The Great Tax Lie

[JeffWartman]

That's right. The allocation of tax revenue by the government isn't an outcome of a political process and a compromise between competing interests within a society, its the suppression of liberty!

Ergo, all military spending should be funded by voluntary taxes, because a very significant percentage of the population is against foreign wars, and forcing those people to pay taxes for which they disagree is a violation of their freedom.

And if you disagree with me, you hate liberty and freedom.

No one is saying anything of the sort. But to claim that spending needs to increase at exponential levels, with more and more bureaucracy to eat up funds, more funds becoming "lost" everyday, coupled with the hidden costs of currency depreciation, and you have a recipe for economic disaster.

But yeah, those 130 or so odd years of small budgets, no federal income tax and overall liberty were just made up by evil capitalists.

"Government does not have an unlimited claim on the earnings of individuals. One of the foremost precepts of the natural law is man's right to the possession and the use of his property. And a man's earnings are his property as much as his land and the house in which he lives" - Barry Goldwater, The Conscience of a Conservative.

 

[jreeves]

The poll was done by the Wall Street Journal.

This is the link

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119518268221495363.html?mod=todays_us_page_one

ok saw the WSJ poll, but what does this prove again?

 

[Toro]

ok saw the WSJ poll, but what does this prove again?

That no one speaks for above average income earners when making the trade-off between social and military spending.

 

[Toro]

No one is saying anything of the sort. But to claim that spending needs to increase at exponential levels, with more and more bureaucracy to eat up funds, more funds becoming "lost" everyday, coupled with the hidden costs of currency depreciation, and you have a recipe for economic disaster.

But yeah, those 130 or so odd years of small budgets, no federal income tax and overall liberty were just made up by evil capitalists.

"Government does not have an unlimited claim on the earnings of individuals. One of the foremost precepts of the natural law is man's right to the possession and the use of his property. And a man's earnings are his property as much as his land and the house in which he lives" - Barry Goldwater, The Conscience of a Conservative.

I don't disagree with any of that, except the part of nobody saying anything of the sort, which jreeves is.

And, as for your point about the economy, I'll point out that Slick Willie left us with a surplus and less spending whereas the Republican, George Bush, has left us with higher government spending and deficits that could $500 billion again in the next few years. That's what is depreciating the currency.

 

[indago]

Toro trumpeted:

I'll point out that Slick Willie left us with a surplus

Maybe you could point out for us on this chart just where this surplus was "that Slick Willie left us with"...


-

 

[Toro]

Maybe you could point out for us on this chart just where this surplus was "that Slick Willie left us with"...


-

Maybe you could just check the budget balances at the CBO.

http://www.cbo.gov/budget/data/historical.pdf

 

[jreeves]

That no one speaks for above average income earners when making the trade-off between social and military spending.

The top 50% wage earners don't make over 100,000 dollars, its just under 32,000 dollars. Since the top 50% wage earners is what I was referring to, I think I'm still safe. Plus as you know I'm sure polls can be skewed depending on the question that you ask. Yes taxes may not be the most important but it probably ranks right up there I'm sure. I wasn't trying to speak for any sector of American society. I was stating it's ridiculous to expect the top 50% wage earners to pay 97% of the taxes and hand out 680 billion dollars in social programs, last year.

 

[Toro]

I was stating it's ridiculous to expect the top 50% wage earners to pay 97% of the taxes and hand out 680 billion dollars in social programs, last year.

Well, of course if there are going to be social programs, the top 50% are going to pay to the bottom 50%. It makes no sense that the bottom 50% would pay to the top 50% or to themselves. That's what social programs are for.

As one of those in the top 50%, I have no problem paying out $680 billion to the poor and the needy and the elderly. That's about 5% of GDP. If society deemed it such to pay more - and they are going to over the next few years - I have no problem with that either because I am one of the fortunate to have been born into a good family and with gifts God gave me to make a good living in this country. Others are not so fortunate.

 

[jreeves]

Well, of course if there are going to be social programs, the top 50% are going to pay to the bottom 50%. It makes no sense that the bottom 50% would pay to the top 50% or to themselves. That's what social programs are for.

As one of those in the top 50%, I have no problem paying out $680 billion to the poor and the needy and the elderly. That's about 5% of GDP. If society deemed it such to pay more - and they are going to over the next few years - I have no problem with that either because I am one of the fortunate to have been born into a good family and with gifts God gave me to make a good living in this country. Others are not so fortunate.

I wasn't so fortunate, I was raised in poverty. My family didn't receive public assistance of any kind. I worked my ass off to get where I'm at now and the government penalizes me. Do you think that's fair?

 

[jreeves]

Well, of course if there are going to be social programs, the top 50% are going to pay to the bottom 50%. It makes no sense that the bottom 50% would pay to the top 50% or to themselves. That's what social programs are for.

As one of those in the top 50%, I have no problem paying out $680 billion to the poor and the needy and the elderly. That's about 5% of GDP. If society deemed it such to pay more - and they are going to over the next few years - I have no problem with that either because I am one of the fortunate to have been born into a good family and with gifts God gave me to make a good living in this country. Others are not so fortunate.

With a 9.3 trillion dollar defecit it is no time to be spending 680 billion dollars on Social Programs. When you fund poverty, it creates more poverty. Besides the fact, Socialism as a policy is failed.

 

[indago]

Well, I don't see anywhere here where Toro pointed out for us that "Slick Willie" paid off our National Debt and left us with a surplus. Maybe El Toro was just blowing smoke. And since El Toro is blowing smoke, and now eating crow, he just may be enjoying a dish of SMOKED CROW...

 

[jodylee]

The real issue concerning taxation is that all your taxes are stolen from you by the federal reserve, which is a privatly owned bank. The government then has to borrow this money (which is suppossed to belong to the people and the state) from the federal reserve so that it can spend it on public services etc. This money then has to be repaid by the goverment to the federal reserve with interest. This means that the country is held in a perminant state of debt with, and therefore owned by the federal reserve.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The real issue concerning taxation is that all your taxes are stolen from you by the federal reserve, which is a privatly owned bank. The government then has to borrow this money (which is suppossed to belong to the people and the state) from the federal reserve so that it can spend it on public services etc. This money then has to be repaid by the goverment to the federal reserve with interest. This means that the country is held in a perminant state of debt with, and therefore owned by the federal reserve.

What a joke.

 

[JeffWartman]

Toro trumpeted:

Maybe you could point out for us on this chart just where this surplus was "that Slick Willie left us with"...


-

LOL. I guess some people do not understand simple economics.

Please look up the difference between the national deficit and national debt.

 

[JeffWartman]

Well, I don't see anywhere here where Toro pointed out for us that "Slick Willie" paid off our National Debt and left us with a surplus. Maybe El Toro was just blowing smoke. And since El Toro is blowing smoke, and now eating crow, he just may be enjoying a dish of SMOKED CROW...

Wrong. You posted the numbers for the national debt. Toro said that Clinton left with a budget surplus, which is 100% correct.

 

[indago]

JeffWartman posted:

Wrong. You posted the numbers for the national debt. Toro said that Clinton left with a budget surplus, which is 100% correct.

Here is what El Toro posted:

"I don't disagree with any of that, except the part of nobody saying anything of the sort, which jreeves is.

And, as for your point about the economy, I'll point out that Slick Willie left us with a surplus and less spending whereas the Republican, George Bush, has left us with higher government spending and deficits that could $500 billion again in the next few years. That's what is depreciating the currency."

Now, I don't see anything in there about a "budget surplus", do you?

Maybe Ol' El Toro would share some of his dish of SMOKED CROW with you...

 

[JeffWartman]

JeffWartman posted:

Here is what El Toro posted:

"I don't disagree with any of that, except the part of nobody saying anything of the sort, which jreeves is.

And, as for your point about the economy, I'll point out that Slick Willie left us with a surplus and less spending whereas the Republican, George Bush, has left us with higher government spending and deficits that could $500 billion again in the next few years. That's what is depreciating the currency."

Now, I don't see anything in there about a "budget surplus", do you?

Maybe Ol' El Toro would share some of his dish of SMOKED CROW with you...

There was a budget surplus. What you posted is the national debt, which will not show the budget deficit individually.

The national debt is the cumulative results of the budget from year to year. The budget is yearly, so we could have a deficit or surplus in a given year that wouldn't be apparent in a chart of the national debt, but it's painfully ignorant and uneducated to claim that there wasn't a budget surplus in the late 1990's.

 

[Toro]

I wasn't so fortunate, I was raised in poverty. My family didn't receive public assistance of any kind. I worked my ass off to get where I'm at now and the government penalizes me. Do you think that's fair?

Yes I do.

And good for you. I admire you.

 

[Toro]

The real issue concerning taxation is that all your taxes are stolen from you by the federal reserve, which is a privatly owned bank. The government then has to borrow this money (which is suppossed to belong to the people and the state) from the federal reserve so that it can spend it on public services etc. This money then has to be repaid by the goverment to the federal reserve with interest. This means that the country is held in a perminant state of debt with, and therefore owned by the federal reserve.

This is silly.

The government does not borrow from the Fed. The government borrows from savers. The Federal Reserve controls the money supply. It buys and sells short-term debt to influence the Fed Funds target rate - that's the rate they talk about when the press says the Fed cut rates. The Treasury issues the debt of the United States.

 

[Toro]

JeffWartman posted:

Here is what El Toro posted:

"I don't disagree with any of that, except the part of nobody saying anything of the sort, which jreeves is.

And, as for your point about the economy, I'll point out that Slick Willie left us with a surplus and less spending whereas the Republican, George Bush, has left us with higher government spending and deficits that could $500 billion again in the next few years. That's what is depreciating the currency."

Now, I don't see anything in there about a "budget surplus", do you?

Maybe Ol' El Toro would share some of his dish of SMOKED CROW with you...

The term "surplus" refers to a "budget surplus" when you are discussing fiscal matters of the United States government.

And Jeff is correct. The deficit is when in a given fiscal year the government spends more than it takes in. The debt is the accumulation of all deficits over time less any debt repayment. Debt is repaid when a government runs a surplus, or when government revenues exceed expenditures in a given fiscal year.