Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

[Dad2three]

Democrat's should be required to pay higher taxes since they feel we're not taxed enough....
They want higher taxes....Then they should cut a check to the IRS when they file their tax returns...

Yeah, because that's how Gov't is funded, by voluntary contributions *shaking head*


GOP Prez policy since 1981 HAS created about 90% of current US debt but CONservatives/GOP think they shouldn't have to pay iy back!


For 34 years, CONservatives "supply side" BS has not only GUTTED revenues, rewarded the top 1/10th of 1% by HUGE increases in the piece of the pie they held 1945-1980 (while the tax "burden" on that piece of the pie has shrunk by 40%!!!), but they ALSO gutted infrastructure spending, safety nets and continue their war on the poor/middle class

Congrats you right wing loons, the US will look like a 3rd world nation your Klown policies create!

 

[thanatos144]

Democrat's should be required to pay higher taxes since they feel we're not taxed enough....
They want higher taxes....Then they should cut a check to the IRS when they file their tax returns...

Yeah, because that's how Gov't is funded, by voluntary contributions *shaking head*


GOP Prez policy since 1981 HAS created about 90% of current US debt but CONservatives/GOP think they shouldn't have to pay iy back!


For 34 years, CONservatives "supply side" BS has not only GUTTED revenues, rewarded the top 1/10th of 1% by HUGE increases in the piece of the pie they held 1945-1980 (while the tax "burden" on that piece of the pie has shrunk by 40%!!!), but they ALSO gutted infrastructure spending, safety nets and continue their war on the poor/middle class

Congrats you right wing loons, the US will look like a 3rd world nation your Klown policies create!

This just proves you are a idiot. We haven't used conservative economics since Bush senior. But Clinton should thank Reagan for the good economy that he fucked up. Good thing for newt or it would have been far worse

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Andylusion]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

This is a rhetorical question, you do realize we who do pay taxes cut refunds to individuals who don't pay a dime?

If you want to balance the budget realize this is one of the problems, tell me what the percentage and amount is of non tax paying citizens and I'll bet you lunch we can balance the budget...

not sure where your going with this...the least wealthy often dont make enough to pay INCOME taxes...but taxing them more would be foolish since you cant squeeze blood from a turnip as they say.

What he's trying to point out, is that those at the lowest end, have a negative income tax rate. Not only are they not contributing to the upkeep of this country in taxes, but they are actually getting money back.

Now this is one of those "Depending on your perspective" type arguments.

If you count Social Security as a tax, then no one avoids paying tax.

But then you would have to conclude that Social Security is one of the most horrific anti-poor taxes on the planet.

However, if you do not count Socialist Insecurity as a tax, then there are tons of people who get money BACK from the government.

They have a negative income tax rate. They actually get more money from the government in refunds, than they have withheld in taxes.

His point is that we could balance the budget much easier, if we simply had everyone paying the minimum tax.

Or at the very least, if we were not paying people back, more money than they have withheld.

Having a tax rate of ZERO, would be a step above, a negative rate.

 

[Dad2three]

Democrat's should be required to pay higher taxes since they feel we're not taxed enough....
They want higher taxes....Then they should cut a check to the IRS when they file their tax returns...

Yeah, because that's how Gov't is funded, by voluntary contributions *shaking head*


GOP Prez policy since 1981 HAS created about 90% of current US debt but CONservatives/GOP think they shouldn't have to pay iy back!


For 34 years, CONservatives "supply side" BS has not only GUTTED revenues, rewarded the top 1/10th of 1% by HUGE increases in the piece of the pie they held 1945-1980 (while the tax "burden" on that piece of the pie has shrunk by 40%!!!), but they ALSO gutted infrastructure spending, safety nets and continue their war on the poor/middle class

Congrats you right wing loons, the US will look like a 3rd world nation your Klown policies create!

This just proves you are a idiot. We haven't used conservative economics since Bush senior. But Clinton should thank Reagan for the good economy that he fucked up. Good thing for newt or it would have been far worse

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Yeah, I forgot, it was credit in right wing world for Ronnie's '18 year miracle" but Obama's economy, not Dubya's *shaking head*

Newt huh? He vote for the 1993 tax increases that set the stage to get US 4 straight surpluses under BJ Bill the best conservative Prez since Ike? THREE OF THE SURPLUSES WERE AFTER BJ BILL VETOED THE GOP'S $700-+ BILLION TAX CUT. Then Dubya came in and we saw how "fiscally conservative" the GOP was, lol

 

[Dad2three]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

This is a rhetorical question, you do realize we who do pay taxes cut refunds to individuals who don't pay a dime?

If you want to balance the budget realize this is one of the problems, tell me what the percentage and amount is of non tax paying citizens and I'll bet you lunch we can balance the budget...

not sure where your going with this...the least wealthy often dont make enough to pay INCOME taxes...but taxing them more would be foolish since you cant squeeze blood from a turnip as they say.

What he's trying to point out, is that those at the lowest end, have a negative income tax rate. Not only are they not contributing to the upkeep of this country in taxes, but they are actually getting money back.

Now this is one of those "Depending on your perspective" type arguments.

If you count Social Security as a tax, then no one avoids paying tax.

But then you would have to conclude that Social Security is one of the most horrific anti-poor taxes on the planet.

However, if you do not count Socialist Insecurity as a tax, then there are tons of people who get money BACK from the government.

They have a negative income tax rate. They actually get more money from the government in refunds, than they have withheld in taxes.

His point is that we could balance the budget much easier, if we simply had everyone paying the minimum tax.

Or at the very least, if we were not paying people back, more money than they have withheld.

Having a tax rate of ZERO, would be a step above, a negative rate.

MORE BULLSH*T

SS keeps half of seniors out of poverty, grow the fuk up!


So here is total taxes -- which includes corporate taxes, income taxes, payroll taxes, state sales taxes, and more -- paid by different income groups and broken into federal and state and local burdens:

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.


But here is really the only tax graph you need: It's total tax burden by income group. And as you'll see, every income group is paying something, and the rich aren't paying much more, as a percentage of their incomes, then the middle class.

The one tax graph you really need to know


THOSE "LUCKY DUCKIES" AT THE BOTTOM HALF OF AMERICA, AVERAGING ;LESS THAN $15,000 PER FAMILY (A CUT OF ALMOST $5,000 PER FAMILY IF THEY KEPT THE SAME PIECE OF THE PIE!)

 

[Dad2three]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

This is a rhetorical question, you do realize we who do pay taxes cut refunds to individuals who don't pay a dime?

If you want to balance the budget realize this is one of the problems, tell me what the percentage and amount is of non tax paying citizens and I'll bet you lunch we can balance the budget...

not sure where your going with this...the least wealthy often dont make enough to pay INCOME taxes...but taxing them more would be foolish since you cant squeeze blood from a turnip as they say.

What he's trying to point out, is that those at the lowest end, have a negative income tax rate. Not only are they not contributing to the upkeep of this country in taxes, but they are actually getting money back.

Now this is one of those "Depending on your perspective" type arguments.

If you count Social Security as a tax, then no one avoids paying tax.

But then you would have to conclude that Social Security is one of the most horrific anti-poor taxes on the planet.

However, if you do not count Socialist Insecurity as a tax, then there are tons of people who get money BACK from the government.

They have a negative income tax rate. They actually get more money from the government in refunds, than they have withheld in taxes.

His point is that we could balance the budget much easier, if we simply had everyone paying the minimum tax.

Or at the very least, if we were not paying people back, more money than they have withheld.

Having a tax rate of ZERO, would be a step above, a negative rate.

EITC is why most people have a minus tax burden, think they should stop working?


Reagan: EITC “the best anti-poverty, the best pro-family, the best job creation measure to come out of Congress,”

 

[GWV5903]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

This is a rhetorical question, you do realize we who do pay taxes cut refunds to individuals who don't pay a dime?

If you want to balance the budget realize this is one of the problems, tell me what the percentage and amount is of non tax paying citizens and I'll bet you lunch we can balance the budget...

I'LL TAKE THAT BET BUBS

BOTTOM 50% OF US MAKE A WHOPPING 11% OF ALL US REVENUES (ABOUT THE SAME AS THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US)

They average LESS than $15,000 PER FAMILY IF THEY HAD THE SAME SHARE OF INCOME THEY HAD PRE REAGANOMICS (1980) THEY WOULD HAVE AN ADDITIONAL ALMOST $5,000 PER FAMILY!


So here is total taxes -- which includes corporate taxes, income taxes, payroll taxes, state sales taxes, and more -- paid by different income groups and broken into federal and state and local burdens:

WHO WILL BALANCE THE BUDGET? THE BOTTOM HALF OF US MAKING LES THAN $15,000 PER FAMILY? LOL

The one tax graph you really need to know



Tax data here:
Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

Do you even read the shit you post?

From your link...

Top 50 Percent of All Taxpayers Paid 97.2 Percent of All Federal Income Taxes; Top 1 Percent Paid 38.1 Percent; and Bottom 90 Percent Paid 29.7 Percent of All Federal Income Taxes

 

[GWV5903]

Did you know that Warren Buffet(who pays less taxes than his secretary)

He pays a smaller percentage not less...

That's a lie. He pays more and a larger percentage.

I think he would know...

Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

Warren Buffett says even though he and other top earners are paying higher taxes this year, he thinks he's still paying a lower rate than his secretary.
In 2013, capital gains for those earning more than $400,000 ($450,000 for couples) will be taxed at 20%, up from 15%. And high-income households also will pay an additional 3.8% in Medicare taxes on their investment income for the first time. The top marginal tax rate also rose for the wealthiest wage earners, but since Buffett's income is from investment gains, not wages, that's not a factor.

 

[GWV5903]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

This is a rhetorical question, you do realize we who do pay taxes cut refunds to individuals who don't pay a dime?

If you want to balance the budget realize this is one of the problems, tell me what the percentage and amount is of non tax paying citizens and I'll bet you lunch we can balance the budget...

not sure where your going with this...the least wealthy often dont make enough to pay INCOME taxes...but taxing them more would be foolish since you cant squeeze blood from a turnip as they say.

Well the truth is were I am going and if you really want to know I am certain you can find it...

I have seen too many times when couples get refunds in excess of $10K and make less than $60K a year, a fact that goes under the radar...

The last time this happened the husband was here on a sponsorship visa and lied about his mileage, their refund was in excess of $12K before their tax preparers fee came out of it...

And if you think they are in the minority you're fooling no one but yourself...

There are a lot of facts out there that no one talks about...

 

[GWV5903]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

This is a rhetorical question, you do realize we who do pay taxes cut refunds to individuals who don't pay a dime?

If you want to balance the budget realize this is one of the problems, tell me what the percentage and amount is of non tax paying citizens and I'll bet you lunch we can balance the budget...

not sure where your going with this...the least wealthy often dont make enough to pay INCOME taxes...but taxing them more would be foolish since you cant squeeze blood from a turnip as they say.

What he's trying to point out, is that those at the lowest end, have a negative income tax rate. Not only are they not contributing to the upkeep of this country in taxes, but they are actually getting money back.

Now this is one of those "Depending on your perspective" type arguments.

If you count Social Security as a tax, then no one avoids paying tax.

But then you would have to conclude that Social Security is one of the most horrific anti-poor taxes on the planet.

However, if you do not count Socialist Insecurity as a tax, then there are tons of people who get money BACK from the government.

They have a negative income tax rate. They actually get more money from the government in refunds, than they have withheld in taxes.

His point is that we could balance the budget much easier, if we simply had everyone paying the minimum tax.

Or at the very least, if we were not paying people back, more money than they have withheld.

Having a tax rate of ZERO, would be a step above, a negative rate.

Very true story, check it out...

 

[Dad2three]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

This is a rhetorical question, you do realize we who do pay taxes cut refunds to individuals who don't pay a dime?

If you want to balance the budget realize this is one of the problems, tell me what the percentage and amount is of non tax paying citizens and I'll bet you lunch we can balance the budget...

I'LL TAKE THAT BET BUBS

BOTTOM 50% OF US MAKE A WHOPPING 11% OF ALL US REVENUES (ABOUT THE SAME AS THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US)

They average LESS than $15,000 PER FAMILY IF THEY HAD THE SAME SHARE OF INCOME THEY HAD PRE REAGANOMICS (1980) THEY WOULD HAVE AN ADDITIONAL ALMOST $5,000 PER FAMILY!


So here is total taxes -- which includes corporate taxes, income taxes, payroll taxes, state sales taxes, and more -- paid by different income groups and broken into federal and state and local burdens:

WHO WILL BALANCE THE BUDGET? THE BOTTOM HALF OF US MAKING LES THAN $15,000 PER FAMILY? LOL

The one tax graph you really need to know



Tax data here:
Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

Do you even read the shit you post?

From your link...

Top 50 Percent of All Taxpayers Paid 97.2 Percent of All Federal Income Taxes; Top 1 Percent Paid 38.1 Percent; and Bottom 90 Percent Paid 29.7 Percent of All Federal Income Taxes

Oh right sorry, I forgot in right wing world, 25% of ALL Gov't taxation and 46% of federal revenues. INCOME taxes is ALL that matters


Top 50% of taxpayers TOOK almost 89% of ALL income dummy!

TOP 10% MADE NEARLY 60% OF INCOME, HOW MUCH SHOULD THE BOTTOM 90% PAY?? LOL

 

[Dad2three]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

This is a rhetorical question, you do realize we who do pay taxes cut refunds to individuals who don't pay a dime?

If you want to balance the budget realize this is one of the problems, tell me what the percentage and amount is of non tax paying citizens and I'll bet you lunch we can balance the budget...

not sure where your going with this...the least wealthy often dont make enough to pay INCOME taxes...but taxing them more would be foolish since you cant squeeze blood from a turnip as they say.

Well the truth is were I am going and if you really want to know I am certain you can find it...

I have seen too many times when couples get refunds in excess of $10K and make less than $60K a year, a fact that goes under the radar...

The last time this happened the husband was here on a sponsorship visa and lied about his mileage, their refund was in excess of $12K before their tax preparers fee came out of it...

And if you think they are in the minority you're fooling no one but yourself...

There are a lot of facts out there that no one talks about...

LOL

More "welfare queen" BS from the right

 

[Dad2three]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

This is a rhetorical question, you do realize we who do pay taxes cut refunds to individuals who don't pay a dime?

If you want to balance the budget realize this is one of the problems, tell me what the percentage and amount is of non tax paying citizens and I'll bet you lunch we can balance the budget...

not sure where your going with this...the least wealthy often dont make enough to pay INCOME taxes...but taxing them more would be foolish since you cant squeeze blood from a turnip as they say.

What he's trying to point out, is that those at the lowest end, have a negative income tax rate. Not only are they not contributing to the upkeep of this country in taxes, but they are actually getting money back.

Now this is one of those "Depending on your perspective" type arguments.

If you count Social Security as a tax, then no one avoids paying tax.

But then you would have to conclude that Social Security is one of the most horrific anti-poor taxes on the planet.

However, if you do not count Socialist Insecurity as a tax, then there are tons of people who get money BACK from the government.

They have a negative income tax rate. They actually get more money from the government in refunds, than they have withheld in taxes.

His point is that we could balance the budget much easier, if we simply had everyone paying the minimum tax.

Or at the very least, if we were not paying people back, more money than they have withheld.

Having a tax rate of ZERO, would be a step above, a negative rate.

Very true story, check it out...

Yes since the bottom HALF OF AMERICANS made 11% of ALL US income a drop from 18% plus pre Reagan!

TRUE STORY!

 

[sakinago]

Ah really, bc I work with a former VA nurse and have a family full of marines (all 4 uncles served, one died in nam, 3 of 6 of their sons currently serve) on my moms side, all that say a very different story other than satisfaction. And ASCI is like the restaurant polls that they give to their happy customers...and there is a big difference in satisfaction when your paying for it VS when it's free, but you don't hear that control being taken into consideration when they do these polls.

ANYTHING on your MYTH of Switzerland being a libertarian paradise? How about on LBJ demand side tax cuts????


NOTHING HUH? lol

I'm not against demand side tax cuts!!! That's what I've been saying all along. Supply tax cuts also help...however I believe that they should be equal, not negligible. You want to cry about companies moving overseas, but push policies that drive them overseas more. And with the help of LBJs great society, how many more blacks are now dependent on the government?

And the biggest difference between private h/c and socialized h/c is that when there is wrong doing on the private side...those people go to prison and loose business ... When there's wrong doing with the VA, it's a slap on the wrist and more funding.

Yeah, false equivalencies, how wonderful *shaking head*



SUPPLY SIDE HELPS? WHEN DOES IT KICK IN BUBS?

Drive them overseas? Oh right the lowest EFFECTIVE tax rates on corps for 40 years? Horrible. Couldn't be CONservative "free trade" AS we gutted taxes on those job creators right?

Yep, the rights war on the war on poverty has worked better than the lefts war on poverty Bubs

False equivalencies? so it's solely because of free trade that allows companies to move overseas?

And again what is your solution? To force companies to stay in the states?

Why is it so black and white with your "solely" free trade crap?

Of course not.


BUT IT IS GOV'T POLICY THAT ALLOWS OFFSHORING OF US JOBS (as the money IS in the US) via POLICIES ,that are mainly CONservative/GOP

Force Companies? You mean REQUIRE THEM TO BUILD HERE IF THE WANT O HAVE ACCESS TO THE #1 GDP IN THE WORLD? How horrible to have that type of policy, AGAIN!

HINT, CONservative policy ONLY works for the "job creators", be it safety laws, environment, labor, tax, or other PUBLIC POLICY! YES, GOV'T POLICY INFLUENCES WHERE THE JOBS ARE, ONLY A DISHONEST POS OR CON DISAGREES!

I'm black and white? You completley ignore all the expensive factors that go into running a company in America to fit your argument, and then talk about the effective corporate tax rate and how it's not working. What about the cost of healthcare (huge, huge expense), land taxes, lawyers to make sure business follows every minutiae of regulation and reduction of liability, the cost to implement business according to regulation (not every regulation is bad...but a majority are ridiculous), all the licensing, and etc. So remind me why America is such a business friendly environment?

And your solution to get companies to stay here sounds very nationalistic, and socialist at the same time. I wonder if there is a party that combines the 2? And would it not greatly increase the cost of products and service on the demand side?? And what happens when all the QE money (2% a year I believe), that's basically just been going to overseas companies and investments, comes rushing back into the country? Would that not cause a lot of inflation??? But I guess the solution is to raise corporate taxes and taxes on the "rich", and essentially force companies to operate here.

I hear you talk about demand side tax cuts...but I doubt that you are actually for that, bc why not support the flat tax (not getting taxed on the first 50,000) at least on the personal side? After all the only area that you can admit there is govt waste of tax money is defense...but apparently no where else... Pretty much everything else the govt spends on is ok, and doesn't need any reform. That's funny, how much did govt spend on ACA website alone, and how much cheaper would the private sector make a similar website for themselves??

 

[danielpalos]

I believe we should discover a way and a means to abolish the "work tax" by ending direct taxes on "earned" income.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

This nation is 19 trillion in debt because we dont pay enough in taxes... Got it...... Lol

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, simply because it cannot be immoral to merely and simply and secularly and temporally; Tax the wealthiest into Heaven.

 

[danielpalos]

Private charity can Only cover multitudes of sins; Only a public sector can Tax the wealthiest into Heaven and solve simple poverty at the same time; with the full faith and credit of public Acts.

 

[RKMBrown]

Did you know that Warren Buffet(who pays less taxes than his secretary)

He pays a smaller percentage not less...

That's a lie. He pays more and a larger percentage.

I think he would know...

Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

Warren Buffett says even though he and other top earners are paying higher taxes this year, he thinks he's still paying a lower rate than his secretary.
In 2013, capital gains for those earning more than $400,000 ($450,000 for couples) will be taxed at 20%, up from 15%. And high-income households also will pay an additional 3.8% in Medicare taxes on their investment income for the first time. The top marginal tax rate also rose for the wealthiest wage earners, but since Buffett's income is from investment gains, not wages, that's not a factor.

Only morons and liars conflate capital gain taxes with personal income taxes. Are you a moron or a liar.

 

[Dad2three]

ANYTHING on your MYTH of Switzerland being a libertarian paradise? How about on LBJ demand side tax cuts????


NOTHING HUH? lol

I'm not against demand side tax cuts!!! That's what I've been saying all along. Supply tax cuts also help...however I believe that they should be equal, not negligible. You want to cry about companies moving overseas, but push policies that drive them overseas more. And with the help of LBJs great society, how many more blacks are now dependent on the government?

And the biggest difference between private h/c and socialized h/c is that when there is wrong doing on the private side...those people go to prison and loose business ... When there's wrong doing with the VA, it's a slap on the wrist and more funding.

Yeah, false equivalencies, how wonderful *shaking head*



SUPPLY SIDE HELPS? WHEN DOES IT KICK IN BUBS?

Drive them overseas? Oh right the lowest EFFECTIVE tax rates on corps for 40 years? Horrible. Couldn't be CONservative "free trade" AS we gutted taxes on those job creators right?

Yep, the rights war on the war on poverty has worked better than the lefts war on poverty Bubs

False equivalencies? so it's solely because of free trade that allows companies to move overseas?

And again what is your solution? To force companies to stay in the states?

Why is it so black and white with your "solely" free trade crap?

Of course not.


BUT IT IS GOV'T POLICY THAT ALLOWS OFFSHORING OF US JOBS (as the money IS in the US) via POLICIES ,that are mainly CONservative/GOP

Force Companies? You mean REQUIRE THEM TO BUILD HERE IF THE WANT O HAVE ACCESS TO THE #1 GDP IN THE WORLD? How horrible to have that type of policy, AGAIN!

HINT, CONservative policy ONLY works for the "job creators", be it safety laws, environment, labor, tax, or other PUBLIC POLICY! YES, GOV'T POLICY INFLUENCES WHERE THE JOBS ARE, ONLY A DISHONEST POS OR CON DISAGREES!

I'm black and white? You completley ignore all the expensive factors that go into running a company in America to fit your argument, and then talk about the effective corporate tax rate and how it's not working. What about the cost of healthcare (huge, huge expense), land taxes, lawyers to make sure business follows every minutiae of regulation and reduction of liability, the cost to implement business according to regulation (not every regulation is bad...but a majority are ridiculous), all the licensing, and etc. So remind me why America is such a business friendly environment?

And your solution to get companies to stay here sounds very nationalistic, and socialist at the same time. I wonder if there is a party that combines the 2? And would it not greatly increase the cost of products and service on the demand side?? And what happens when all the QE money (2% a year I believe), that's basically just been going to overseas companies and investments, comes rushing back into the country? Would that not cause a lot of inflation??? But I guess the solution is to raise corporate taxes and taxes on the "rich", and essentially force companies to operate here.

I hear you talk about demand side tax cuts...but I doubt that you are actually for that, bc why not support the flat tax (not getting taxed on the first 50,000) at least on the personal side? After all the only area that you can admit there is govt waste of tax money is defense...but apparently no where else... Pretty much everything else the govt spends on is ok, and doesn't need any reform. That's funny, how much did govt spend on ACA website alone, and how much cheaper would the private sector make a similar website for themselves??

Without false premises, distortions and lies what would right wingers ever have Bubba?


RECORD Corp profits in the US, lowest tax "burden" in 40 years AND first time EVER labor rates below 50% of costs

Must be horrible to run a Biz in America


Flat taxes, ALL of them proposed, are regressive Bubba, that's demand side? lol

Weird the 3 times thew US economy has tanked in 100 year period we followed the GOPers "laizze affaire" (as close as we can) policies


Harding/Coolidge "hands off approach, cheering on the credit bubble gave US the great depression

Ronnie Reagan ignored regulator warnings that started in 1984 that would've stopped 90% of his S&L crisis

Then exactly 20 years later Dubya ignored FBI warnings of exactly the same thing, when he cheered on the Banksters subprime bubble


ALL a coincidence right Bubba? lol