Let Capitalism Work! Tax the Rich!

[jgarden]

The common mantra amongst just about anyone that knows the economy is that Capatalism is good because it shoots productivity through the roof. This is true, allow people the chance to make there own fate and they are highly motivated to make something of themselves.

Also the common mantra amonst most neocons and people that are pushing for tax cuts for the rich is that it will create more jobs. The way to create more jobs is for rich people to get to work. To invest that money and expand there business and to hire people. They arent going to get any richer unless they work harder! They arent going to get richer unless they deserve it!

Instead of trying to give them everything they want, why dont we start taxing them harder, to give them an incentive to work?? This really isnt that radical of an idea, its something these same people have been doing to the working class of people. Paying them less so they work harder.

Can anyone explain to me why giving rich people everything they want, and allowing them to gain wealth and riches beyond measure, will create more jobs?? Especially considering that is counterproductive to the basic rules of capitalism??

Or is our economic model better represented by capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich?

Responsibility for America's huge federal debt can be directly attributed to 3 American presidents - Ronald Reagan, GHW Bush and GW Bush.

Under the much maligned Jimmy Carter, the federal debt/GDP ratio actually reached its lowest point since 1945. After 8 years of the Reagan Administration, the debt/GDP ratio went from 32.5% to 53.1% - a 20.6% increase.

When GHW Bush left office in 1989, the debt/GDP ratio had increased from 53.1% to 66.1% - a 13.0% increase.

Under the Clinton Adminstration the ratio actually decreased from 66.1% to 56.4% - down 9.7%. Despite being labelled as "tax and spend" Democrats, no Democratic president had increased the debt/GDP ratio between 1945 and 2009.

Between 2001 and 2009, the GW Bush Administration raised the debt/GDP ratio from 56.4% to 84.2% - an increase of 27.8%.

These 3 Republican presidents, combined, are responsible for a debt/GDP increase of 61.4%.

After the 2008 election, American conservatives then experienced an "epihany," suddenly came to the realization that America was deep in debt and decided to start looking for a "scapegoat" - instead of looking in the mirror.

What also links these 3 presidents was the introduction of major federal tax cuts that benefited the wealthy - based on the false assumption that the initial loss in taxes would be more than compensated by revenues resulting from an expanding US economy.

Taxing the wealthy is the logical place to raise revenues to address the debt - since they were the one and only group that actually benefited from the tax-cutting policies that contributed to it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

 

[billyshugeBhole]

stop making sense!! We will have none of that!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The common mantra amongst just about anyone that knows the economy is that Capatalism is good because it shoots productivity through the roof. This is true, allow people the chance to make there own fate and they are highly motivated to make something of themselves.

Also the common mantra amonst most neocons and people that are pushing for tax cuts for the rich is that it will create more jobs. The way to create more jobs is for rich people to get to work. To invest that money and expand there business and to hire people. They arent going to get any richer unless they work harder! They arent going to get richer unless they deserve it!

Instead of trying to give them everything they want, why dont we start taxing them harder, to give them an incentive to work?? This really isnt that radical of an idea, its something these same people have been doing to the working class of people. Paying them less so they work harder.

Can anyone explain to me why giving rich people everything they want, and allowing them to gain wealth and riches beyond measure, will create more jobs?? Especially considering that is counterproductive to the basic rules of capitalism??

Or is our economic model better represented by capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich?

Instead of trying to give them everything they want, why dont we start taxing them harder, to give them an incentive to work??

As usual, idiot liberals have everything backwards. I'll try to explain.
Take an evil rich guy who makes $1000 a day. At the current 35% top rate, a day off to spend with his family costs him $650. Raise his taxes to 70% and a day off only costs him $300. Chances are, he's going to take more time off to spend with his family.

If you think cutting his take home from $650 to $300 will get him to double (or more) his time at work, just to send more money to whiners like you, you're dumber than you sound.

 

[WatertheTree]

Well ive said it a few times already in this thread, and everyone is so quick to repeat the mantra to me, but none will address the fallacy.

All you sheeple are convinced that we need these douchbags. As if there is not an endless line of competition who is being suppressed by the government. Tax the rich! If they dont want to play in the market then say goodbye by helping a smaller business that does want to play ball.

We should be encouraging economic growth in the middle and lower classes while taxing the concentrations of money in the money supply. What we currently do is encourage economic growth in the rich, and tax everyone lower.

How sad you people are to not see what is so obvious.

 

[Mr.Nick]

The common mantra amongst just about anyone that knows the economy is that Capatalism is good because it shoots productivity through the roof. This is true, allow people the chance to make there own fate and they are highly motivated to make something of themselves.

Also the common mantra amonst most neocons and people that are pushing for tax cuts for the rich is that it will create more jobs. The way to create more jobs is for rich people to get to work. To invest that money and expand there business and to hire people. They arent going to get any richer unless they work harder! They arent going to get richer unless they deserve it!

Instead of trying to give them everything they want, why dont we start taxing them harder, to give them an incentive to work?? This really isnt that radical of an idea, its something these same people have been doing to the working class of people. Paying them less so they work harder.

Can anyone explain to me why giving rich people everything they want, and allowing them to gain wealth and riches beyond measure, will create more jobs?? Especially considering that is counterproductive to the basic rules of capitalism??

Or is our economic model better represented by capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich?

How about the more money the "rich" have equals the more they can invest equals more jobs..

Not to mention wealth isn't finite - its infinite under the capitalist model - or at least our monetary system.

Think about it.

A person gets up and goes to work.... That person just created wealth that wasn't there the previous day..

I don't know why capitalism is so hard to grasp..

Most morons treat the economy like its a bag of M&M's and there is not enough to share with everyone and some kid has 10 while others are left with one or none... That is NOT how capitalism works - capitalism is the fucking chocolate factory where they make the M&M's - there are as much as you want but you have to make them...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well ive said it a few times already in this thread, and everyone is so quick to repeat the mantra to me, but none will address the fallacy.

All you sheeple are convinced that we need these douchbags. As if there is not an endless line of competition who is being suppressed by the government. Tax the rich! If they dont want to play in the market then say goodbye by helping a smaller business that does want to play ball.

We should be encouraging economic growth in the middle and lower classes while taxing the concentrations of money in the money supply. What we currently do is encourage economic growth in the rich, and tax everyone lower.

How sad you people are to not see what is so obvious.

You're right, we don't need douchbags. But enough about you.

 

[bripat9643]

Well ive said it a few times already in this thread, and everyone is so quick to repeat the mantra to me, but none will address the fallacy.

All you sheeple are convinced that we need these douchbags. As if there is not an endless line of competition who is being suppressed by the government.

What the hell is "an endless line of competition?" You can't even speak coherent English sentences. Why should anyone swallow your pontifications on taxation?

Tax the rich! If they dont want to play in the market then say goodbye by helping a smaller business that does want to play ball.

Small business owners are the people turds like you call "the rich." You're trying to loot them into oblivion.

We should be encouraging economic growth in the middle and lower classes while taxing the concentrations of money in the money supply. What we currently do is encourage economic growth in the rich, and tax everyone lower.

People in the middle class all work for rich people. How are you going to promote economic growth among the middle class by taxing their employers into oblivion? The rich pay the bulk of taxes, so your claim that we don't tax them is a bald-faced lie.

How sad you people are to not see what is so obvious.

It's only "obvious" to drones with their heads immersed in the Kool-Aid jug.

 

[WatertheTree]

The common mantra amongst just about anyone that knows the economy is that Capatalism is good because it shoots productivity through the roof. This is true, allow people the chance to make there own fate and they are highly motivated to make something of themselves.

Also the common mantra amonst most neocons and people that are pushing for tax cuts for the rich is that it will create more jobs. The way to create more jobs is for rich people to get to work. To invest that money and expand there business and to hire people. They arent going to get any richer unless they work harder! They arent going to get richer unless they deserve it!

Instead of trying to give them everything they want, why dont we start taxing them harder, to give them an incentive to work?? This really isnt that radical of an idea, its something these same people have been doing to the working class of people. Paying them less so they work harder.

Can anyone explain to me why giving rich people everything they want, and allowing them to gain wealth and riches beyond measure, will create more jobs?? Especially considering that is counterproductive to the basic rules of capitalism??

Or is our economic model better represented by capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich?

How about the more money the "rich" have equals the more they can invest equals more jobs..

Not to mention wealth isn't finite - its infinite under the capitalist model - or at least our monetary system.

Think about it.

A person gets up and goes to work.... That person just created wealth that wasn't there the previous day..

I don't know why capitalism is so hard to grasp..

Most morons treat the economy like its a bag of M&M's and there is not enough to share with everyone and some kid has 10 while others are left with one or none... That is NOT how capitalism works - capitalism is the fucking chocolate factory where they make the M&M's - there are as much as you want but you have to make them...

Thats what we have banks for, and thats what we have investors for. If rich people dont want to work then investors can invest in people that do. Nothing will change, investors will still want to get paid. If the banks dont want to lend then its time for the government to direct flow of new money to banks that will. Rich people need us, we dont need them. What we need is sovereign money and a tax system that serves the needs of the country not a tax system that serves the rich.

Good god people, who among us can even speculate how fast the GDP would soar of we eliminated all taxes on small and medium business, cut the taxes on big business in half, and then tripled the taxes on rich peoples income and giving the benefits to the middle class?

This is after all pretty much the exact opposite of what we have been doing for the last 50 years. You know, back in the good times when we were prosperous.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The common mantra amongst just about anyone that knows the economy is that Capatalism is good because it shoots productivity through the roof. This is true, allow people the chance to make there own fate and they are highly motivated to make something of themselves.

Also the common mantra amonst most neocons and people that are pushing for tax cuts for the rich is that it will create more jobs. The way to create more jobs is for rich people to get to work. To invest that money and expand there business and to hire people. They arent going to get any richer unless they work harder! They arent going to get richer unless they deserve it!

Instead of trying to give them everything they want, why dont we start taxing them harder, to give them an incentive to work?? This really isnt that radical of an idea, its something these same people have been doing to the working class of people. Paying them less so they work harder.

Can anyone explain to me why giving rich people everything they want, and allowing them to gain wealth and riches beyond measure, will create more jobs?? Especially considering that is counterproductive to the basic rules of capitalism??

Or is our economic model better represented by capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich?

How about the more money the "rich" have equals the more they can invest equals more jobs..

Not to mention wealth isn't finite - its infinite under the capitalist model - or at least our monetary system.

Think about it.

A person gets up and goes to work.... That person just created wealth that wasn't there the previous day..

I don't know why capitalism is so hard to grasp..

Most morons treat the economy like its a bag of M&M's and there is not enough to share with everyone and some kid has 10 while others are left with one or none... That is NOT how capitalism works - capitalism is the fucking chocolate factory where they make the M&M's - there are as much as you want but you have to make them...

Thats what we have banks for, and thats what we have investors for. If rich people dont want to work then investors can invest in people that do. Nothing will change, investors will still want to get paid. If the banks dont want to lend then its time for the government to direct flow of new money to banks that will. Rich people need us, we dont need them. What we need is sovereign money and a tax system that serves the needs of the country not a tax system that serves the rich.

Good god people, who among us can even speculate how fast the GDP would soar of we eliminated all taxes on small and medium business, cut the taxes on big business in half, and then tripled the taxes on rich peoples income and giving the benefits to the middle class?

This is after all pretty much the exact opposite of what we have been doing for the last 50 years. You know, back in the good times when we were prosperous.

Good god people, who among us can even speculate how fast the GDP would soar of we eliminated all taxes on small and medium business, cut the taxes on big business in half, and then tripled the taxes on rich peoples income and giving the benefits to the middle class?

Let's see, triple the tax on rich people's income.....3 times 35% = 105%.
And give the benefits to the middle class.
If we give the middle class 105% of rich people's income, how much money will that be?

 

[Mr.Nick]

The common mantra amongst just about anyone that knows the economy is that Capatalism is good because it shoots productivity through the roof. This is true, allow people the chance to make there own fate and they are highly motivated to make something of themselves.

Also the common mantra amonst most neocons and people that are pushing for tax cuts for the rich is that it will create more jobs. The way to create more jobs is for rich people to get to work. To invest that money and expand there business and to hire people. They arent going to get any richer unless they work harder! They arent going to get richer unless they deserve it!

Instead of trying to give them everything they want, why dont we start taxing them harder, to give them an incentive to work?? This really isnt that radical of an idea, its something these same people have been doing to the working class of people. Paying them less so they work harder.

Can anyone explain to me why giving rich people everything they want, and allowing them to gain wealth and riches beyond measure, will create more jobs?? Especially considering that is counterproductive to the basic rules of capitalism??

Or is our economic model better represented by capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich?

How about the more money the "rich" have equals the more they can invest equals more jobs..

Not to mention wealth isn't finite - its infinite under the capitalist model - or at least our monetary system.

Think about it.

A person gets up and goes to work.... That person just created wealth that wasn't there the previous day..

I don't know why capitalism is so hard to grasp..

Most morons treat the economy like its a bag of M&M's and there is not enough to share with everyone and some kid has 10 while others are left with one or none... That is NOT how capitalism works - capitalism is the fucking chocolate factory where they make the M&M's - there are as much as you want but you have to make them...

Thats what we have banks for, and thats what we have investors for. If rich people dont want to work then investors can invest in people that do. Nothing will change, investors will still want to get paid. If the banks dont want to lend then its time for the government to direct flow of new money to banks that will. Rich people need us, we dont need them. What we need is sovereign money and a tax system that serves the needs of the country not a tax system that serves the rich.

Good god people, who among us can even speculate how fast the GDP would soar of we eliminated all taxes on small and medium business, cut the taxes on big business in half, and then tripled the taxes on rich peoples income and giving the benefits to the middle class?

This is after all pretty much the exact opposite of what we have been doing for the last 50 years. You know, back in the good times when we were prosperous.

NOT invest in banks - invest in their own business....

You do realize wal mart just wasn't constructed out of thin air??? or Mc Donalds, Burger King etc...

Those franchises and corporations grew because the owners reinvested back into them.. That created jobs..

You see how that works???

Every large mega franchise or corporation in the US is proof positive that the "rich" will reinvest back into their own businesses.

You know why?? because they all started as small businesses and grew from there...

When you tax the shit out of the rich that money that may have went into opening a new Burger King franchise is now in the governments pocket and all those people who would have had jobs now don't - no they get welfare from the guy who could have given him or her a job...

You see...

 

[WatertheTree]

How about the more money the "rich" have equals the more they can invest equals more jobs..

Not to mention wealth isn't finite - its infinite under the capitalist model - or at least our monetary system.

Think about it.

A person gets up and goes to work.... That person just created wealth that wasn't there the previous day..

I don't know why capitalism is so hard to grasp..

Most morons treat the economy like its a bag of M&M's and there is not enough to share with everyone and some kid has 10 while others are left with one or none... That is NOT how capitalism works - capitalism is the fucking chocolate factory where they make the M&M's - there are as much as you want but you have to make them...

Thats what we have banks for, and thats what we have investors for. If rich people dont want to work then investors can invest in people that do. Nothing will change, investors will still want to get paid. If the banks dont want to lend then its time for the government to direct flow of new money to banks that will. Rich people need us, we dont need them. What we need is sovereign money and a tax system that serves the needs of the country not a tax system that serves the rich.

Good god people, who among us can even speculate how fast the GDP would soar of we eliminated all taxes on small and medium business, cut the taxes on big business in half, and then tripled the taxes on rich peoples income and giving the benefits to the middle class?

This is after all pretty much the exact opposite of what we have been doing for the last 50 years. You know, back in the good times when we were prosperous.

NOT invest in banks - invest in their own business....

You do realize wal mart just wasn't constructed out of thin air??? or Mc Donalds, Burger King etc...

Those franchises and corporations grew because the owners reinvested back into them.. That created jobs..

You see how that works???

Every large mega franchise or corporation in the US is proof positive that the "rich" will reinvest back into their own businesses.

You know why?? because they all started as small businesses and grew from there...

When you tax the shit out of the rich that money that may have went into opening a new Burger King franchise is now in the governments pocket and all those people who would have had jobs now don't - no they get welfare from the guy who could have given him or her a job...

You see...

Agian, and I really feel like a broken record here, there are plenty of people waiting in line to be the next 'burger king' or whatever. Your entire argument is based on a fallacy that we need them, that society will just fall apart if stop serving rich people. I sure dont know to many people that wouldnt like to make a million a month, even if it ment paying the government 60% of it. Its still living like a king.

Well I unlike you do not think there is a shortage of people trying to grow there business into something big but hits brickwall after brickwall of red tape and barriers to entry and operation. Eliminate them and promote upward mobility in both business and people, watch how trivial 'to big to fail' gets.

 

[bripat9643]

Agian, and I really feel like a broken record here, there are plenty of people waiting in line to be the next 'burger king' or whatever.

There won't be if your policy of looting the wealthy is enacted. Staring a business takes capital (money) and you would have government confiscate all the money available for such purposes. Furthermore, you would take away the incentive for anyone to start such a business since you would tax away all their profits.

Your entire argument is based on a fallacy that we need them, that society will just fall apart if stop serving rich people.

Treating rich people the same as everyone else is not "serving" them. The fact is that we do need rich people. America's productive capital has to be owned by someone. Otherwise the government has to own it, and we already know that arrangement is a disaster.

I sure dont know to many people that wouldnt like to make a million a month, even if it ment paying the government 60% of it. Its still living like a king.

People earning a million a month don't spend it all on caviar and champagne, dolt. The invest the bulk of it. That means they use it create jobs. Tax that money away and you destroy all the jobs that might have been created.

Well I unlike you do not think there is a shortage of people trying to grow there business into something big but hits brickwall after brickwall of red tape and barriers to entry and operation.

That's because you're a Marxist moron.

Eliminate them and promote upward mobility in both business and people, watch how trivial 'to big to fail' gets.

You're like the stupid king who has executed every single person who has been his finance minister and then wonders why he can't find a qualified person for the job.

 

[WatertheTree]

Agian, and I really feel like a broken record here, there are plenty of people waiting in line to be the next 'burger king' or whatever.

There won't be if your policy of looting the wealthy is enacted. Staring a business takes capital (money) and you would have government confiscate all the money available for such purposes. Furthermore, you would take away the incentive for anyone to start such a business since you would tax away all their profits.

Your entire argument is based on a fallacy that we need them, that society will just fall apart if stop serving rich people.

Treating rich people the same as everyone else is not "serving" them. The fact is that we do need rich people. America's productive capital has to be owned by someone. Otherwise the government has to own it, and we already know that arrangement is a disaster.



People earning a million a month don't spend it all on caviar and champagne, dolt. The invest the bulk of it. That means they use it create jobs. Tax that money away and you destroy all the jobs that might have been created.

Well I unlike you do not think there is a shortage of people trying to grow there business into something big but hits brickwall after brickwall of red tape and barriers to entry and operation.

That's because you're a Marxist moron.

Eliminate them and promote upward mobility in both business and people, watch how trivial 'to big to fail' gets.

You're like the stupid king who has executed every single person who has been his finance minister and then wonders why he can't find a qualified person for the job.

Fuck you fascist pig!

 

[Charles_Main]

The common mantra amongst just about anyone that knows the economy is that Capatalism is good because it shoots productivity through the roof. This is true, allow people the chance to make there own fate and they are highly motivated to make something of themselves.

Also the common mantra amonst most neocons and people that are pushing for tax cuts for the rich is that it will create more jobs. The way to create more jobs is for rich people to get to work. To invest that money and expand there business and to hire people. They arent going to get any richer unless they work harder! They arent going to get richer unless they deserve it!

Instead of trying to give them everything they want, why dont we start taxing them harder, to give them an incentive to work?? This really isnt that radical of an idea, its something these same people have been doing to the working class of people. Paying them less so they work harder.

Can anyone explain to me why giving rich people everything they want, and allowing them to gain wealth and riches beyond measure, will create more jobs?? Especially considering that is counterproductive to the basic rules of capitalism??

Or is our economic model better represented by capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich?

We do Tax the Rich, At a much Higher Rate than the Bottom 50% of us.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Thats what we have banks for, and thats what we have investors for. If rich people dont want to work then investors can invest in people that do. Nothing will change, investors will still want to get paid. If the banks dont want to lend then its time for the government to direct flow of new money to banks that will. Rich people need us, we dont need them. What we need is sovereign money and a tax system that serves the needs of the country not a tax system that serves the rich.

Good god people, who among us can even speculate how fast the GDP would soar of we eliminated all taxes on small and medium business, cut the taxes on big business in half, and then tripled the taxes on rich peoples income and giving the benefits to the middle class?

This is after all pretty much the exact opposite of what we have been doing for the last 50 years. You know, back in the good times when we were prosperous.

NOT invest in banks - invest in their own business....

You do realize wal mart just wasn't constructed out of thin air??? or Mc Donalds, Burger King etc...

Those franchises and corporations grew because the owners reinvested back into them.. That created jobs..

You see how that works???

Every large mega franchise or corporation in the US is proof positive that the "rich" will reinvest back into their own businesses.

You know why?? because they all started as small businesses and grew from there...

When you tax the shit out of the rich that money that may have went into opening a new Burger King franchise is now in the governments pocket and all those people who would have had jobs now don't - no they get welfare from the guy who could have given him or her a job...

You see...

Agian, and I really feel like a broken record here, there are plenty of people waiting in line to be the next 'burger king' or whatever. Your entire argument is based on a fallacy that we need them, that society will just fall apart if stop serving rich people. I sure dont know to many people that wouldnt like to make a million a month, even if it ment paying the government 60% of it. Its still living like a king.

Well I unlike you do not think there is a shortage of people trying to grow there business into something big but hits brickwall after brickwall of red tape and barriers to entry and operation. Eliminate them and promote upward mobility in both business and people, watch how trivial 'to big to fail' gets.

And that makes you a socialist...

You want to hinder capitalism....

 

[Big Fitz]

Thank you captian assumption.

Captain Assumption is Captain... and still right.

Your post is just more of the same old. Lets give the rich everything they want or otherwise they wont be productive anymore!

No. I pointed out a basic FACT of economics, then elaborated on it, broke it down in to bite size chunks for you to digest and hopefully get something through your class warfare addled skull. I see I failed in this, but thankfully other's DID learn where you failed to.

Taxes should go to where the money in the money supply is at, not to where the majority of the people are at.

Guess what? When you tax income that is EXACTLY where the taxes go. To income. Most wealthy people don't have 'incomes' that are taxed by income taxes. The people who get burned by income tax ARE the middle class, slightly wealthy and the POOR!

The wealthy look at you funny because you're not smart enough to safely abscond your wealth away from greedy looters and whiny bleeding hearts who want to do good works with no risk to their own resources.

Tax code should promote equality, not reinforce inequality.

So social engineering is more important than equality. Since equal results requires unfairness and inequality under the law, how is this good and just? Complete equality requires you to show favoritism and special treatment for reasons OTHER than merit.

So let's find out something here. Do you understand that profit is not equal to theft? Achievement is NOT equal to unmerited gain. Why is it that wealth is automatically evil? Cannot anyone justly and fairly earn a living in this nation without someone trying to tell them they're not being fair or they don't give enough to a group or charity someone ELSE thinks they need to support, not their own conscience.

I think you should be giving at least 50% of your income to Bob Jones university. What is your problem on not doing something so noble and compassionate? Are you a racist or some sort of sociopath? Give give give to my desired charities!

If they dont want to get off there asses to help pay for the society that enables them to have that wealth then FUCKEM, promote competition from smaller business to take there market share.

You know what? They're not obligated to support what you think they should. You have, nor doe ANYONE else have a right to their money and labor. It is theirs, not yours. Now if you decide to achieve and make millions and billions, then YOU can choose who to give to.

To say that anyone has a right to another's labor is to support and endorse slavery. You wanna be a slaveowner, massa? Is dat what you is? Doan be whippin dem poor richies! You whips dem too hard an dey won't be able to work so hard fo' yo' lazy ass, massa!

You can scream all you want till your bleeding heart is content, but nobody has an obligation to support his 'brother's' way of life or business. You aren't required to buy a product from a company you don't support unless it's a monopoly, and the only monopolies in the US are government based or sanctioned like the USPS.

Your line of thinking is accurate for middle and low class only! There is an endless supply of business people who would be more then happy to take the market share of these huge business if they dont want to get to work. And the new guys coming up from the bottom wont care if they get taxed.

First off, the US doesn't have "static classes" because we have 'class mobility'. This means you may start off in one place, and end up in another at different points of there life.

Of course there are thousands of "businessmen" who want to take the place of fortune 500's out there. But you know what? They can't do it as well as the Fortune 500's nor will they provide the same quality of service as those companies, because, like it or not, those big companies ARE big for a reason. Google started out small. So did E-Bay, Yahoo, Exxon, Caterpillar, Boeing, Whole Foods, Woolworths, Wal-Mart, McDonalds... The list goes on and on and on. They all succeeded because they gave the public what they wanted at a price they were willing to pay. Where is Packard? Studebaker? Willis? They were all car companies that did not offer a good enough product, make sound financial choices or became fiscally weak, and went under ultimately or were bought out. Who's fault is that? Was it evil? Should they have been bailed out?

You gonna bail out the horse buggy whip industry now too? How about Amalgamated Hay, Boston Opera Hats and Acme Spats?

This whole idea that our entire economy and lives are dependent on rich people getting richer if a total fucking LIE.

Really? Name one poor person in charge of a company or hiring people to work for them. Should be an easy thing to do if it's a 'fucking lie' that rich people don't run the economy.

It is based on the principal that they are the only ones that can say create a company like haliburton, but that is just not true.

Okay, show how poor people can create a Fortune 500 company. You're in a fantasy world.

All government has to do is encourage growth of medium sized companies and allow them to compete with the big guys that 'dont want to pay taxes'.

And how does the government 'encourage growth' when it's flat broke, and printing money like monopoly money? You can't print money and not destroy the business environment if you do not back it with SOMETHING, moron.

I think you need to be held back a grade to retake civics and summer school for economics. A simplified and stable tax code that is equal to all players is the best way to encourage growth.

Instead what we do is the opposite, we shield big business from competition and then worship the ground they walk on when they say shit like 'if you tax us we wont produce'.

From TARP to QE2, we've shit trillions down the drain and produced what? 4 million lost jobs? Good investment.

Bullshit.

Yes, you are full of it.

 

[bripat9643]

Fuck you fascist pig!

That's the kind of stunning logic we've come to expect from Marxist drones like you.

 

[Bern80]

Well ive said it a few times already in this thread, and everyone is so quick to repeat the mantra to me, but none will address the fallacy.

All you sheeple are convinced that we need these douchbags. As if there is not an endless line of competition who is being suppressed by the government. Tax the rich! If they dont want to play in the market then say goodbye by helping a smaller business that does want to play ball.

We should be encouraging economic growth in the middle and lower classes while taxing the concentrations of money in the money supply. What we currently do is encourage economic growth in the rich, and tax everyone lower.

How sad you people are to not see what is so obvious.

The issue would be that taxing the rich would have the opposite effect of what you are trying to accomplish. Under what logical theory does taking more money from people that are in the best position to provide jobs and compensation lead to higher compensation and and more jobs?

 

[auditor0007]

Man are you all over the place! Anyway, the rich already pay the majority of the taxes. Their money today is sitting on the sideline, not being invested for a variety of reasons. You think increases taxes on them will result in more job creation? Really?

The rich pay the majority of federal income taxes; they do not pay the majority of taxes. This is something so many of you fail to understand. You honestly believe the rich are being soaked when in fact, they are barely paying an equitable percentage based on their earnings, when all taxes are included. And yes, I believe they should be paying more. And yes, it is in their best interest to pay more. That doesn't mean we should tax them into oblivion, but they should pay substantially more.

Look at it this way; the person who makes barely enough to keep food on the table and a roof over his head really isn't gaining much from close to a trillion dollars in defense spending. However, a wealthy person who has his money tied up in companies throughout the world has much more to lose, so all that military spending is worth a lot more to the rich person. That's a very basic example, but it's true.

The rich pay the majority of state income taxes, city income taxes, property taxes, and various excise taxes. Which taxes do they not pay? Please provide something other than wishful thinking.

Seriously, don't you ever research anything before you open your mouth? We are talking about percentage of taxes based on income, not dollar amounts. Of course someone who earns $1 million per year who pays on average 7% in state taxes will pay more dollars than the person earning $25,000 paying 11% in state taxes. But the person earning $25,000 is paying a much higher rate, and they can least afford to pay those taxes. But please, continue with your rebuttal.

CHART: Poverty Is Up, But The Poor Are Paying The Most Taxes | FierceReason.com

 

[auditor0007]

Man are you all over the place! Anyway, the rich already pay the majority of the taxes. Their money today is sitting on the sideline, not being invested for a variety of reasons. You think increases taxes on them will result in more job creation? Really?

The rich pay the majority of federal income taxes; they do not pay the majority of taxes. This is something so many of you fail to understand. You honestly believe the rich are being soaked when in fact, they are barely paying an equitable percentage based on their earnings, when all taxes are included. And yes, I believe they should be paying more. And yes, it is in their best interest to pay more. That doesn't mean we should tax them into oblivion, but they should pay substantially more.

Look at it this way; the person who makes barely enough to keep food on the table and a roof over his head really isn't gaining much from close to a trillion dollars in defense spending. However, a wealthy person who has his money tied up in companies throughout the world has much more to lose, so all that military spending is worth a lot more to the rich person. That's a very basic example, but it's true.

First, a person's total taxes depends heavily on where they live. No sales or income tax in Nevada makes a big difference from someone in New York. Still, we were talking about federal income tax rates and money that we hope would be used for job creating investments, which is now sitting on the sideline. I repeat, increasing income tax on wealthier people...will that help to create more jobs or create another barrier that results in even more capital not invested? Obviously, the answer is the latter.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, it's a spending problem we have, not a revenue problem! We cannot maintain our current level of spending much less the projected increases in spending and expect to bring that money in through tax revenue. There is no tax rate high enough to do that. Cut spending to live within our means and we can talk about taxing one group more than another.

The problem is that you are talking about having to cut spending by 50%. We have a spending problem and a revenue problem. It is not strictly a spending problem. With Medicare and SS costs increasing due to the baby boomers starting to retire en masse, along with the increased defense spending of the last decade, you want us to believe that we can reduce spending to levels not seen since before the Great Depression. Sorry pal, but it ain't happening.