Cutting taxes sounds great till

[MikeK]

If you have more than anyone in your town I guess you should get busy writing checks then.

That would depend on how much one has and how little others have.

If you live in a place like Saudi Arabia and you fall into poverty you will end up living on slum streets and sustaining yourself by begging -- or you will starve. And if you get sick you will either get better or you will suffer and die on the street.

What are your thoughts on that kind of uncomplicated, straightforward social policy compared with the situation here in the U.S.?

 

[auditor0007]

Oh, oh, oh, pick me Mister Kottaire.

Cutting taxes sound great until the economy improves, companies start investing and hiring, people and businesses work less hard to avoid taxes and government revenue goes up as it has for every tax cut in history.

Hmmm...I thought I had that one, but they still sound great...

If tax cuts are the answer to all of our problems, and if tax cuts always increase revenues, then why don't we just cut taxes to zero. Apparently, your argument that every tax cut increases revenues would suggest that we would get the greatest return by cutting taxes to zero. Or is there a point when the formula no longer works?

You obviously have a limited affinity to math...in particular, calculus.

As with many things, there is a point where if you decrease something too much, the affect on something else goes from positive to negative.

It is not nearly as unusual as you seem to believe it is...and I find it humorous that mnbasketball thanked you for the statement as well.

Ummm, obviously you don't have a sense of humor. Of course I realize that you can't continually decrease something and continue to expect a positive effect. At some point there is a breaking point. My point is that we are likely at that point and cutting taxes any more than we have will only have a negative effect. Obviously, your affinity to sarcasm is lacking greatly.

 

[shintao]

Who was the best Pres...?

To answer this question you must first define the parameters of the exercise. A President is a figurehead that essentially leads. He cannot introduce legislation, create jobs or other things attributed to them while they are in office. They do have control on foreign policy and this is one area you can rate them on and leadership ability.

Leadership was definitely Reagan's strong-point and a President must be able to lead and on this basis He was the best. He also brought the country out the economic quagmire of the Carter years and the Foreign policy nightmare that Carter got us into.

I can't leave this post unchallenged. Carter inherited the economic quagmire (google: Ford stagflation WIN) and had very bad luck when our Embassy was taken over. Yet eventually all hostages came home safely. Carter did try to get us off oil, putting solar panels on the White House which Reagan promptly removed. Had Carter's vision prevailed we might be energy independent today and not engaged in two (three?) wars all of which have something to do with oil.
Presidents can create jobs, at least they can if the Congress cooperates. Posting that they cannot create policies which stimulate job growth is a lie.

Carter had 4 years to get the economy straightened out and could not do it. He appointed Admiral Stansfield Turner as director of the CIA who promptly fired all of the human operatives and virtually destroyed our Humit intelligence for decades. The fall of Iran and the hostage situation can be indirectly tied to his failures ad CIA director not to mention decades of problems in Central America.

Carter was and is not a bad person, but as a President he was a failure.

A President can lead and create policy, yes, but it is congressman and senators who introduce and make legislation.

Ahh, one of those theorists who thinks it is a Reagan economy.................

 

[Samson]

I can't leave this post unchallenged. Carter inherited the economic quagmire (google: Ford stagflation WIN) and had very bad luck when our Embassy was taken over. Yet eventually all hostages came home safely. Carter did try to get us off oil, putting solar panels on the White House which Reagan promptly removed. Had Carter's vision prevailed we might be energy independent today and not engaged in two (three?) wars all of which have something to do with oil.
Presidents can create jobs, at least they can if the Congress cooperates. Posting that they cannot create policies which stimulate job growth is a lie.

Carter had 4 years to get the economy straightened out and could not do it. He appointed Admiral Stansfield Turner as director of the CIA who promptly fired all of the human operatives and virtually destroyed our Humit intelligence for decades. The fall of Iran and the hostage situation can be indirectly tied to his failures ad CIA director not to mention decades of problems in Central America.

Carter was and is not a bad person, but as a President he was a failure.

A President can lead and create policy, yes, but it is congressman and senators who introduce and make legislation.

Ahh, one of those theorists who thinks it is a Reagan economy.................

Ahh, one of those theorists who has Reagan Derangement Syndrome.............

 

[editec]

We've been cutting taxes for the wealthy for decades.

How's that hopey-changey thing working out for most of us?

 

[asterism]

If you have more than anyone in your town I guess you should get busy writing checks then.

That would depend on how much one has and how little others have.

If you live in a place like Saudi Arabia and you fall into poverty you will end up living on slum streets and sustaining yourself by begging -- or you will starve. And if you get sick you will either get better or you will suffer and die on the street.

What are your thoughts on that kind of uncomplicated, straightforward social policy compared with the situation here in the U.S.?

I know that's not what it's like in Saudi Arabia for starters. That said, if you advocate those with more giving their money to those with less then you should get busy actually doing it yourself instead of trying get someone else (the government) the force others to contribute.

 

[8537]

Who was the best Pres...?

To answer this question you must first define the parameters of the exercise. A President is a figurehead that essentially leads. He cannot introduce legislation, create jobs or other things attributed to them while they are in office. They do have control on foreign policy and this is one area you can rate them on and leadership ability.

Leadership was definitely Reagan's strong-point and a President must be able to lead and on this basis He was the best. He also brought the country out the economic quagmire of the Carter years and the Foreign policy nightmare that Carter got us into.

I can't leave this post unchallenged. Carter inherited the economic quagmire (google: Ford stagflation WIN) and had very bad luck when our Embassy was taken over. Yet eventually all hostages came home safely. Carter did try to get us off oil, putting solar panels on the White House which Reagan promptly removed. Had Carter's vision prevailed we might be energy independent today and not engaged in two (three?) wars all of which have something to do with oil.
Presidents can create jobs, at least they can if the Congress cooperates. Posting that they cannot create policies which stimulate job growth is a lie.

Did you LIVE during the Carter years? The military crumbled, we waited in line for gas, our foreign policy was a disaster - as was the unemployment rate, interest rates on homes were 21%, we were the laughing stock of the middle east.....

Why the left continues to prop this failure Carter - as well as Obaba - up as successful presidents are truly amazing...

Obama is Carter on Steroids...

Carter increased military spending - significantly. Unemployment was about 7% when he took office...and 7%ish when he left. It reached 10+ under Reagan.

Interest rates reached their highest point under Reagan as well.

 

[8537]

Just because one isn't true, doesn't mean the other isn't. The war on the rich is quite observable. The left wing politicians and people on this board spout everyday about how the rich need to pay their fair share and how the rich keep the poor down. There is most definately a war on the wealthy.

While there definitely is a growing awareness and resentment of the political shift toward corporate dominance of and the influence of independent wealth on politics, please tell us how the "war" on the wealthy you refer to has manifested. Tell us what blows have been struck by ordinary Americans against the super-rich who are draining the vitality of this Nation like a flourishing cult of vampires.

But the war the corporatocracy and the wealthy have been waging against the common people since Reagan commenced the destruction of the middle class is clearly manifest in the stagnation and decline of wages, the elimination of unions, the exportation of American industries and jobs, the consistent rise in unemployment and homelessness, the engagement in unnecessary and unlawful military aggressions which benefit only the military industrial complex, the assaults on the environment by the oil and coal industries, corruption of the Supreme Court, incremental adaptation to police state tactics and the concentrated transfer of the Nation's wealth resources to a 2% minority of the population.

I would like to think you are consciously fabricating your claim that the "left" is waging war on the "rich" but I know you truly believe it. I know that because I have observed the progress of the deliberate indoctrination process conducted by corporate interests via the broadcast media and I believe you represent just one more example of its effectiveness.

You actually believe what you've said in the above message. And you believe it because Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and other propagandists in the employ of the corporatocracy have imbedded these ideas in your brain via methodically crafted, repetitive commentary.

Rush, Sean and Glenn are idiot entertainers that I have no time for if I did believe they had any credibility.

15% of my net, before personal deductions goes to government.
29% of my gross after all deductions goes to government.
6% goes to state government as income taxes.
6% for sales tax on what I consume.
If 56% of EVERY DAMN THING I make is not a war against the working man then:
WTF IS?!

We need a math check. If 15% of your net and 29% of your gross go to the government, you can't add them together and say 44% goes to the government - you're double counting the same pot.

Or, you're paying 15% on cap gains and 29% on income - In which case, you can't add them together.

And if you are paying 15% on cap gains, you clearly aren't spending every dollar you make on taxable consumption items, so you're not paying 6% of income in sales tax.

So, to review: You're paying nowhere near 56%. You might be paying 30-35%, on an expensive day.

 

[Screaming Eagle]

Cutting taxes sounds great till those cuts affect you.

No, that's when I finally win out. Look, there's only one tax that really helps me out, fuel taxes. Roads are about the only thing I like government doing.

 

[Bern80]

We've been cutting taxes for the wealthy for decades.

How's that hopey-changey thing working out for most of us?

Probably not well for those that thought the change wouldn't require any effort on their own part.

 

[Intense]

Cutting taxes sounds great till those cuts affect you. America is understanding more every day about what is going on here since the election. Tax cutting has consequences and when most all the cuts go to help one sector of the nation while everything else is force to either cut benefits or programs or make the general public do without or get by with less.

What were told is govt is costing us too much, and it should be cut. Putting money in the hands of people who will create jobs was/is being the big push behind most tax cuts, but where are the JOBS?

People who have money have proven that if you can get to this point where you can use that money you can increase your wealth and never lift a finger, create a job, start a business or help anyone but their own self worth.

So what is the new group in congress all about, there is only one thing that shows up at every step of the process, make the rich have a better oppertunity to get wealthier and those in the middle made to pick up more of the cost of running our nation and our local govts.

So we get to that point when we have the top 20% who have anything they want, the next 20% who have a decent life and then the rest of you that have so little chance to improve it will be sad.

There is no substitute for "Value for Value". There is no such thing as something for nothing. Somehow, some way, Somebody has to pay. How about next time you remember to flush.

 

[DiamondDave]

While there definitely is a growing awareness and resentment of the political shift toward corporate dominance of and the influence of independent wealth on politics, please tell us how the "war" on the wealthy you refer to has manifested. Tell us what blows have been struck by ordinary Americans against the super-rich who are draining the vitality of this Nation like a flourishing cult of vampires.

But the war the corporatocracy and the wealthy have been waging against the common people since Reagan commenced the destruction of the middle class is clearly manifest in the stagnation and decline of wages, the elimination of unions, the exportation of American industries and jobs, the consistent rise in unemployment and homelessness, the engagement in unnecessary and unlawful military aggressions which benefit only the military industrial complex, the assaults on the environment by the oil and coal industries, corruption of the Supreme Court, incremental adaptation to police state tactics and the concentrated transfer of the Nation's wealth resources to a 2% minority of the population.

I would like to think you are consciously fabricating your claim that the "left" is waging war on the "rich" but I know you truly believe it. I know that because I have observed the progress of the deliberate indoctrination process conducted by corporate interests via the broadcast media and I believe you represent just one more example of its effectiveness.

You actually believe what you've said in the above message. And you believe it because Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and other propagandists in the employ of the corporatocracy have imbedded these ideas in your brain via methodically crafted, repetitive commentary.

Rush, Sean and Glenn are idiot entertainers that I have no time for if I did believe they had any credibility.

15% of my net, before personal deductions goes to government.
29% of my gross after all deductions goes to government.
6% goes to state government as income taxes.
6% for sales tax on what I consume.
If 56% of EVERY DAMN THING I make is not a war against the working man then:
WTF IS?!

We need a math check. If 15% of your net and 29% of your gross go to the government, you can't add them together and say 44% goes to the government - you're double counting the same pot.

Or, you're paying 15% on cap gains and 29% on income - In which case, you can't add them together.

And if you are paying 15% on cap gains, you clearly aren't spending every dollar you make on taxable consumption items, so you're not paying 6% of income in sales tax.

So, to review: You're paying nowhere near 56%. You might be paying 30-35%, on an expensive day.

Yet you neglect to even think that there are even MORE taxes taken beyond what he mentioned.... dare we say property tax, gas tax, beverage tax, other excise taxes, fishing license tax, inheritance tax, recreational vehicle tax, telephone tax, power consumption tax, the list goes on...

The math may have been SLIGHTLY off in nitty gritty calculation... but yes, many MANY of us pay over 50% of our income in taxes, in one way, shape, or form....

 

[mnbasketball]

average middle class person earns around 51,000 and has a family of 3+ average.

The typical deduction for this group is around 25,000, so they pay taxes on around 26,000.

but they pay SS and med tax on 51,000.

7% of 51,000 is around 3500 SS tax
15% of 26000 is another 4000 income tax
average real estate tax(renters) 1500
state tax 6% 1500
gas tax $.48 gal (500 gals)250
sales tax 6% of 26,000 1500
Fees, other taxes 200

12,400 to taxes

approx 25% of total income in taxes on $51,000
if you take the figure that the govt allows for average deductions
you would have paid about 48% of taxable income

the rich (top20%) pay like 32% of their total income after the same deductions that are allowed to those making 51,000 plus other deductions that the middle class don't have access to.

the middle class has 39,000 to take care of a family of 3+ after taxes to pay for everything from food, to home cost(buying or renting), to clothes, to entertainment to ed. of kids, to medical and savings, to gas for car, and home electrical and gas. Not to mention emergencies.

The middle class pays a much higher after deductions tax portion of income that is 1 1/2 times that of the rich. it's a fact.

.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Cutting taxes sounds great till those cuts affect you. America is understanding more every day about what is going on here since the election. Tax cutting has consequences and when most all the cuts go to help one sector of the nation while everything else is force to either cut benefits or programs or make the general public do without or get by with less.

What were told is govt is costing us too much, and it should be cut. Putting money in the hands of people who will create jobs was/is being the big push behind most tax cuts, but where are the JOBS?

People who have money have proven that if you can get to this point where you can use that money you can increase your wealth and never lift a finger, create a job, start a business or help anyone but their own self worth.

So what is the new group in congress all about, there is only one thing that shows up at every step of the process, make the rich have a better oppertunity to get wealthier and those in the middle made to pick up more of the cost of running our nation and our local govts.

So we get to that point when we have the top 20% who have anything they want, the next 20% who have a decent life and then the rest of you that have so little chance to improve it will be sad.

The other day I was doing a service call at the local social service building for my county it was crowded with people waiting to talk with someone about getting help for government assistants. Couple of things I noticed. out of the 100 people sitting in the waiting room 75 of them were talking or texting on the latest cell phone. ad most of the women had a 125.00 hair care, with their nails manicured some even looked like their nail had gold painted on some nails. I overheard this one woman between talking her cell phone and talking with the receptionist that she needed help with her water bill because she had to pay her cable bill.

People need to get their priorities in order. I honestly hope my company I WORK for never sends me back to that place because I will cuss everyone of those cocksuckers out.

 

[Bern80]

average middle class person earns around 51,000 and has a family of 3+ average.

The typical deduction for this group is around 25,000, so they pay taxes on around 26,000.

but they pay SS and med tax on 51,000.

7% of 51,000 is around 3500 SS tax
15% of 26000 is another 4000 income tax
average real estate tax(renters) 1500
state tax 6% 1500
gas tax $.48 gal (500 gals)250
sales tax 6% of 26,000 1500
Fees, other taxes 200

12,400 to taxes

approx 25% of total income in taxes on $51,000
if you take the figure that the govt allows for average deductions
you would have paid about 48% of taxable income

the rich (top20%) pay like 32% of their total income after the same deductions that are allowed to those making 51,000 plus other deductions that the middle class don't have access to.

the middle class has 39,000 to take care of a family of 3+ after taxes to pay for everything from food, to home cost(buying or renting), to clothes, to entertainment to ed. of kids, to medical and savings, to gas for car, and home electrical and gas. Not to mention emergencies.

The middle class pays a much higher after deductions tax portion of income that is 1 1/2 times that of the rich. it's a fact.

.

Ummmmm the middle class doesn't have access to those deductions because you can't deduct something from nothing, you idiot.

How exatly did you figure that the middle class pays 1.5 x more than the rich cause I'm not seeing your math working out.

And here's a crazy idea. No one ever promised you 39k would be enough to raise a family of 3, so if it's not enough stop pissing and moaning and figure out how to make more.

 

[auditor0007]

average middle class person earns around 51,000 and has a family of 3+ average.

The typical deduction for this group is around 25,000, so they pay taxes on around 26,000.

but they pay SS and med tax on 51,000.

7% of 51,000 is around 3500 SS tax
15% of 26000 is another 4000 income tax
average real estate tax(renters) 1500
state tax 6% 1500
gas tax $.48 gal (500 gals)250
sales tax 6% of 26,000 1500
Fees, other taxes 200

12,400 to taxes

approx 25% of total income in taxes on $51,000
if you take the figure that the govt allows for average deductions
you would have paid about 48% of taxable income

the rich (top20%) pay like 32% of their total income after the same deductions that are allowed to those making 51,000 plus other deductions that the middle class don't have access to.

the middle class has 39,000 to take care of a family of 3+ after taxes to pay for everything from food, to home cost(buying or renting), to clothes, to entertainment to ed. of kids, to medical and savings, to gas for car, and home electrical and gas. Not to mention emergencies.

The middle class pays a much higher after deductions tax portion of income that is 1 1/2 times that of the rich. it's a fact.

.

Let's get serious, those other taxes are insignificant and unimportant. Stick to the subject matter. The only tax that is important is the income tax, and the rich are paying way too much. The only ones who disagree with this are the super wealthy themselves, like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, but who are they anyway?

 

[MikeK]

I know that's not what it's like in Saudi Arabia for starters.[...]

Do you?

(Excerpt)

[...]" Despite the government’s efforts, hundreds of thousands of Saudi citizens continue to live in extreme poverty, with no access to clean water, electricity, education, health services, and security. In some extremely poor urban enclaves, mostly in Riyadh and Jeddah, but also in the northern and southern border towns, there is a total absence of government institutions; from police stations and fire departments to schools and health clinics. Some areas are worse off than others. An example on the extreme end of things is a little-known neighborhood in Riyadh’s eastern suburbs, to which representatives of government institutions must be escorted by the National Guard, dressed in riot gear, inside armored tanks, to conduct normal, everyday business of security and infrastructural maintenance.[vii] According to first hand accounts, the level of poverty there is so extreme that men, women, and children who are not related to each other live under the same roof; children do not receive formal schooling; prostitution is rampant; and illegal drugs are found everywhere. This Saudi neighborhood is a 45-minute drive from my home in Riyadh. However, poverty does not only come in such an extreme picture, but also permeates the everyday lives of security guards, librarians, teachers, taxi drivers, and museum employees, all of whom live in our midst, but cannot make ends meet and can only suffer in silence."[...]

Poverty in the Oil Kingdom: An Introduction

And this in one of the world's richest nations, where oil princes ride around in chauffered Cadillacs with gold inlaid ornamentation.

What else do you know?

 

[mnbasketball]

average middle class person earns around 51,000 and has a family of 3+ average.

The typical deduction for this group is around 25,000, so they pay taxes on around 26,000.

but they pay SS and med tax on 51,000.

7% of 51,000 is around 3500 SS tax
15% of 26000 is another 4000 income tax
average real estate tax(renters) 1500
state tax 6% 1500
gas tax $.48 gal (500 gals)250
sales tax 6% of 26,000 1500
Fees, other taxes 200

12,400 to taxes

approx 25% of total income in taxes on $51,000
if you take the figure that the govt allows for average deductions
you would have paid about 48% of taxable income

the rich (top20%) pay like 32% of their total income after the same deductions that are allowed to those making 51,000 plus other deductions that the middle class don't have access to.

the middle class has 39,000 to take care of a family of 3+ after taxes to pay for everything from food, to home cost(buying or renting), to clothes, to entertainment to ed. of kids, to medical and savings, to gas for car, and home electrical and gas. Not to mention emergencies.

The middle class pays a much higher after deductions tax portion of income that is 1 1/2 times that of the rich. it's a fact.

.

Ummmmm the middle class doesn't have access to those deductions because you can't deduct something from nothing, you idiot.

How exatly did you figure that the middle class pays 1.5 x more than the rich cause I'm not seeing your math working out.

"The middle class pays a much higher after deductions tax portion of income that is 1 1/2 times that of the rich. it's a fact."



And here's a crazy idea. No one ever promised you 39k would be enough to raise a family of 3, so if it's not enough stop pissing and moaning and figure out how to make more.

they end up paying 48% tax of some kind on all their income after the standard deductions everyone gets.

the rich pay like 32% of their total income in some form of tax after their standard deduction everyone gets.

I did not say they pay 1 1/2 times as much, their tax rate is 1 1/2 times as high, is what I am saying on all income after the govt's standard deductions are taken.

a person making 51,000 and he has 26,000 in taxable income will pay around 13,000.00 in some form of tax on that 26,000.

a persom making 1,000,000 will have a 975,000 taxable income after min deduction but will end up paying only around 32% of that 975,000 in some form of tax.


26,000/13,000=50%,
975,000/320,000=32%

 

[auditor0007]

average middle class person earns around 51,000 and has a family of 3+ average.

The typical deduction for this group is around 25,000, so they pay taxes on around 26,000.

but they pay SS and med tax on 51,000.

7% of 51,000 is around 3500 SS tax
15% of 26000 is another 4000 income tax
average real estate tax(renters) 1500
state tax 6% 1500
gas tax $.48 gal (500 gals)250
sales tax 6% of 26,000 1500
Fees, other taxes 200

12,400 to taxes

approx 25% of total income in taxes on $51,000
if you take the figure that the govt allows for average deductions
you would have paid about 48% of taxable income

the rich (top20%) pay like 32% of their total income after the same deductions that are allowed to those making 51,000 plus other deductions that the middle class don't have access to.

the middle class has 39,000 to take care of a family of 3+ after taxes to pay for everything from food, to home cost(buying or renting), to clothes, to entertainment to ed. of kids, to medical and savings, to gas for car, and home electrical and gas. Not to mention emergencies.

The middle class pays a much higher after deductions tax portion of income that is 1 1/2 times that of the rich. it's a fact.

.

Ummmmm the middle class doesn't have access to those deductions because you can't deduct something from nothing, you idiot.

How exatly did you figure that the middle class pays 1.5 x more than the rich cause I'm not seeing your math working out.

And here's a crazy idea. No one ever promised you 39k would be enough to raise a family of 3, so if it's not enough stop pissing and moaning and figure out how to make more.

The one thing so many like you fail to realize is that the middle class is what makes the wealthy wealthy. If we lose the middle class, which we are, then there will be nobody left to purchase all the products that help keep the wealthy that way. Eventually, the wealthy will become poor also. I have nothing against the wealth, nor do I think we should rape them with overtaxation. However, they have earned a tremendous amount of wealth over the last twenty years on the backs of everyone else through taxation rates that are so low that we have become riddled with an almost insurmountable debt. Yet, people like you will try to blame it on the poor because they get a small monthly stipend to help them out. The poor who collect some type of welfare are not the real problem, although I do understand the frustration with a certain segment of society that chooses to remain poor because it is the easy way out.

 

[mnbasketball]

It's my true belief that 80% of the bottom dwellers could do everything right and would never be able to get past poverty level. Just the fact that there are 50 million people who are unemployed/ or given up looking for now, not counting those who will always be poor and unemployable for the most part, tells us that there isn't a road to get everyone out of the poverty that we have, there aren't enough jobs as many people right now are working two part time or low pay jobs to make ends meet.


Where do people get this idea that everyone who is poor has gotten there because of the fact they are lazy?

When you try to improve your lot in life and by doing so, getting a job ends up making your life less worthwhile, makes it real hard to entice someone to better themselves. I don't know what the answer is, but turning your back on the people who are hurting because WE think we want a better life is not anything that I can be for..


and no I don't need a job, I am retired and live comfortable compared to the needy in our country, and I pay a fair share even in retirement.