The Buffet Rule, fair share, greed and stupidity

[candycorn]

Let's take more money from the very people that drive our economy. And before you say they don't YES THEY DO. The hire companies like mine to remodel their houses. Which in turn allows me to hire my help. Which in turn gets spent in a multitude of ways.
Hell last week I bought a new stereo and had it installed by another contractor then bought a new dog. Without that rich person none of that would have happened.
You liberals all have tunnel vision.

Apparently you're not working so they're getting ripped off.

 

[starcraftzzz]

So apparently Obama wants to push the Buffet rule. Why the fuck would anyone support an increase in taxes on anyone when in the not to near future the Bush tax cuts will expire causing taxes to go up. Then we have the new Obamacare taxes kicking in.

When is enough enough you greedy bastards? Obama is getting ready to dish out his second wave of green energy free money yet is crying that he needs more money. Can he not see the disconnect?

This is why dumbass.

One Chart Shows Obama Is Right About "Buffett Rule" - BlueOregon
^The average millionaire with 2/3rd income from investments pays 30% less taxes then someone making 50,000 a year

Top 25 Hedge Fund Managers Make As Much As 440,000 Middle-Class Americans, But Still Get Tax Loophole | ThinkProgress
^Hedge fund managers make over 500 million dollars a year yet pay an effective tax rate that is 10% lower than the average working American due to tax loopholes, and republicans refuse to close that loophole.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/07intop400.pdf
^Richest 400 Americans have an effective tax rate of 15% half the tax rate for Middle class Americans

Billionaires Use Tax Loophole To Lower Their Tax Rates To 1 Percent | ThinkProgress
^Some billionaires pay as low of tax rates as 1%

9 Things The Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes
^The bottom 50% of American have a 35% higher effective tax rate compared to wages then the richest 400 Americans.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Let's take more money from the very people that drive our economy. And before you say they don't YES THEY DO. The hire companies like mine to remodel their houses. Which in turn allows me to hire my help. Which in turn gets spent in a multitude of ways.
Hell last week I bought a new stereo and had it installed by another contractor then bought a new dog. Without that rich person none of that would have happened.
You liberals all have tunnel vision.

Apparently you're not working so they're getting ripped off.

When you goto McDonald's do you demand the owner serve you your food?

I earned my status through 23 years of hard work and multiple surgeries.

 

[starcraftzzz]

No matter how high taxes on the rich are raised, you won't see a lowering of taxes on the middle class, nor will you see higher wages. Just higher prices.

I see so according to you Obama giving the middle class the biggest tax cut ever means taxes were not raised...
Do you ever say anything that isn't competl;yk retarded?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

No matter how high taxes on the rich are raised, you won't see a lowering of taxes on the middle class, nor will you see higher wages. Just higher prices.

I see so according to you Obama giving the middle class the biggest tax cut ever means taxes were not raised...
Do you ever say anything that isn't competl;yk retarded?

Lol whaa?

 

[Oldstyle]

I've yet to see a progressive here explain how Barry's call to raise taxes in a weak economy makes any sense at all from a Keynesian perspective. This ISN'T about sound economic policy...it's about finding a populist message that he can sell in order to get re-elected. It's cynical politics at it's worse.

If you're one of the long term unemployed, you have my sympathies because this President cares much more about keeping HIS job than he does about finding one for you.

 

[candycorn]

Most of the enlightened wealthy realize that the way the society works is that it depends on good schools, good roads, healthy persons, etc... Educated persons get good jobs and are paid well to buy their products that travel over good roads.

They understand that having 5,000 (just to pick a number) persons who have more disposable income is better for them than having 250 (just to pick another number) mega rich. There is only so much consumption the mega rich can do.

Anyway, thats the way it works. Back to the hemhawing and profanity.

 

[peach174]

Dem's want to cut spending by 1 trillion in 10 years.
Repubs want to cut 3.3 trillion in 10 years.

The United States is teetering on the edge of Greek-style bankruptcy. Our total indebtedness, including the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare, could run as high as $130 trillion, more than 900 percent of GDP. In the face of this looming crisis, Obama and Ryan have presented two distinct visions of the future. The president offers a bigger government, paid for with more debt and higher taxes. Ryan’s vision may be maddeningly timid and vague in places, but it takes important steps toward a smaller, less costly, and less intrusive government.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Most of the enlightened wealthy realize that the way the society works is that it depends on good schools, good roads, healthy persons, etc... Educated persons get good jobs and are paid well to buy their products that travel over good roads.

They understand that having 5,000 (just to pick a number) persons who have more disposable income is better for them than having 250 (just to pick another number) mega rich. There is only so much consumption the mega rich can do.

Anyway, thats the way it works. Back to the hemhawing and profanity.

So it's better to have 5000 people spend 2 dollars than it is to have 250 people spend 40 dollars?

How exactly? The same amount of money is being spent is it not?

And how is it better if the government takes my money away from me and gives it to some slacker to spend than if I spend it myself?

 

[Oldstyle]

Most of the enlightened wealthy realize that the way the society works is that it depends on good schools, good roads, healthy persons, etc... Educated persons get good jobs and are paid well to buy their products that travel over good roads.

They understand that having 5,000 (just to pick a number) persons who have more disposable income is better for them than having 250 (just to pick another number) mega rich. There is only so much consumption the mega rich can do.

Anyway, thats the way it works. Back to the hemhawing and profanity.

So if you're wealthy and you don't think you should have to prop up a wasteful and inefficient Federal Government then you're not "enlightened"? Here's a radical concept for you, Candy...the way that society "works" is when success isn't punished and failure rewarded. We currently spend more per student than any other industrialized nation and yet our kids learn less. We pay trillions in gas taxes so that we will have good roads...so why don't we? The fact is...government in this country is bloated and sick. It NEEDS to be overhauled. It does NOT need to be given more money to waste.

 

[candycorn]

Most of the enlightened wealthy realize that the way the society works is that it depends on good schools, good roads, healthy persons, etc... Educated persons get good jobs and are paid well to buy their products that travel over good roads.

They understand that having 5,000 (just to pick a number) persons who have more disposable income is better for them than having 250 (just to pick another number) mega rich. There is only so much consumption the mega rich can do.

Anyway, thats the way it works. Back to the hemhawing and profanity.

So it's better to have 5000 people spend 2 dollars than it is to have 250 people spend 40 dollars?

How exactly? The same amount of money is being spent is it not?

And how is it better if the government takes my money away from me and gives it to some slacker to spend than if I spend it myself?

Yes but what is not in your equation is that the 250 people don't need to spend all $40. In your small scale it makes no sense since we're talking about 40 bucks. But having 5,000 persons who are well off is preferable to having 250 people who have more money than they know what to do with.

Lets take toasters. If you own a factory that makes toasters, you can sell 250 or you can sell 5000. I think most people would rather sell 5000 than 250. It's not like that for all items but it's an example.

Anyway, thats the way it works and why you see a great many persons who have the means and the social consciousness agreeing with the President on this issue.

 

[Listening]

Most of the enlightened wealthy realize that the way the society works is that it depends on good schools, good roads, healthy persons, etc... Educated persons get good jobs and are paid well to buy their products that travel over good roads.

They understand that having 5,000 (just to pick a number) persons who have more disposable income is better for them than having 250 (just to pick another number) mega rich. There is only so much consumption the mega rich can do.

Anyway, thats the way it works. Back to the hemhawing and profanity.

So it's better to have 5000 people spend 2 dollars than it is to have 250 people spend 40 dollars?

How exactly? The same amount of money is being spent is it not?

And how is it better if the government takes my money away from me and gives it to some slacker to spend than if I spend it myself?

Yes but what is not in your equation is that the 250 people don't need to spend all $40. In your small scale it makes no sense since we're talking about 40 bucks. But having 5,000 persons who are well off is preferable to having 250 people who have more money than they know what to do with.

Lets take toasters. If you own a factory that makes toasters, you can sell 250 or you can sell 5000. I think most people would rather sell 5000 than 250. It's not like that for all items but it's an example.

Anyway, thats the way it works and why you see a great many persons who have the means and the social consciousness agreeing with the President on this issue.

It's not like this post is biased. More money than they know what to do with ?

That isn't who will be paying.

Obamacare seeks to pull in uninsured young people who are low risk so they can help take care of older people. My adult kids don't have more money than they know what to do with.

 

[candycorn]

Most of the enlightened wealthy realize that the way the society works is that it depends on good schools, good roads, healthy persons, etc... Educated persons get good jobs and are paid well to buy their products that travel over good roads.

They understand that having 5,000 (just to pick a number) persons who have more disposable income is better for them than having 250 (just to pick another number) mega rich. There is only so much consumption the mega rich can do.

Anyway, thats the way it works. Back to the hemhawing and profanity.

So if you're wealthy and you don't think you should have to prop up a wasteful and inefficient Federal Government then you're not "enlightened"? Here's a radical concept for you, Candy...the way that society "works" is when success isn't punished and failure rewarded. We currently spend more per student than any other industrialized nation and yet our kids learn less. We pay trillions in gas taxes so that we will have good roads...so why don't we? The fact is...government in this country is bloated and sick. It NEEDS to be overhauled. It does NOT need to be given more money to waste.

Yeah the Bush tax cuts have really turned the economy around, haven't they?

Sorry, thats not the way it works. I do agree that the government does a great many things that it shouldn't. We're building new submarines to replace subs that are superior. And the subs THEY replaced (the LA class) are superior as well. We're doing that with fighter aircraft as well.

Frankly, I think the democratic party has failed in many of their initiatives as often as the GOP has. Head Start and No Child Left Behind are wonderful ideas that were implemented poorly. Tougher standards that mean something would be preferable in education. The trust fund for the highways has been raided by both parties. We need laws that means something.

Again, this is why I keep telling you folks that we need to further perfect the Constitution as to where we can get the games to stop in Washington. Everyone up there works the system and they've come to occupy a position of dubious statesmanship as to where everybody is guilty so by the same token, all are innocent.

Anyway....

The enlightened wealthy understand it's better to have good schools, good roads, good health services because it creates disposable income. Grumps claims that he has a house remodeling company of some sort. If you could give someone who owns such a company a choice between expanding into a market that has 20 houses and one that has 500 houses, they would likely pick the 500 house market since there would be more customers. I doubt they would go for a place that has the 20 great houses and is surrounded by slums.


I believe the rich dudes standing with the President understand that.

 

[Oldstyle]

Most of the enlightened wealthy realize that the way the society works is that it depends on good schools, good roads, healthy persons, etc... Educated persons get good jobs and are paid well to buy their products that travel over good roads.

They understand that having 5,000 (just to pick a number) persons who have more disposable income is better for them than having 250 (just to pick another number) mega rich. There is only so much consumption the mega rich can do.

Anyway, thats the way it works. Back to the hemhawing and profanity.

So if you're wealthy and you don't think you should have to prop up a wasteful and inefficient Federal Government then you're not "enlightened"? Here's a radical concept for you, Candy...the way that society "works" is when success isn't punished and failure rewarded. We currently spend more per student than any other industrialized nation and yet our kids learn less. We pay trillions in gas taxes so that we will have good roads...so why don't we? The fact is...government in this country is bloated and sick. It NEEDS to be overhauled. It does NOT need to be given more money to waste.

Yeah the Bush tax cuts have really turned the economy around, haven't they?

Sorry, thats not the way it works. I do agree that the government does a great many things that it shouldn't. We're building new submarines to replace subs that are superior. And the subs THEY replaced (the LA class) are superior as well. We're doing that with fighter aircraft as well.

Frankly, I think the democratic party has failed in many of their initiatives as often as the GOP has. Head Start and No Child Left Behind are wonderful ideas that were implemented poorly. Tougher standards that mean something would be preferable in education. The trust fund for the highways has been raided by both parties. We need laws that means something.

Again, this is why I keep telling you folks that we need to further perfect the Constitution as to where we can get the games to stop in Washington. Everyone up there works the system and they've come to occupy a position of dubious statesmanship as to where everybody is guilty so by the same token, all are innocent.

Anyway....

The enlightened wealthy understand it's better to have good schools, good roads, good health services because it creates disposable income. Grumps claims that he has a house remodeling company of some sort. If you could give someone who owns such a company a choice between expanding into a market that has 20 houses and one that has 500 houses, they would likely pick the 500 house market since there would be more customers. I doubt they would go for a place that has the 20 great houses and is surrounded by slums.


I believe the rich dudes standing with the President understand that.

There really IS a reason why the Democrats let the Bush tax cuts stand when they controlled the House, the Senate and the Oval Office two years ago, Candy...and that "reason" is that getting rid of the Bush tax cuts would have dampened the economic recovery substantially. Christina Romer understood that...Larry Summers understood that...the Blue Dog Democrats understood that...and even Barry himself seemed to finally understood that. What I find amazing is that people like yourself can't see through this transparent attempt now to come up with a campaign issue that the Obama White House can sell to the American people in order to get another term. Let's be honest here...the economy IS better than it was two years ago but now there are very real fears that we're stalling out again. The latest employment numbers were way below what was projected and we're still living under a pair of economic Damocles swords in the Middle East situation with Israel/Iran and the troubles that persist in Europe. So if you're a Keynesian...and this White House professes to be just that...then you should know that raising taxes in a weak economy was something that John Maynard Keynes cautioned against as being faulty fiscal policy. So why are they pushing tax raises? If it's not good fiscal policy then what possible reason would they have for calling for tax raises NOW of all times?

You won't find the answer to that question in an economics text book, Candy because this isn't about economics...it's about populism and this Administration's apparent belief that the American people aren't smart enough to figure this out until it's too late. What's really sad is that progressives like yourself will undoubtably be heartbroken when a newly re-elected Barack Obama DOESN'T raise taxes on the rich like you want so desperately. It's all a game and right now...and YOU...are the one getting played.

 

[inALIENable]

Ha ha ha we're all headed for doom and at this point I say fuck it and give up ~ everyone deserves it. Let the chaos begin!

Share? LOL yeah, with those I want to and NOT with those I wouldn't want to!

I can't wait until everything just collapses and crashes and the carnage begins. Fucking coveters, LOL. Yeah, come try to share the fruits of my labor and I'll abort you!

 

[Skull Pilot]

Most of the enlightened wealthy realize that the way the society works is that it depends on good schools, good roads, healthy persons, etc... Educated persons get good jobs and are paid well to buy their products that travel over good roads.

They understand that having 5,000 (just to pick a number) persons who have more disposable income is better for them than having 250 (just to pick another number) mega rich. There is only so much consumption the mega rich can do.

Anyway, thats the way it works. Back to the hemhawing and profanity.

So it's better to have 5000 people spend 2 dollars than it is to have 250 people spend 40 dollars?

How exactly? The same amount of money is being spent is it not?

And how is it better if the government takes my money away from me and gives it to some slacker to spend than if I spend it myself?

Yes but what is not in your equation is that the 250 people don't need to spend all $40. In your small scale it makes no sense since we're talking about 40 bucks. But having 5,000 persons who are well off is preferable to having 250 people who have more money than they know what to do with.

Lets take toasters. If you own a factory that makes toasters, you can sell 250 or you can sell 5000. I think most people would rather sell 5000 than 250. It's not like that for all items but it's an example.

Anyway, thats the way it works and why you see a great many persons who have the means and the social consciousness agreeing with the President on this issue.

I would say it's the 2 dollars that you don't need to spend.

I can easily not buy anything that costs 2 bucks but if I'm spending 40 it then is something I need.

And people with money always know what do do with it which is the reason they have money in the first place.

 

[bitterlyclingin]

The Politics Of Envy at work. The trick will be to convince the people of the United States that the people who earn twenty per cent of the income, but pay 40 per cent of the taxes, are not paying their fair share.
We already know he has the lady who was screaming "He's going to pay for my groceries!!!!" at the top of her lungs in 2008 convinced.

 

[editec]

When the median incomes of Americans families is dropping, even as a small part of the population is doing much better, and even as many of those people end up paying ZERO taxes?

It is time to RETHINK our tax laws.

 

[Skull Pilot]

When the median incomes of Americans families is dropping, even as a small part of the population is doing much better, and even as many of those people end up paying ZERO taxes?

It is time to RETHINK our tax laws.

Correct no one should be exempt from paying taxes and no one should actually receive more back than they pay in.

 

[naturegirl]

When you raise taxes on the investors, the investors will move there money else where. So there goes small bussiness investments and municipal investments. This is pure stupidity.

So from 1949 to 1964 when the top tax rate was 91%, investors left the United States?

Comon, asshat.

Back up your statement with anything resembling a fact.

How about when Reagan raised taxes?
When Bush did?
When Clinton did?

You sir, are an ignorant fool being played for a chump.

From 1949 to 1964, we didn't have NAFTA, we exported more than we imported. The USA actually made stuff, they didn't get it from other countries.

How many times have we been told this is a global economy, it's not the same as our grandparents had.

You sir are the fool, you refuse to understand there are countries with booming economies and no Europe is not one of them. So why is the supreme leader trying to mimic a failing economy??