See What Tax Cuts For The Wealthy Has Caused:

[Gadawg73]

Most of the people who receive checks from the government are SS and retired military.

Which of those two groups would you cut off?

The super rich now pay taxes at a lower rate than the rest of us.

Is that fair?

The super rich do not pay a lower tate than the rest of us.
Why do you make up lies like that. They pay 35%.
Get real. Quit repeating the Obama lies.
The income tax on the wealthy is double what you pay.
And why should it be anyway? When you go in and buy a gallon of milk should they have to pay double what you do?
Income taxes are punishment for working hard.

no they don't , Warren Buffet released his tax info and he paid somewhere around 16%.

Exxon made record profits last year and paid ZERO in federal taxes.

Because most was not ordinary income.
Repiblicans want TO CHANGE THE TAX CODE.
Change the tax code and Buffet does not get the deductions he gets. Go to K Street in Washington and see all those office buildings filled with lobbyists that lobby for everyone and anyone to get a tax deduction.
Eliminate ALL those deductions and NO ONE gets those tax breaks.
Buffet could pay 50% if he wanted to.
Who is stopping him.
Most of Buffet's income is capital gains and capital gains ARE ALREADY TAXED before he gets it. That $$ was taxed BEFORE HE INVESTED IT.
Taxing folks TWICE on the money they earned as ordinary income "fair"?
There should be NO tax on capital gains, ever. That is double taxation.
Exxon paid NO taxes because it paid out massive dividends to their stockholders, made most of their profits OVERSEAS and left the $$ there.
Do away with capital gains taxes 20 trillion comes back to America the first year.
A thorough understanding of the tax code, capital gains taxation and free enterprise is needed here. Most Americans do not understand it.
End the IRS and everyone PAYS THE SAME RATE overnight.

 

[Gadawg73]

It began with Reagan's trillion's in cuts but look closely at the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 and it's not rocket science....the wealthy no longer pay their fair share:

Their kids don't go 10,000 miles across the globe to fight and die in the wars they start either

What a bunch of bullshit.
Increasing productivity and reducing cost is a good thing.
Labor is a commodity. Labor is the largest cost of doing business. With profits being squeezed by an increasingly globalized marketplace and increased competition, labor is the first thing to be looked at for cost reductions.
For example....The CEO of American Airlines, one the legacy carriers saddled with very high labor costs due to labor unions told of a situation where the security of hangars was modified to reduce labor costs.
First the theft of tools and materials was deemed out of control. So the company placed security people. With the reduced thefts, the word was obviously out that it was unwise to steal. They reduced the number of people used for security.
Then the company brought in guard dogs and replaced the security people.
Then with even fewer thefts, they reduced the number of guard dogs then reduced the number of hours the dogs were present.
The cost of security went from thousands of dollars per week, to a few hundred. I call that good business.
Confiscating more money for government to spend has nothing to do with this.
Private and public sector expenses are mutually exclusive.

Anyone that does not know that when a company can increase productivity while firing employees at the same time it skyrockets stock prices is a fool.
Increases dividends to the middle class retirees, lowers interest rates of capital, frees up capital for invesment in growth-brick and mortar and raises salaries for those workers left in the company.
Basic Econ 101. Most high school grads can not even balance a check book.
Best thing for capitalism is to lower labor costs and raise productivity.
But the liberal is a damn fool and has no comprehension of the free market.
They want "what is fair" as the cry if Johnny gets a bigger cookie than they did.

 

[Sundial]

Here's what the Reagan-Bush tax cuts for the rich have caused....the destruction of the middle class.

Republicans and their sheep will continue to ignore this...to their peril.

Remind me what the problem is.

Whether there's a problem depends on whether you care about your country.

If you don't ---> no problem.

 

[The Rabbi]

Republicans and their sheep will continue to ignore this...to their peril.

Remind me what the problem is.

Whether there's a problem depends on whether you care about your country.

If you don't ---> no problem.

OK, I care about my country. And I still dont see a problem.

 

[Gadawg73]

51% of Americans pay NO income tax and 99% of them are NOT wealthy.
They are the ones that do not pay their fair share.
They DO NOT PAY ANY SHARE.
Slash entitlements immediately.
End Section 8 housing yesterday, cut food stamps in half, end the free lunch program at schools and let the states do it, do a total review of SS disability where half the recipients CAN WORK, end government unions yesterday, end the Dept. of education, vouchers for Medicare and Medicaid.
Do all that and next year we have a surplus.
Taxes now ARE TOO HIGH. Spending has and always be THE PROBLEM.

 

[Sundial]

It began with Reagan's trillion's in cuts but look closely at the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 and it's not rocket science....the wealthy no longer pay their fair share:

Their kids don't go 10,000 miles across the globe to fight and die in the wars they start either

What a bunch of bullshit.
Increasing productivity and reducing cost is a good thing.
Labor is a commodity. Labor is the largest cost of doing business. With profits being squeezed by an increasingly globalized marketplace and increased competition, labor is the first thing to be looked at for cost reductions.
For example....The CEO of American Airlines, one the legacy carriers saddled with very high labor costs due to labor unions told of a situation where the security of hangars was modified to reduce labor costs.
First the theft of tools and materials was deemed out of control. So the company placed security people. With the reduced thefts, the word was obviously out that it was unwise to steal. They reduced the number of people used for security.
Then the company brought in guard dogs and replaced the security people.
Then with even fewer thefts, they reduced the number of guard dogs then reduced the number of hours the dogs were present.
The cost of security went from thousands of dollars per week, to a few hundred. I call that good business.
Confiscating more money for government to spend has nothing to do with this.
Private and public sector expenses are mutually exclusive.

Labor is not a commodity. Labor is people doing work. Labor includes CEOs and accountants and janitors and every other person who contributes something toward the production of goods and services.

Owners consider labor a "cost", because the income created by the workers is divided between them and the owners. The less that goes to salaries, the more more there is for profits. Their goal, therefore, is to get as much work as possible out of workers, while paying them as little as as they can. If they could reduce the income of ordinary Americans to the level of Chinese factory workers, that would be an advantage (to them).

So labor is a "cost", but only if you look at it purely from the point of view of people who own things, but don't work themselves.

When you look at it from the perspective of the interest of the country as a whole - rather than strictly from the perspective of the rich - a country with a healthy middle class is better than one where a tiny minority consume more and more, while the people who actually do the work struggle harder and harder for less and less.

 

[Sundial]

Remind me what the problem is.

Whether there's a problem depends on whether you care about your country.

If you don't ---> no problem.

OK, I care about my country. And I still dont see a problem.

Then you don't care about your country.

 

[The Rabbi]

Whether there's a problem depends on whether you care about your country.

If you don't ---> no problem.

OK, I care about my country. And I still dont see a problem.

Then you don't care about your country.

No, you're an ignorant shithead, is the problem here.

 

[Sundial]

51% of Americans pay NO income tax and 99% of them are NOT wealthy.
They are the ones that do not pay their fair share.
They DO NOT PAY ANY SHARE.
Slash entitlements immediately.
End Section 8 housing yesterday, cut food stamps in half, end the free lunch program at schools and let the states do it, do a total review of SS disability where half the recipients CAN WORK, end government unions yesterday, end the Dept. of education, vouchers for Medicare and Medicaid.
Do all that and next year we have a surplus.
Taxes now ARE TOO HIGH. Spending has and always be THE PROBLEM.

Taxes are too high - most of them, anyway. Property taxes, sales taxes, payroll taxes - all too high.

The only tax that's not too high is the income tax on the rich. The tax rate on the richest Americans has declined to the lowest rate on record - 17% - if memory serves.

Taxes on capital gains need to be raised to the same level as taxes on earned income. Taxes on the richest Americans need to be raised - immediately.

Taxes on everyone else should be cut. Especially payroll taxes. Payroll taxes are a tax on work. We need more people working, and taking home more of their paychecks - now, more than ever.

 

[The Rabbi]

It began with Reagan's trillion's in cuts but look closely at the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 and it's not rocket science....the wealthy no longer pay their fair share:

Their kids don't go 10,000 miles across the globe to fight and die in the wars they start either

What a bunch of bullshit.
Increasing productivity and reducing cost is a good thing.
Labor is a commodity. Labor is the largest cost of doing business. With profits being squeezed by an increasingly globalized marketplace and increased competition, labor is the first thing to be looked at for cost reductions.
For example....The CEO of American Airlines, one the legacy carriers saddled with very high labor costs due to labor unions told of a situation where the security of hangars was modified to reduce labor costs.
First the theft of tools and materials was deemed out of control. So the company placed security people. With the reduced thefts, the word was obviously out that it was unwise to steal. They reduced the number of people used for security.
Then the company brought in guard dogs and replaced the security people.
Then with even fewer thefts, they reduced the number of guard dogs then reduced the number of hours the dogs were present.
The cost of security went from thousands of dollars per week, to a few hundred. I call that good business.
Confiscating more money for government to spend has nothing to do with this.
Private and public sector expenses are mutually exclusive.

Labor is not a commodity. Labor is people doing work. Labor includes CEOs and accountants and janitors and every other person who contributes something toward the production of goods and services.

Owners consider labor a "cost", because the income created by the workers is divided between them and the owners. The less that goes to salaries, the more more there is for profits. Their goal, therefore, is to get as much work as possible out of workers, while paying them as little as as they can. If they could reduce the income of ordinary Americans to the level of Chinese factory workers, that would be an advantage (to them).

So labor is a "cost", but only if you look at it purely from the point of view of people who own things, but don't work themselves.

When you look at it from the perspective of the interest of the country as a whole - rather than strictly from the perspective of the rich - a country with a healthy middle class is better than one where a tiny minority consume more and more, while the people who actually do the work struggle harder and harder for less and less.

You are a gross ignoramus.
Labor is a commodity. Just like raw materials. If owners can lower their cost of raw materials, they will and save money. If they can lower their cost of labor, they will. US workers make more than CHinese workers not because owners were somehow more beneficient but because they are more productive. Low wages equate universally with low productivity.

 

[The Rabbi]

51% of Americans pay NO income tax and 99% of them are NOT wealthy.
They are the ones that do not pay their fair share.
They DO NOT PAY ANY SHARE.
Slash entitlements immediately.
End Section 8 housing yesterday, cut food stamps in half, end the free lunch program at schools and let the states do it, do a total review of SS disability where half the recipients CAN WORK, end government unions yesterday, end the Dept. of education, vouchers for Medicare and Medicaid.
Do all that and next year we have a surplus.
Taxes now ARE TOO HIGH. Spending has and always be THE PROBLEM.

Taxes are too high - most of them, anyway. Property taxes, sales taxes, payroll taxes - all too high.

The only tax that's not too high is the income tax on the rich. The tax rate on the richest Americans has declined to the lowest rate on record - 17% - if memory serves.

Taxes on capital gains need to be raised to the same level as taxes on earned income. Taxes on the richest Americans need to be raised - immediately.

Taxes on everyone else should be cut. Especially payroll taxes. Payroll taxes are a tax on work. We need more people working, and taking home more of their paychecks - now, more than ever.

Why should taxes on capital gains be raises to the same level as earned income? WHy don't we lower the tax on earned income to the same level as cap gains?

 

[bripat9643]

It began with Reagan's trillion's in cuts but look closely at the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 and it's not rocket science....the wealthy no longer pay their fair share:

Their kids don't go 10,000 miles across the globe to fight and die in the wars they start either

All that chart shows is that the wealthy now report their income rather than plow it into various tax avoidance schemes.

The top 10 pro athletes make far more than the top ten CEOs, but you never see libturds whining about their salaries. The same goes for top 10 grossing movie stars

 

[bripat9643]

They are laughing at us for believing in such an idiotic theory as trickle down economics.

No one believes in "trickle down" economics except for left-wing morons like you.

 

[bripat9643]

Amazing what you can do with statistics.
In fact take any specific working person employed for 15 years in the same or comparable job. Is he really making just what he was 15 years ago? Really? No, of course not.
But family sizes change and income changes as women quit work to have babies or people retire or whatever.
Out wth class warfare. In with less government.

This graph is suspect because the term "average wages" so vague that it's virtually meaningless. Does that mean "hourly wages," per capita income, family income or what? One suspects it's one of the bogus statistics the left cooks up that amounts to little more than outright fraud.

 

[bripat9643]

Here's what the Reagan-Bush tax cuts for the rich have caused....the destruction of the middle class.

http://peakwatch.typepad.com

You'll forgive us if we don't find a blatant communist source like "Peakwatch" to be credible.

 

[bripat9643]

Who determines the "fair share"?
The 51% that now receive a govenrment check?
Alexis de Toqueville predicted THIS shortly after this country was founded.
I remember as a kid one of the neighbors had a Rolls Royce. This man had a hardware store, investments in the stock market and rental houses. When he used to drive down the road my Dad would say "There goes Mr. Parker. He is a hard working man. When you grow up you need to try to be like him. He is a good role model"
Now the tax and spend moocher class says "There goes Mr. Parker. He stole all his money from others and is greedy. He does not care about anyone and is selfish because he has more than anyone else. He does not need that Rolls Royce. He does not need all of those investments and rental houses. He does not pay his fair share in taxes. I DEMAND MORE OF HIS WEALTH AND I DEMAND GOVERNMENT TAKE IT FROM HIM AND GIVE IT TO ME AND OTHERS."

Most of the people who receive checks from the government are SS and retired military.

Which of those two groups would you cut off?

The super rich now pay taxes at a lower rate than the rest of us.

Is that fair?

No one is talking about cutting off current retirees, you dumb fuck.

 

[bripat9643]

Whether there's a problem depends on whether you care about your country.

If you don't ---> no problem.

The "problem" is that we have too many voters like you with nothing tangible between the ears.

Looking at some cooked up statistics posted by Chris with approval is a sure sign that you're the problem.

 

[bripat9643]

Labor is not a commodity. Labor is people doing work. Labor includes CEOs and accountants and janitors and every other person who contributes something toward the production of goods and services.

Owners consider labor a "cost", because the income created by the workers is divided between them and the owners. The less that goes to salaries, the more more there is for profits. Their goal, therefore, is to get as much work as possible out of workers, while paying them as little as as they can. If they could reduce the income of ordinary Americans to the level of Chinese factory workers, that would be an advantage (to them).

So labor is a "cost", but only if you look at it purely from the point of view of people who own things, but don't work themselves.

When you look at it from the perspective of the interest of the country as a whole - rather than strictly from the perspective of the rich - a country with a healthy middle class is better than one where a tiny minority consume more and more, while the people who actually do the work struggle harder and harder for less and less.

There's the first indication that you're a moron. An effective argument doesn't start out by disputing the basic laws of economics.

If labor is not a cost, then where does an accountant note the figure the company pays you? Does he put it under charity? In your case, that's probably appropriate.

 

[bripat9643]

no, you're an ignorant shithead, is the problem here.

bingo!

 

[Gadawg73]

It began with Reagan's trillion's in cuts but look closely at the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 and it's not rocket science....the wealthy no longer pay their fair share:

Their kids don't go 10,000 miles across the globe to fight and die in the wars they start either

What a bunch of bullshit.
Increasing productivity and reducing cost is a good thing.
Labor is a commodity. Labor is the largest cost of doing business. With profits being squeezed by an increasingly globalized marketplace and increased competition, labor is the first thing to be looked at for cost reductions.
For example....The CEO of American Airlines, one the legacy carriers saddled with very high labor costs due to labor unions told of a situation where the security of hangars was modified to reduce labor costs.
First the theft of tools and materials was deemed out of control. So the company placed security people. With the reduced thefts, the word was obviously out that it was unwise to steal. They reduced the number of people used for security.
Then the company brought in guard dogs and replaced the security people.
Then with even fewer thefts, they reduced the number of guard dogs then reduced the number of hours the dogs were present.
The cost of security went from thousands of dollars per week, to a few hundred. I call that good business.
Confiscating more money for government to spend has nothing to do with this.
Private and public sector expenses are mutually exclusive.

Labor is not a commodity. Labor is people doing work. Labor includes CEOs and accountants and janitors and every other person who contributes something toward the production of goods and services.

Owners consider labor a "cost", because the income created by the workers is divided between them and the owners. The less that goes to salaries, the more more there is for profits. Their goal, therefore, is to get as much work as possible out of workers, while paying them as little as as they can. If they could reduce the income of ordinary Americans to the level of Chinese factory workers, that would be an advantage (to them).

So labor is a "cost", but only if you look at it purely from the point of view of people who own things, but don't work themselves.

When you look at it from the perspective of the interest of the country as a whole - rather than strictly from the perspective of the rich - a country with a healthy middle class is better than one where a tiny minority consume more and more, while the people who actually do the work struggle harder and harder for less and less.

"people who own things but don't work themselves"
So the owners do not work.
Talk about not knowing shit about the business world.