Next Up: a "Flat Tax" for the Rich

[Sallow]

We could probably cut the military budget in half...or by 2/3rds..and still be able to more then protect our homeland.

Invasions? Well we couldn't do that so easily anymore.

I'm on board with that.

Got any details?

-Shrink our Nukes to about 2k.
-Cut military bases around the world save for trouble spots like South Korea and Taiwan.
-Get rid of missile defense.
-Focus more weapon systems like the predator and less on fighter planes (although they are still needed)

Overall the focus should be on small limited military actions..and not on full out war...or nation building.

 

[georgephillip]

Thier Social agenda isn't mandated...Military is...so what to cut? Naturally the military.

These idiots will lop off their own noses to spite their face...and be proud of broadcasting it to the world.

Why not put the US military to work in their homeland building and protecting infranstructure?

Because we already have people here for that.

*NEXT*

Put a few thousand on the borders as we close them tickles my fancy however.

Many of the people we already have for building things in this country are currently unemployed. Many others are busy in Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead a hiring workers from Spain to design and build US high-speed rail, why not put our own unemployed and military to work building the next generation of US rail transportation?

Personally, I would put Goldman Sachs and the New York Fed on the borders. Maybe the drug cartels need a few motivational speakers?

Or moving targets.

 

[The T]

Well..it basically isn't..

But now that we are at 50 states, close to 300 million people, a 13 trillion dollar economy, over 700 military bases worldwide, a standing army over 500k strong, 5000 nukes, a navy bigger then all of the navys in the world, combined, roads, bridges, electrical grids, airports, seaports, public transportation systems, water systems, and hooks into every financial system in the world; what kind of small, "limited", "gubmint" do you propose the manage all that?

Norquist's starving the "beast" and Friedman's trickle down have failed miserably.

Well, basically it is a total strawman.

Shrinking an obviously bloated military-industrial complex doesn't necessarily have to supply spoiled rotten little progressive brats with more money for their domestic do-goodery....Those funds would find a much better purpose being left in the hands of the productive sector economy.

And you can't say that starving the beast is a failure, because it hasn't even been tried...Same with so-called "trickle down", as the spending cuts half of the equation has also never been tried.

Sure it has..starving the beast led to mines collapsing, oil rigs blowing up, Bernie Maddoff walking away with 20 billion dollars, tainted dog food, tainted human food and a financial meltdown that almost sunk the world economy. And "trickle-down" been tried several times..failing several times. The real salary of the average joe has not grown in the last decade or so..while the high flying risk takers are making a bundle.

And all persuits the perveyor takes on readily...by choice.

Responsibility isn't your strong suit is it?

 

[Oddball]

Sure it has..starving the beast led to mines collapsing, oil rigs blowing up, Bernie Maddoff walking away with 20 billion dollars, tainted dog food, tainted human food and a financial meltdown that almost sunk the world economy. And "trickle-down" been tried several times..failing several times. The real salary of the average joe has not grown in the last decade or so..while the high flying risk takers are making a bundle.

What total crap.

Regulators failing to do their jobs while crooks operate right under their noses is not a product of too little money being thrown at the bureaucracy...It does, however, expose for all to see the inherent ineptitude and inefficiency of "the beast".

Typical leftist wackloon argument, though...Failure is claimed as evidence that they need even more power and money.

 

[shintao]

Would anyone pay taxes in your America?

If so, would your system of taxation fall more heavily on "earned" or "unearned" income?

A flat tax system has a fixed tax rate regardless of level of income. The primary advantage of a flat tax is simplicity. Not only are flat tax computations and payments very straightforward, but in theory the economy also benefits from a minimum of distorted incentives driven by tax deductions in a flat tax regime. Usually, the flat tax is understood to apply only to earned income. Many conservatives favor this flat tax formulation because it eliminates capital gains taxes. Opponents describe such a flat tax system as regressive, meaning that the poor share a disproportionate burden. In contrast, the current US tax system is progressive because high-income earners pay a higher rate than low-income earners. The name flat tax comes from the flat line that results when tax rate is plotted against income. In 1994, Estonia became the first country to implement a flat tax, and when its economy subsequently thrived other countries followed suit.
(doginthedow)

 

[The T]

Why not put the US military to work in their homeland building and protecting infranstructure?

Because we already have people here for that.

*NEXT*

Put a few thousand on the borders as we close them tickles my fancy however.

Many of the people we already have for building things in this country are currently unemployed. Many others are busy in Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead a hiring workers from Spain to design and build US high-speed rail, why not put our own unemployed and military to work building the next generation of US rail transportation?

Personally, I would put Goldman Sachs and the New York Fed on the borders. Maybe the drug cartels need a few motivational speakers?

Or moving targets.

And that happens to be their mission. I'll be glad when that mission is over.

As to the rest of your blather? No thanks. It is just that...nonsensicle horsepoo.

 

[Sallow]

Well, basically it is a total strawman.

Shrinking an obviously bloated military-industrial complex doesn't necessarily have to supply spoiled rotten little progressive brats with more money for their domestic do-goodery....Those funds would find a much better purpose being left in the hands of the productive sector economy.

And you can't say that starving the beast is a failure, because it hasn't even been tried...Same with so-called "trickle down", as the spending cuts half of the equation has also never been tried.

Sure it has..starving the beast led to mines collapsing, oil rigs blowing up, Bernie Maddoff walking away with 20 billion dollars, tainted dog food, tainted human food and a financial meltdown that almost sunk the world economy. And "trickle-down" been tried several times..failing several times. The real salary of the average joe has not grown in the last decade or so..while the high flying risk takers are making a bundle.

And all persuits the perveyor takes on readily...by choice.

Responsibility isn't your strong suit is it?

What??

Where the heck have you been??

Risk is managed by tax payers..profit has been privatized.

What the heck do you think TARP was all about??

 

[The T]

Sure it has..starving the beast led to mines collapsing, oil rigs blowing up, Bernie Maddoff walking away with 20 billion dollars, tainted dog food, tainted human food and a financial meltdown that almost sunk the world economy. And "trickle-down" been tried several times..failing several times. The real salary of the average joe has not grown in the last decade or so..while the high flying risk takers are making a bundle.

What total crap.

Regulators failing to do their jobs while crooks operate right under their noses is not a product of too little money being thrown at the bureaucracy...It does, however, expose for all to see the inherent ineptitude and inefficiency of "the beast".

Typical leftist wackloon argument, though...Failure is claimed as evidence that they need even more power and money.

The strawmen union is stong here isn't it?

 

[Sallow]

Sure it has..starving the beast led to mines collapsing, oil rigs blowing up, Bernie Maddoff walking away with 20 billion dollars, tainted dog food, tainted human food and a financial meltdown that almost sunk the world economy. And "trickle-down" been tried several times..failing several times. The real salary of the average joe has not grown in the last decade or so..while the high flying risk takers are making a bundle.

What total crap.

Regulators failing to do their jobs while crooks operate right under their noses is not a product of too little money being thrown at the bureaucracy...It does, however, expose for all to see the inherent ineptitude and inefficiency of "the beast".

Typical leftist wackloon argument, though...Failure is claimed as evidence that they need even more power and money.

You missed the whole deregulate defunding bonanzas of your heroes Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

To bad.

Hopefully though..there are no more sequels.

 

[The T]

Sure it has..starving the beast led to mines collapsing, oil rigs blowing up, Bernie Maddoff walking away with 20 billion dollars, tainted dog food, tainted human food and a financial meltdown that almost sunk the world economy. And "trickle-down" been tried several times..failing several times. The real salary of the average joe has not grown in the last decade or so..while the high flying risk takers are making a bundle.

And all persuits the perveyor takes on readily...by choice.

Responsibility isn't your strong suit is it?

What??

Where the heck have you been??

Risk is managed by tax payers..profit has been privatized.

What the heck do you think TARP was all about??

Risk is ALWAYS taken on by Investors you fuckin goof. Only stolen by government at the expense of the investor.

YOU seriously need to re-educate yourself you ominous victim of Gubmint schooling.

 

[georgephillip]

Who does "infrastructure" need to be protected from?

Box-cutter wielding Muslims on steroids?

Has it occurred to you we've made literally tens of thousands of enemies since October 2001? Enemies for whom blood feud is a major part of their tradition? If we stop killing innocent Muslims for money tomorrow, the hatred has already been sown.

Possibly, the military would be more useful here, protecting US infrastructure and lives than they would be destroying infrastructure and lives on the opposite side of the globe.

 

[georgephillip]

Would anyone pay taxes in your America?

If so, would your system of taxation fall more heavily on "earned" or "unearned" income?

How about consumption? I'd gladly pay more for that system.

Would your definition of "consumption" apply to economic elements that have no counterpart in actual cost of production, i.e., land rent, monopoly rent, interest and other financial fees, and insurance premiums.

"This economic rent is the major return to wealth.
"It is grounded in the finance, insurance and real estate sector."

Would FIRE pay consumption taxes at the same rate as labor?

Flat Tax

 

[georgephillip]

We could probably cut the military budget in half...or by 2/3rds..and still be able to more then protect our homeland.

Invasions? Well we couldn't do that so easily anymore.

Just like a lib.... cut the military!

How about cut entitlements and implement a fair tax or flat tax on ALL OF US?

We need the military.... we dont fat idiots sitting at home collecting welfare and I am sick and tired of supporting illegals who have no buisiness being here.

Take your "cut the miltary by 2/3rds" and shove it up your ass!

Are you troubled by the apparent fact that your tax dollars are paying Afghan insurgents to refrain from attacking trucks carrying supplies destined for combat troops?

Some of this extortion money is then used to buy weapons and ammunition that kills and maims US/NATO troops.

If you haven't read Smedley Butler's 72 page online book
War is a Racket
you should.

"CHAPTER TWO

WHO MAKES THE PROFITS?

"The World War, rather our brief participation in it, has cost the United States some $52,000,000,000. Figure it out.

"That means $400 to every American man, woman, and child. And we haven't paid the debt yet.

"We are paying it, our children will pay it, and our children's children probably still will be paying the cost of that war.

"The normal profits of a business concern in the United States are six, eight, ten, and sometimes twelve percent.

"But war-time profits – ah! that is another matter – twenty, sixty, one hundred, three hundred, and even eighteen hundred per cent – the sky is the limit. All that traffic will bear.

"Uncle Sam has the money. Let's get it.

"Of course, it isn't put that crudely in war time. It is dressed into speeches about patriotism, love of country, and 'we must all put our shoulders to the wheel,' but the profits jump and leap and skyrocket – and are safely pocketed. Let's just take a few examples:

"Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people – didn't one of them testify before a Senate committee recently that their powder won the war? Or saved the world for democracy? Or something?

"How did they do in the war? They were a patriotic corporation. Well, the average earnings of the du Ponts for the period 1910 to 1914 were $6,000,000 a year.

"It wasn't much, but the du Ponts managed to get along on it. Now let's look at their average yearly profit during the war years, 1914 to 1918. Fifty-eight million dollars a year profit we find!

"Nearly ten times that of normal times, and the profits of normal times were pretty good. An increase in profits of more than 950 per cent.

 

[Sallow]

And all persuits the perveyor takes on readily...by choice.

Responsibility isn't your strong suit is it?

What??

Where the heck have you been??

Risk is managed by tax payers..profit has been privatized.

What the heck do you think TARP was all about??

Risk is ALWAYS taken on by Investors you fuckin goof. Only stolen by government at the expense of the investor.

YOU seriously need to re-educate yourself you ominous victim of Gubmint schooling.

Done here.

You don't have a clue on what happened over the last 3 years or so..

 

[ThePatriot]

We could probably cut the military budget in half...or by 2/3rds..and still be able to more then protect our homeland.

Invasions? Well we couldn't do that so easily anymore.

You cannot simply cut military spending while a large mass of U.S. forces are involved in wars over seas. Soldiers are underfunded as it is, which in itself has greatly prolonged the war in Afghanistan. American's so quickly forget the 9/11 attacks, terrorism is real and terrorists will never back down. American's screamed government ignorance when the attacks happened, to cut spending would only allow the very people we have spent the last nine years fighting back in the game.

 

[georgephillip]

Do you believe that killing eight or nine innocent Muslims for every insurgent is making this country safer?

Do you think anyone on Wall Street should profit from killing the innocents or the insurgents?

 

[georgephillip]

Does a small business owner working 70 to 80 hours per week for $250,000/year deserve to keep her "earnings' in the same way someone "earning" $50,000,000/year deserves his?

The great thing about being a consistent defender of freedom, is that I don't go around under the arrogant pretense that I can decide who is and isn't "deserving" of their earnings.

Should the small business owner and plutocrat have their income taxed at the same rate?

 

[ThePatriot]

There is no perfect government, I think anyone who can objectively view politics can see that. However, there is a direct correlation between education, work, and income. The more schooling you have and the harder you work, the more pay. So while a flat tax would hurt some, just as tax brackets do, there is no American value behind taxing the highly educated.

 

[georgephillip]

Does a small business owner working 70 to 80 hours per week for $250,000/year deserve to keep her "earnings' in the same way someone "earning" $50,000,000/year deserves his?

Yes.... yes he/she does..... THEY EARNED IT, its theirs!

That person earning $50,000,000/year didnt get that by sitting on their ass and doing nothing. They started a buisiness that employs hundreds or even thousands, and yes they deserve every penny of their earnings.

Otherwise why would someone put all their capital into a buisiness just to give it all away?

This arguement is retarded.

Should their incomes be taxed at the same rate?

Are producers and speculators of equal value to society?

About ten thousand Americans "earn" $50,000,000 per year or about 30% of total US annual income.

Should elements of income with no counterparts in actual production be taxed more or less than income based on production of goods and services?

 

[georgephillip]

There is no perfect government, I think anyone who can objectively view politics can see that. However, there is a direct correlation between education, work, and income. The more schooling you have and the harder you work, the more pay. So while a flat tax would hurt some, just as tax brackets do, there is no American value behind taxing the highly educated.

Some of the most highly educated and smartest people in the last generation are working on Wall Street. Two years ago they very nearly plunged the global economy into another major depression.

Today their bonus pools are back to where they were before the Great Recession.

Have they earned those bonuses?

Or are the bonuses a gift from government?