wreck the economy, blame it on somebody or something else."

No matter how much revenue is taken in by taxes, they'll find a way to spend it, and a need for more. They'll claim a need to subsidize the poor instead finding a way to get the poor to bring themselves out of poverty. And they'll claim the wealthy should fund that subsidy, because they have money.

You just keep right on thinking real hard, I'm sure you'll find a reason and a way to take money that does not belong to you from people who earned it and justify it by saying "they have plenty, and more than anyone else". It'll still be just as wrong, just as evil, and just as damaging to the country and the economy.

[moot]

This post shoulda gone in the Special Relationship and Hate for everything russian threads, too..

[Silat]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
No matter what they (the "wealthy") pay in taxes, it will NEVER be enough in the eyes of those like you, EVER. It's called redistribution of wealth, AKA socialism. It's also called legalized stealing. The money DOES NOT belong to the government. It belongs to the person or persons who earn it.

Savage I just think its a different way of thinking.
Neither Oboe nor I are advocating socialism. But we do think that those with money should care greatly about those that dont have money. '

Im my opinion we are all in this together. If I or my government ( which is me )dont care for those with less than me then it will be a very messed up country.

Im fortunate in my life and have benefited greatly from Bush's caring of the rich. But I dont think it is right. I get to keep plenty and the 2 points he gave me didnt change my lifestyle one bit but it hurt those less fortunate than I.

And the government is US.

I want good roads,a teacher for every 9 kids ( as 95% of all studies recommend ) , no one in America to go hungry if they want to eat, no one to lack health care for any reason whatsoever.
I feel this is a small price for those in the top 1% to pay, to keep the little people happy:)

                     

                         

[moot]

Key word being 'should', not 'must'.  
You get what you earn, nothing more, nothing less.

[lazs2]

"I want good roads,a teacher for every 9 kids ( as 95% of all studies recommend ) , no one in America to go hungry if they want to eat, no one to lack health care for any reason whatsoever.
I feel this is a small price for those in the top 1% to pay, to keep the little people happy"

silat.. you don't seem that naive so I will assume you were joking..  For anyone dumb enough to think that you sounded reasonable....

If you want good roads then take the 34 cents a gallon of gas that we pay and make it an enterprise fund that can only go to building and maintaining roads....  not social programs... you would have gold plated roads built by the best contractors in the world...

You want good education?   twice as good do for a start?   allow vouchers and use the wasted money that goes to public schools to allow the parents to have some real choice in their childrens education... yeah... you need 9 in a classroom in liberal public schools... private schools do twice as good with classrooms 3-5 times as large.

Name someone who has starved to death (besides fasting to make tibet free or some such) or not been able to get into an emergency ward and emergency care.

Anyway... I am sure you know this and don't really want to stop the producers in this country from producing... you don't really expect to get a paycheck from the poor do you?

lazs

[oboe]

Savage that was harsh, and an incorrect assessment of my politics besides.   I don't like being lumped in with either liberals, conservatives, Republicans or Democrats.   I dislike alot of things about all of them.

Taxes aside, the biggest issue that bothers me about government is the reckless spending resulting in the deficit and staggering debt we are passing to our children.   I'm not an economist but I do understand there are times when deficit spending is a reasonable course.  But our current situation, however, feels far from reasonable and having to borrow $2 billion a day from the Chinese and Japanese to keep our country going is a disgrace.    Does that sound socialist?  Liberal?

The secondmost thing bothering me is bloated government - absolutely ineffective government programs, waste, fraud, corruption.   And we have plenty of that too.   Halliburton and Custer Battles are two companies that come to mind when thinking of waste and fraud.   But the permanent state of welfare queens bothers me alot too.    Does that sound like a socialist?

But I agree with Lew - we are looking at it differently than you.
My goals wouldn't be as expansive as Lew's - for example I think 9 kids per teacher may be unaffordable as anationwide standard.   But I sure as hell wouldn't mind getting down to 20-22 from the 30-40 students per teacher that my children currently endure.

My tax principles would be that everybody, EVERYBODY pays something (this means cracking down on illegal immigrant workers, tax evaders, etc) and nobody ever pays more than half their income in taxes.   Within those guidelines there is a broad range of possibilities, and I would probably skew more favorably toward the middle class families and small business.

You might think a nation with a small number of trillionaires and the rest of the population in poverty, without healthcare or education or decent jobs is fine if that's where globalism and the free market capitalism takes us (which is where I believe it does ultimately).   I don't.   But you don't have to look very hard to see trends that indicate its happening.

[Toad]

Virgil, spot on old chap.

Lew, did you return your Bush tax cut and tell them to pay down the national debt, fund a school program or feed the hungry with your contribution? Or did you just give it to the Salvation Army or something? Or did you keep it?

Oboe, there's not a single thing standing between you and sharing as much of your wealth as you choose to share with those less fortunate. I can link you to several worthy charities if you like.

[oboe]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Just exactly why is it that a person or persons who create or acquire wealth by legitimate means should be taxed at a higher rate than those who simply wander along aimlessly, never getting anywhere?

This answer to this is because they operated in an environment provided by our taxes to create the wealth.   Bully for them if they had the ingenuity and drive to create a company and jobs for people - that's great.   But recognize your and my tax money keeps the environment in which they succeed so well operating smoothly.

But how about Nike in Indonesia?   Or was it the Phillippines?   Sure, they created jobs but the employees earned so little they were basically economic slaves.   You cheer on that kind of system?

How about our own heritage with coal mining - economic conditions so harsh they inspired the song that goes - "sixteen tons and whaddaya get - another day older and deeper in debt." and "I've sold my soul to the company store."   Its great that you idolize successful capitalists but there are plenty that made their wealth by exploiting the workers.   Do you think that was right?  Is that what makes a nation strong and healthy?

[Toad]

In the present US system, what person or company is exploiting the workers as Nike did in SE Asia or as the coal companies did the later 1800's and early 1900's?

[lazs2]

oboe...  the rich pay a far higher share of the infrastucture than you or I...  If the money is spent badly it is not their fault but.. they pay more in road fees and everything else.

When a sudivision of houses is built.... It includes upgrades to the cities watrer, sewer, storm and park and road systems... the hookup fees for each house can run into $50,000 dollars (but you knew that).

Habitat for humanity is a great thing but the house they build is prtty much fee exempt and adds nothing to the community but a low income home owner... nothing wrong with that but.. you don't want a whole city of low income homes.

the socialist democrats and their butt buddies the teachers unions have destroyed education.. not the rich.

You did know that they early capitalist robber barons had their power through the power of the US military and local police right?

socialism is what will drag us all down not rich people creating more wealth.

Look at england.. Is that what you want?   you want to look at those teeth in the mirror?

lazs

[Suave]

Have you guys seen "Tax Me if you can" ?

[Toad]

Here you go Oboe. The Brits are pondering taxing all road users on a per mile basis.

What do you think? Fair? Not Fair?

UK would tag all vehicles in road pricing scheme

[Silat]

Originally posted by Toad
Virgil, spot on old chap.

Lew, did you return your Bush tax cut and tell them to pay down the national debt, fund a school program or feed the hungry with your contribution? Or did you just give it to the Salvation Army or something? Or did you keep it?

Oboe, there's not a single thing standing between you and sharing as much of your wealth as you choose to share with those less fortunate. I can link you to several worthy charities if you like.

We arent talking about what you or I give to charity.

We are talking about our (governments) responsibilities to its citizens.


And like I said, "We see things differently"


I love compassionate conservatives:) Wish I could find one:)