NathanMcMahon
Banned
wtf
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Republican senator says if the wealthy don't get tax cuts, nobody else will either
- Thread starter Oblivion
- Start date
- Status
wtf
Caught in a landslide...
Yeah, you are right. I just don't have it in me.
For the sake of some argument, yes Im a registered Republican.
I think the "TAX THE RICH" is retarded because it is a red herring in terms of the actual debt and tax issues. Rasing the taxes on the "rich" doesn't really increase much revenue. Its just a symbolic thing.
There is no question that tax REVENUE needs to go up in a significant way, but I disagree with tax hikes and I more support the lowering of the tax rate, but the elimiation of many loop holes. This will lower taxes AND increase revenue...A pipe dream perhaps.
Thats about all I have in the tank for this argument.
I think some of you guys are being a bit unfair to Republicans...sociopaths? really?
Though, it is a sad comentary on politcs and the media that unless you are a freakin bomb thrower (yes, figurative of speach...can't be too careful with that incendiary language..wait...damn it...did it again...), no one will listen to you. Good, solid solutions (like the Simpson-Bowles debt reduction committee that Obama commissioned), get completely ignored because everyone has to pluck a feather from the golden goose.
I don't think any of this is unreasonable per se, but the devil is in the details. Our current system rewards people who can hire better accountants, so that's not ideal for anybody except accountants. But for tax reform to be functionally productive, it will have to mean functionally higher tax rates on the rich AND that portion of the middle class that takes advantage of all the loopholes.
spiderman123
Member
I'm rich, I'm Canadian, I hate high taxes but does it affect my lifestyle. NO
I know this is off-topic and I'll call Lindsey Graham a moron in a minute, but if Romney does this I will die from laughter.
Government spending is the slowest in decades
The debt/deficit "problem" is a tax problem. Taxes themselves are at all time lows because of the Bush Tax Cuts, and along with that revenue is down because it's a recession, so people are unemployed and can't pay into the system, etc.
les papillons sexuels
Banned
taxes make everything cheaper, some people will grow up and understand this, some will be ignorant, but in the long run taxes make things cheaper.
as a canadian, my vote goes to the party who is willing to raise taxes, who has the balls to be accountable with the citizens money.
as a canadian, my vote goes to the party who is willing to raise taxes, who has the balls to be accountable with the citizens money.
I don't disagree with the overall point of your post but bush's tax cut for the rich costs us about 10 billion a year which is a lot of mars rovers.
rudieboy77
Member
Graham says he would support the Simpson/Bowles plan, which would dramatically cut Social Security and Medicare. Then says if the top do not continue to keep the Bush tax cuts no one should have a tax break? I do not see how much more obvious Republicans have make their position to folks. It surely will be interesting when the folks who support these politicians realize their benefits and social insurance that they have paid for has been drastically cut. Eventually they will notice that they had to be the ones to pay back all the debt and that the rich got a tax break, credit, grant, handout. I'm sure the Republicans will have someone else for them to blame then, probably the normal scape goat, the poor.
spiderman123
Member
As a canadian I say no to this. I vote for those who are fiscally responsible. Sure raise taxes but show me that its worth it.
Reducing government spending means eliminating government jobs. That increases the unemployment rate which drags the economy down.
Government employment has dropped like a rock since the recession hit. It's not a spending problem. The problem is the preferential treatment the rich receive from capital investment tax rates. Paying ~15% on hundreds of millions in earnings while people earning $60k/year pay in the mid 20's is shameful.
ETA: Regarding the cost for the tax cuts, here's the projections from 2010:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/11/us/politics/11tax.html
ClassyPenguin
Banned
from poligaf:
"More than 680,000 Federal, State and Local government jobs have been eliminated since 2009, the biggest 3 year decline on record. If these jobs still existed it would lower the unemployment rate by 1%.
But take a closer look at the two steepest increases in government employment since 1968. Those "fat times" occurred during the early 1970's (Nixon) and the 1980's (Reagan and Bush I). Isn't it precious that Republicans paint Democrats as the party of big government and big spending?"
http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/2012/08/government-employment-at-lowest-level.html
Government Employment At Lowest Level Since 1968
"More than 680,000 Federal, State and Local government jobs have been eliminated since 2009, the biggest 3 year decline on record. If these jobs still existed it would lower the unemployment rate by 1%.
But take a closer look at the two steepest increases in government employment since 1968. Those "fat times" occurred during the early 1970's (Nixon) and the 1980's (Reagan and Bush I). Isn't it precious that Republicans paint Democrats as the party of big government and big spending?"
You also pay payroll taxes for each employee, raising taxes does not encourage companies to hire if they don't see the need to since a raise in taxes equals a raise in payroll tax.
Wafflecakes
Member
Plan:
1. Let Bush Tax cuts expire.
2. Pass new tax cuts for middle class. (who is honestly going to vote against this who wants reelected?)
3. Profit?
1. Let Bush Tax cuts expire.
2. Pass new tax cuts for middle class. (who is honestly going to vote against this who wants reelected?)
3. Profit?
Mammoth Jones
Member
I like you.
So where do we get the revenue we need? Sure, we can all say cut taxes for the middle class, but that has to go hand in hand with raising taxes on the rich right?
Unless you want to cut services with those tax cuts?
Tax cuts do not create jobs. There is NO evidence of that, period. Bush's tax cuts didn't create shit, that's a fact. The only "jobs" that got created during the Bush years was military and off shoots from the military. Jobs are created when DEMAND is there. Demand is caused by the MIDDLE CLASS, not the high income people. It's a fact. 20 people buying a Ford Escort helps the economy more than 1 dude buying a Ferrari. Ever since WW2 our economy has grown and grown and grown with a few bumps. Only after NAFTA was signed (the thing I blame Clinton for, but otherwise I think he did a good job 8 years of no major wars and strong economic growth and gas prices never above $1.30 a gallon is proof of that) and then all of the banking laws that were in place since the Great Depression were taken down by a mainly republican congress, that we started to see the glide into a plutocracy. But most tea partiers/republican's are basing their "theorycraft" on covert Ayn Randism's that's being sprouted by the likes of Ryan et al.
In other words: they are basing their ideology on un-proven theories that have been co-opted from Ayn Rand's philosophy.
Wafflecakes
Member
IISANDERII
Member
To be fair, many of us here have an exaggerated definition of the word 'productive'.
les papillons sexuels
Banned
oh, fiscal responisibility is key, but I think it's porportional to the amount of taxes people pay.
if people have to give more taxes to the government they're going to make the government more accountable, take a stronger interest in where their money goes.
More taxes mean less passive politics and more educated people.
If your cable bill is $500 a month, you better believe that people would not let the cable company ever have a disruption of service, they're going to be making sure they get the best quality, and they're gonna be ensuring the accountability of the cable company.
If we have higher taxes, so too would we get higher financial accountability, and transparant government too.
br0ken_shad0w
Member
trickledown.jpg
MasterOfPastures
Banned
Is there any way to influence budgets in the US beyond electing representatives?
Wafflecakes
Member
Not on the national level no.
But of course the private sector tends to be more efficient with programs than the public sector in the long run.
Sure more spending means more public-sector employment but does that make things necessarily better?
Well, California tried the whole direct democracy thing and it's failing miserably.
Prove it.
If the private sector thinks it can make more money with unsafe working conditions for labor, then that's what they'll do. But it doesn't mean they will make more money, or that it's the best course of action objectively.
That depends entirely on the nature of that program.
Forgotten_Taco
Member
Now here's a platform to hang a campaign on.
travisbickle
Member
les papillons sexuels
Banned
colorado springs proves otherwise.
Right. Look at how efficient the US healthcare system is. Not a penny wasted.
Dude Abides
Banned
I believe PMing a mod is the preferred avenue for whining about moderation.
haha good one
Right now the private sector has 8% of our working population completely un-utilized. These are people that want to work, but are not given something to do. I don't think I could ever describe something more inefficient if I tried.
Yes. More employment means more money means more sales means more demand means less of a recession.
Mr. B Natural
Member
Are the Chinese breaking down our doors? What does the debt have anything to do with our cause and sustaining of our recent slump?
Is our debt an issue? Of course. Does it have much to do with what america has been complaining about? Not really. If anything it was a great way to fire-up the tea party movement and that's about it.
We do not have a gross issue. We have PLENTY of money flowing in our system, it's just stuck at the top...it trickled up.
BattleMonkey
Member
Stop trying to take my money!
Come at me!
Come at me!
No it isn't. In a fiat monetary system debt itself isn't an issue. Our debt is nothing more than another government spending program. We could end it at any time. The issue you look toward when trying to see if your government is spending too much or too little is inflation, not debt. Debt is just a scorecard, really.
Yeah, because that's how an economy works. Money flows upwards. You counteract that with a decent progressive tax system. It's stuck at the top because the tax system isn't working.
Which, if it were to raise revenue, would simply be a tax increase on the rich...which the Republicans will vote against no matter what.
Mr. B Natural
Member
Working class also had labor unions as well to counter the natural flow of power and money. But global economy trumps local/national unions.
Perhaps, but HOW things get done are just as important as the end result.
Both parties in the "sound bites" are missing the point. Revenue MUST increase, and spending must be reduced. Thats not rocket science.
Neither party wants to give in to the other and thus the most sensible of solutions (and the one reached by a bi-partisan committee) will be forever ignored.
It's also not true.
When you're in a recession, you deficit spend. When the business cycle turns and you're in a boom, you raise taxes and pay down the deficit. Mitigate the business cycle.
Government spending is the slowest in decades
The debt/deficit "problem" is a tax problem. Taxes themselves are at all time lows because of the Bush Tax Cuts, and along with that revenue is down because it's a recession, so people are unemployed and can't pay into the system, etc.
That image right there is why I can't vote for republicans anymore. They're liars. They talk about smaller government, etc. But when they get elected they do the opposite of what they say. There's a track record and it's in black and white.
Raising taxes on everybody and decreasing spending is one way to exacerbate the recession. Why do you think we have to reduce our spending right now?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked