CAN we tax members of congress at 90%?

[Mr. President]

This post is stupid. If you don't like the way things are being ran you can vote a different representative into office who would better reflect the will of the people. That is democracy in action. So many time we have cries and complaints but the people complaining are doing nothing about it. if it is that bad RUN FOR OFFICE.

 

[NOBama]

true, we must admit its hilarious to see congress with all that phony outrage over AIG when congress cant even control itself.

That's just the diversion to keep our "eye off the ball". While all this hoopla is going on regarding bonuses, they're executing generational theft with scalpel like precision. Another campaign prophecy being fulfilled...

 

[WillowTree]

Agree, everyone who makes over 250k should be taxed 90%.
"On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."

UBI and the Flat Tax

well, if you could live on what is left then we have no reason to pity the poor now do we? Newp! A true anti American Communist

 

[WillowTree]

Agree, everyone who makes over 250k should be taxed 90%.

"On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."

UBI and the Flat Tax

Are the real owners the people that actually earned the money or the people that wait by the mailbox a certain day every month ? .....

Nailed it didn't ya? Yep

 

[Angel Heart]

Agree, everyone who makes over 250k should be taxed 90%.

"On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."

UBI and the Flat Tax

Fuck that shit!!!

BTW your buddy now makes over $250,000...

What is the president's salary? - Do You Know at GovSpot.com

 

[Gunny]

afterall, they have given us an 11 trillion and growing deficit. all their money should be taxed to help pay down the deficit.

The beauty of a great plan. They are paid well and have better perks than any of these failed executives, and they are BIGGER failures. When was the last time Congress accomplished anything good? It's been DECADES.

 

[midcan5]

Like Pavlov's dog the knee-jerk responses are to be expected from the empty headed. But did anyone read the article or consider its argument? Nah, the brain dead remain brain dead, that is why fools get elected and reelected. They know what makes you all salivate. Say 'taxes' and the tongue starts wagging.

"The Nobel Prize-winning economist and social scientist Herbert Simon estimated that “social capital” is responsible for at least 90 percent of what people earn in wealthy societies like those of the United States or northwestern Europe. By social capital Simon meant not only natural resources but, more important, the technology and organizational skills in the community, and the presence of good government. These are the foundation on which the rich can begin their work. “On moral grounds,” Simon added, “we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent.” Simon was not, of course, advocating so steep a rate of tax, for he was well aware of disincentive effects. But his estimate does undermine the argument that the rich are entitled to keep their wealth because it is all a result of their hard work. If Simon is right, that is true of at most 10 percent of it." Peter Singer

 

[editec]

CAN we tax members of congress at 90%?

You can try if you'd like.

Good luck with that.

 

[Yurt]

Agree, everyone who makes over 250k should be taxed 90%.

"On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."

UBI and the Flat Tax

according to the constitution, the individual owns his or her wealth...what you advocate is a destruction of the constitution, you are an enemy to this country.

 

[midcan5]

according to the constitution, the individual owns his or her wealth...what you advocate is a destruction of the constitution, you are an enemy to this country.

That was actually dumber than your usually inane replies, try again, I'll give you a hint, consider that word you used 'property' in the context of the argument. And for Pavlov fans, 'the constitution' is another saliva trigger.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

 

[Yurt]

according to the constitution, the individual owns his or her wealth...what you advocate is a destruction of the constitution, you are an enemy to this country.

That was actually dumber than your usually inane replies, try again, I'll give you a hint, consider that word you used 'property' in the context of the argument. And for Pavlov fans, 'the constitution' is another saliva trigger.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

you are nothing but a hack...try reading the 5th amendment and i am glad you admit that when i said wealth that wealth is property....and the preamble is not the law in this case, the constitution is....funny how you don't know the difference

 

[DiveCon]

according to the constitution, the individual owns his or her wealth...what you advocate is a destruction of the constitution, you are an enemy to this country.

That was actually dumber than your usually inane replies, try again, I'll give you a hint, consider that word you used 'property' in the context of the argument. And for Pavlov fans, 'the constitution' is another saliva trigger.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

notice the difference

 

[Yurt]

according to the constitution, the individual owns his or her wealth...what you advocate is a destruction of the constitution, you are an enemy to this country.

That was actually dumber than your usually inane replies, try again, I'll give you a hint, consider that word you used 'property' in the context of the argument. And for Pavlov fans, 'the constitution' is another saliva trigger.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

notice the difference

 

[midcan5]

you are nothing but a hack...try reading the 5th amendment and i am glad you admit that when i said wealth that wealth is property....and the preamble is not the law in this case, the constitution is....funny how you don't know the difference

And you are a fool, your compensation under the laws of the land is we allow fools like you the same rights as the good citizens. You live here, thus you pay. Funny how you wingnuts stress this word or phrase over the other. But you didn't address my question, given you earn little on your own, what excuses you from paying your fair rate? And given your off base replies, you should now pay 95 percent. lol

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

PS why are not on that circle jerk site, DP?

 

[Jon]

according to the constitution, the individual owns his or her wealth...what you advocate is a destruction of the constitution, you are an enemy to this country.

That was actually dumber than your usually inane replies, try again, I'll give you a hint, consider that word you used 'property' in the context of the argument. And for Pavlov fans, 'the constitution' is another saliva trigger.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

notice the difference

Furthermore, "securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves" indicates that we as a people should have the right to earn whatever income we see fit.

 

[Yurt]

you are nothing but a hack...try reading the 5th amendment and i am glad you admit that when i said wealth that wealth is property....and the preamble is not the law in this case, the constitution is....funny how you don't know the difference

And you are a fool, your compensation under the laws of the land is we allow fools like you the same rights as the good citizens. You live here, thus you pay. Funny how you wingnuts stress this word or phrase over the other. But you didn't address my question, given you earn little on your own, what excuses you from paying your fair rate? And given your off base replies, you should now pay 95 percent. lol

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

PS why are not on that circle jerk site, DP?

why do you want to destroy the constitution? your ideas are in direct violation of the US constitution.

and your sentence makes no sense and i fail to see why you find it necessary to bash another site....that you have posted on and got your ass kicked in debate after debate...no wonder you have to insult it, chicken

 

[midcan5]

and your sentence makes no sense and i fail to see why you find it necessary to bash another site....that you have posted on and got your ass kicked in debate after debate...no wonder you have to insult it, chicken

Name calling is the final resource for those who cannot defend their ideas. DP bans thought, figured you knew that by now.

 

[Yurt]

and your sentence makes no sense and i fail to see why you find it necessary to bash another site....that you have posted on and got your ass kicked in debate after debate...no wonder you have to insult it, chicken

Name calling is the final resource for those who cannot defend their ideas. DP bans thought, figured you knew that by now.

that is simply not true and you know it. it is pathetic that you would cowardly bash that site from here and not actually debate there. dp is a great site.

 

[manu1959]

and your sentence makes no sense and i fail to see why you find it necessary to bash another site....that you have posted on and got your ass kicked in debate after debate...no wonder you have to insult it, chicken

Name calling is the final resource for those who cannot defend their ideas. DP bans thought, figured you knew that by now.

you shouldn't have any any problem there then....

 

[oreo]

I would love to throw all their behinds out of office, & see them standing in the un-employment lines. They created this mess with their "everyone" deserves homeowner ship policy--& signed our names to those mortgages guaranteeing that they would be paid back. Not only that--where in the hell was the SEC when Madoff was ripping everyone off, along with all the crooks on Wall Street. It's unbelieveable exactly how incompetent our federal government really is. Think when was the last time they actually did something RIGHT? They use our tax dollars to clean up pig stink in Iowa, like they have got an infinite well of our money.

Then the audacity to tax these exec. at 90%--when our political morons already approved those bonuse's in the stimulus bill -- THAT THEY DIDN'T READ. From there we got the Barney Franks dog & pony show--blaming everyone for these bonuse's when he too signed off on them. Wake up Americans--& start looking at your government.

They're all a bunch of morons, many of them corrupt morons. How about we start doing bus tours of our politicians homes?