Who are Dems Fooling with this "Additional Revenues" Nonsense?

[Sactowndog]

The gov't has never invested in anything successfully.

I'd point out the Interstate Highway System, but I know you'll just ignore it.

You point it out because it is the ONLY example out there. And it is over 50 years old.
Want me to list the failures, like synfuels, ethanol, etc?

Uh how about the internet! That was a pretty spectacular success. You are so biased that you lose all credibiity. All you can do is throw insults.

 

[Sactowndog]

if you like higher taxes, then say that, calling them "additional revenues" or "revenue enhancements" is douchey and ridiculous

you don't hear those of us that favor spending cuts calling them "outlay reductions"

One of the greatest things that happened in my lifetime is that Progressives losing their media monopoly.

Yea Frank, it lays the groundwork for a corporatocracy, the newest form of an aristocracy, which conservatives ALWAYS try to build.

Its not that new. It is called Facism and the Latin American's have perfected it for years.

 

[Too Tall]

Dems started Korea and Vietnam, duh. Nixon lied about having a secret plan and dragged it out for SIX more years- totally corrupt...

Nixon got the US out before the end of his first term, dipstick.

Sorry, Nixon resigned and the last American GI left Vietnam on Ford's watch in April, 1975.

 

[Too Tall]

Wow. Really, your position is cut anything and everything as long as the millionaires don't pay a dime more in taxes.

Unreal.

Well, apparently YOUR position is that we need to punish anyone who doesn't suck off the government teat so that those who do don't suffer as much for their dependency.

Talk about unreal.

First of all Cecilie, I have to tell you that I'm into bondage.
Secondly, I would guess that many of the people sucking off the government teat probably don't like being there. After over 30 years of basically no growth in wages in Real Dollars, people are having a real rough time living from check to check as their wages are being outpaced by inflation which translates to less expendable income.
So, in your opinion, only those who have not been included in the growth of the economy should be further penalized. Also those who have realized the rewards of the economic growth shouldn't also have to sacrifice to rail in this country's economic downturn.

Workers’ share of national income plummets to record low
Workers

Now paddle my Lilly white ass!

Federal employees have been getting COLA (Cost of Living Allowance) for years that is based on the CPI. They all also get step increases in pay merely by being there. I was merely referring to your second statement.

 

[AmericanFirst]

if you like higher taxes, then say that, calling them "additional revenues" or "revenue enhancements" is douchey and ridiculous

you don't hear those of us that favor spending cuts calling them "outlay reductions"

"Outlay reductions" I like that. Good one.

Oh, for the record, I'm in favour of higher taxes. I want them back up to where they were in 2000.

Socialist!! It is the spending. CLinton was as bad as obamaturd except he had a re[publican congress to keep him somewhat honest, but then there was the monica fiasco.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Considering that none of the spending cuts effect the top percentiles, what is the uber wealthy's sacrifice in righting the economy? What are the sacrifices of the large corporations, the banks and Wall Street? Anyone?
Why does the right hate Main Street America?
I'm all for Americans sacrificing to to right our economy and I'm referring to ALL AMERICANS.

The Left pulls out this "sacrifice" shit whenever they want more money. It's either that or "investment." The gov't has never invested in anything successfully.

The government invested in a war against Germany and Japan a few decades ago. Perhaps you've heard of it.

You do not invest in a war. War has no financial returns. I want to see the failure list, but it is probably too long to post.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The government invested in a war against Germany and Japan a few decades ago. Perhaps you've heard of it.

Look up the word "invest". I do not think it means what you think it means.

I'm quite certain I know what it means. And even more certain I'm using it right.

Really? So what financial return is directly inherent in war?

 

[kiwiman127]

Well, apparently YOUR position is that we need to punish anyone who doesn't suck off the government teat so that those who do don't suffer as much for their dependency.

Talk about unreal.

First of all Cecilie, I have to tell you that I'm into bondage.
Secondly, I would guess that many of the people sucking off the government teat probably don't like being there. After over 30 years of basically no growth in wages in Real Dollars, people are having a real rough time living from check to check as their wages are being outpaced by inflation which translates to less expendable income.
So, in your opinion, only those who have not been included in the growth of the economy should be further penalized. Also those who have realized the rewards of the economic growth shouldn't also have to sacrifice to rail in this country's economic downturn.

Workers’ share of national income plummets to record low
Workers

Now paddle my Lilly white ass!

First of all, Kiwi, I have to tell you that you have no chance with me whatsoever.

Second of all, I don't care if they LIKE being there or not. Punishing people for being successful and doing without government handouts in order to spare pain to those who ARE dependent on government handouts leaves me spectacularly unimpressed.

In my opinion, making life harder on even more people by taking more of their money to send to a huge, bloated, overintrusive federal government to spend, misspend, and outright waste - however it is you want to "spin" it to play on the sympathies of the masses - is an incredibly bad idea, particularly in a bad economy. If people base their lives on the government being an obscenely obese highway robber of their neighbor's prosperity, and subsequently live less well when their neighbor refuses to pay up, I'm not planning to get all that exercised about it.

In short, until the government shows me some evidence that it plans to be more thrifty with the trillions of dollars it already takes from the taxpayers (and not even a liberal can make the claim that the government is thrifty or prudent with money), I cannot see my way clear to authorizing throwing more money at it.

The point is, many of the uber wealthy obtained their wealth on the backs of the worker class. As noted in the link I provided, the working class is at a record low as far as their share of the national income. Why would that be? And this has been going on for decades as wages have been basically frozen in Real Dollars. The working class is the foundation of our consumer driven economy. Over two-thirds of the US economy is driven by consumer spending. The scenario of very weak consumer spending was a major cause of the Great Depression, which again was driven by flat wages for the working class. Now as the US struggles with it's economy, we are in the same position as we were in 1929. And the obvious is ignored. The above scenario wasn't created by government, it was created by greed. And now, who gets stuck with all the sacrifice, while being held back economically by the private sector for decades?
Now I have absolutely no problem blaming government for much of our economic woes, but it wasn't all caused by government, greed has played into this mess too. Facts back me up! All one has to due is look at the ever increasing wealth gap (which is at the same point it was in 1929).
Yet those who you righties want to do all the sacrifice, is the same group who the private sector needs to grow and it's the same sector who fights in the trenches in all our wars. And they get zero respect from the right while the right bends over backwards protecting the wealthy and Big Corporations.
So in the right's perfect word, Main Street America AGAIN sacrifices and AGAIN the uber wealthy and Corporate America escape the responsibility to also sacrifice from something they helped create.
That thinking is morally corrupt.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

First of all Cecilie, I have to tell you that I'm into bondage.
Secondly, I would guess that many of the people sucking off the government teat probably don't like being there. After over 30 years of basically no growth in wages in Real Dollars, people are having a real rough time living from check to check as their wages are being outpaced by inflation which translates to less expendable income.
So, in your opinion, only those who have not been included in the growth of the economy should be further penalized. Also those who have realized the rewards of the economic growth shouldn't also have to sacrifice to rail in this country's economic downturn.

Workers’ share of national income plummets to record low
Workers

Now paddle my Lilly white ass!

First of all, Kiwi, I have to tell you that you have no chance with me whatsoever.

Second of all, I don't care if they LIKE being there or not. Punishing people for being successful and doing without government handouts in order to spare pain to those who ARE dependent on government handouts leaves me spectacularly unimpressed.

In my opinion, making life harder on even more people by taking more of their money to send to a huge, bloated, overintrusive federal government to spend, misspend, and outright waste - however it is you want to "spin" it to play on the sympathies of the masses - is an incredibly bad idea, particularly in a bad economy. If people base their lives on the government being an obscenely obese highway robber of their neighbor's prosperity, and subsequently live less well when their neighbor refuses to pay up, I'm not planning to get all that exercised about it.

In short, until the government shows me some evidence that it plans to be more thrifty with the trillions of dollars it already takes from the taxpayers (and not even a liberal can make the claim that the government is thrifty or prudent with money), I cannot see my way clear to authorizing throwing more money at it.

The point is, many of the uber wealthy obtained their wealth on the backs of the worker class. As noted in the link I provided, the working class is at a record low as far as their share of the national income. Why would that be? And this has been going on for decades as wages have been basically frozen in Real Dollars. The working class is the foundation of our consumer driven economy. Over two-thirds of the US economy is driven by consumer spending. The scenario of very weak consumer spending was a major cause of the Great Depression, which again was driven by flat wages for the working class. Now as the US struggles with it's economy, we are in the same position as we were in 1929. And the obvious is ignored. The above scenario wasn't created by government, it was created by greed. And now, who gets stuck with all the sacrifice, while being held back economically by the private sector for decades?

Weak consumer spending caused the Great Depression? Are you sure it wasn't thousands of bank failures causing thousands of business failures causing unemployment to reach 25%?

Now I have absolutely no problem blaming government for much of our economic woes, but it wasn't all caused by government, greed has played into this mess too. Facts back me up! All one has to due is look at the ever increasing wealth gap (which is at the same point it was in 1929).
Yet those who you righties want to do all the sacrifice, is the same group who the private sector needs to grow and it's the same sector who fights in the trenches in all our wars. And they get zero respect from the right while the right bends over backwards protecting the wealthy and Big Corporations.

That's right, righties only support the wealthy. We don't know what we'd do without our biggest donors, Goldman Sachs and George Soros. Wait, what?

So in the right's perfect word, Main Street America AGAIN sacrifices and AGAIN the uber wealthy and Corporate America escape the responsibility to also sacrifice from something they helped create.
That thinking is morally corrupt.

Stick it to the corporations! That'll make 'em hire more people.

 

[kiwiman127]

First of all, Kiwi, I have to tell you that you have no chance with me whatsoever.

Second of all, I don't care if they LIKE being there or not. Punishing people for being successful and doing without government handouts in order to spare pain to those who ARE dependent on government handouts leaves me spectacularly unimpressed.

In my opinion, making life harder on even more people by taking more of their money to send to a huge, bloated, overintrusive federal government to spend, misspend, and outright waste - however it is you want to "spin" it to play on the sympathies of the masses - is an incredibly bad idea, particularly in a bad economy. If people base their lives on the government being an obscenely obese highway robber of their neighbor's prosperity, and subsequently live less well when their neighbor refuses to pay up, I'm not planning to get all that exercised about it.

In short, until the government shows me some evidence that it plans to be more thrifty with the trillions of dollars it already takes from the taxpayers (and not even a liberal can make the claim that the government is thrifty or prudent with money), I cannot see my way clear to authorizing throwing more money at it.

The point is, many of the uber wealthy obtained their wealth on the backs of the worker class. As noted in the link I provided, the working class is at a record low as far as their share of the national income. Why would that be? And this has been going on for decades as wages have been basically frozen in Real Dollars. The working class is the foundation of our consumer driven economy. Over two-thirds of the US economy is driven by consumer spending. The scenario of very weak consumer spending was a major cause of the Great Depression, which again was driven by flat wages for the working class. Now as the US struggles with it's economy, we are in the same position as we were in 1929. And the obvious is ignored. The above scenario wasn't created by government, it was created by greed. And now, who gets stuck with all the sacrifice, while being held back economically by the private sector for decades?

Weak consumer spending caused the Great Depression? Are you sure it wasn't thousands of bank failures causing thousands of business failures causing unemployment to reach 25%?

Now I have absolutely no problem blaming government for much of our economic woes, but it wasn't all caused by government, greed has played into this mess too. Facts back me up! All one has to due is look at the ever increasing wealth gap (which is at the same point it was in 1929).
Yet those who you righties want to do all the sacrifice, is the same group who the private sector needs to grow and it's the same sector who fights in the trenches in all our wars. And they get zero respect from the right while the right bends over backwards protecting the wealthy and Big Corporations.

That's right, righties only support the wealthy. We don't know what we'd do without our biggest donors, Goldman Sachs and George Soros. Wait, what?

So in the right's perfect word, Main Street America AGAIN sacrifices and AGAIN the uber wealthy and Corporate America escape the responsibility to also sacrifice from something they helped create.
That thinking is morally corrupt.

Stick it to the corporations! That'll make 'em hire more people.

Well, actually the wealth/income inequality was a cause of the Crash.

"The Great Depression was the worst economic slump ever in U.S. history, and one which spread to virtually all of the industrialized world. The depression began in late 1929 and lasted for about a decade. Many factors played a role in bringing about the depression; however, the main cause for the Great Depression was the combination of the greatly unequal distribution of wealth throughout the 1920's, and the extensive stock market speculation that took place during the latter part that same decade. The maldistribution of wealth in the 1920's existed on many levels. Money was distributed disparately between the rich and the middle-class, between industry and agriculture within the United States, and between the U.S. and Europe. This imbalance of wealth created an unstable economy. The excessive speculation in the late 1920's kept the stock market artificially high, but eventually lead to large market crashes. These market crashes, combined with the maldistribution of wealth, caused the American economy to capsize."
General History: The Great Depression, stock market speculation, main causes of the great depression

Oh yeah, let's bring in Goldman Sachs and Soros which have nothing to do with my post.
Guess what, I'm not a Dem or a lefty, I'm 100% Main Street America. I have no problem with making cuts with entitlements and I have no problem with most of the cuts the GOP has put on the table. I find it shameful that all the burden has been put on Main Street America regarding fixing our economic situation. In times like these, EVERYONE MUST SACRIFICE or our economic issues won't be fixed.
Why is it that you folks on the right want to stick it to Main Street America and ONLY Main Street America?
Some people are serious about eliminating the debt, others want to do it selectively.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The point is, many of the uber wealthy obtained their wealth on the backs of the worker class. As noted in the link I provided, the working class is at a record low as far as their share of the national income. Why would that be? And this has been going on for decades as wages have been basically frozen in Real Dollars. The working class is the foundation of our consumer driven economy. Over two-thirds of the US economy is driven by consumer spending. The scenario of very weak consumer spending was a major cause of the Great Depression, which again was driven by flat wages for the working class. Now as the US struggles with it's economy, we are in the same position as we were in 1929. And the obvious is ignored. The above scenario wasn't created by government, it was created by greed. And now, who gets stuck with all the sacrifice, while being held back economically by the private sector for decades?

Weak consumer spending caused the Great Depression? Are you sure it wasn't thousands of bank failures causing thousands of business failures causing unemployment to reach 25%?That's right, righties only support the wealthy. We don't know what we'd do without our biggest donors, Goldman Sachs and George Soros. Wait, what?

So in the right's perfect word, Main Street America AGAIN sacrifices and AGAIN the uber wealthy and Corporate America escape the responsibility to also sacrifice from something they helped create.
That thinking is morally corrupt.

Stick it to the corporations! That'll make 'em hire more people.

Well, actually the wealth/income inequality was a cause of the Crash.

"The Great Depression was the worst economic slump ever in U.S. history, and one which spread to virtually all of the industrialized world. The depression began in late 1929 and lasted for about a decade. Many factors played a role in bringing about the depression; however, the main cause for the Great Depression was the combination of the greatly unequal distribution of wealth throughout the 1920's, and the extensive stock market speculation that took place during the latter part that same decade. The maldistribution of wealth in the 1920's existed on many levels. Money was distributed disparately between the rich and the middle-class, between industry and agriculture within the United States, and between the U.S. and Europe. This imbalance of wealth created an unstable economy. The excessive speculation in the late 1920's kept the stock market artificially high, but eventually lead to large market crashes. These market crashes, combined with the maldistribution of wealth, caused the American economy to capsize."
General History: The Great Depression, stock market speculation, main causes of the great depression

Oh yeah, let's bring in Goldman Sachs and Soros which have nothing to do with my post.
Guess what, I'm not a Dem or a lefty, I'm 100% Main Street America. I have no problem with making cuts with entitlements and I have no problem with most of the cuts the GOP has put on the table. I find it shameful that all the burden has been put on Main Street America regarding fixing our economic situation. In times like these, EVERYONE MUST SACRIFICE or our economic issues won't be fixed.
Why is it that you folks on the right want to stick it to Main Street America and ONLY Main Street America?
Some people are serious about eliminating the debt, others want to do it selectively.

How does the wealth/income inequality cause the Crash?

What do you mean Goldman and Soros have nothing to do with your post?
If the Dems are only for the little guy and the Republicans are only for billionaires and big business, what are those morons at Goldman doing supporting the Dems?
Doesn't Soros know the Dems he throws money at want to raise his rates and only the Republicans support him?

Stick it to Main Street? You mean lowering our highest in the world corporate tax rate won't help new businesses hire more Main Streeters?
I am in favor of ending corporate welfare, ethanol subsidies, farm subsidies as well as closing the borders so Main Streeters don't have to compete with illegals for jobs.
Is that enough sticking it to big business for now?

 

[kiwiman127]

Weak consumer spending caused the Great Depression? Are you sure it wasn't thousands of bank failures causing thousands of business failures causing unemployment to reach 25%?That's right, righties only support the wealthy. We don't know what we'd do without our biggest donors, Goldman Sachs and George Soros. Wait, what?


Stick it to the corporations! That'll make 'em hire more people.

Well, actually the wealth/income inequality was a cause of the Crash.

"The Great Depression was the worst economic slump ever in U.S. history, and one which spread to virtually all of the industrialized world. The depression began in late 1929 and lasted for about a decade. Many factors played a role in bringing about the depression; however, the main cause for the Great Depression was the combination of the greatly unequal distribution of wealth throughout the 1920's, and the extensive stock market speculation that took place during the latter part that same decade. The maldistribution of wealth in the 1920's existed on many levels. Money was distributed disparately between the rich and the middle-class, between industry and agriculture within the United States, and between the U.S. and Europe. This imbalance of wealth created an unstable economy. The excessive speculation in the late 1920's kept the stock market artificially high, but eventually lead to large market crashes. These market crashes, combined with the maldistribution of wealth, caused the American economy to capsize."
General History: The Great Depression, stock market speculation, main causes of the great depression

Oh yeah, let's bring in Goldman Sachs and Soros which have nothing to do with my post.
Guess what, I'm not a Dem or a lefty, I'm 100% Main Street America. I have no problem with making cuts with entitlements and I have no problem with most of the cuts the GOP has put on the table. I find it shameful that all the burden has been put on Main Street America regarding fixing our economic situation. In times like these, EVERYONE MUST SACRIFICE or our economic issues won't be fixed.
Why is it that you folks on the right want to stick it to Main Street America and ONLY Main Street America?
Some people are serious about eliminating the debt, others want to do it selectively.

How does the wealth/income inequality cause the Crash?

What do you mean Goldman and Soros have nothing to do with your post?
If the Dems are only for the little guy and the Republicans are only for billionaires and big business, what are those morons at Goldman doing supporting the Dems?
Doesn't Soros know the Dems he throws money at want to raise his rates and only the Republicans support him?

Stick it to Main Street? You mean lowering our highest in the world corporate tax rate won't help new businesses hire more Main Streeters?
I am in favor of ending corporate welfare, ethanol subsidies, farm subsidies as well as closing the borders so Main Streeters don't have to compete with illegals for jobs.
Is that enough sticking it to big business for now?

If you went to the link I provided or even read the excerpt, you'd have a clue. Don't be lazy. Or why not prove me wrong?

Yes, American corporation taxes are high but you fail to mention that the US also has the most loopholes in the world to the point that many corporations don't even pay taxes.

Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes
Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes | Reuters

I'm outa here, as I have company on the way. But, I'll be back.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well, actually the wealth/income inequality was a cause of the Crash.

"The Great Depression was the worst economic slump ever in U.S. history, and one which spread to virtually all of the industrialized world. The depression began in late 1929 and lasted for about a decade. Many factors played a role in bringing about the depression; however, the main cause for the Great Depression was the combination of the greatly unequal distribution of wealth throughout the 1920's, and the extensive stock market speculation that took place during the latter part that same decade. The maldistribution of wealth in the 1920's existed on many levels. Money was distributed disparately between the rich and the middle-class, between industry and agriculture within the United States, and between the U.S. and Europe. This imbalance of wealth created an unstable economy. The excessive speculation in the late 1920's kept the stock market artificially high, but eventually lead to large market crashes. These market crashes, combined with the maldistribution of wealth, caused the American economy to capsize."
General History: The Great Depression, stock market speculation, main causes of the great depression

Oh yeah, let's bring in Goldman Sachs and Soros which have nothing to do with my post.
Guess what, I'm not a Dem or a lefty, I'm 100% Main Street America. I have no problem with making cuts with entitlements and I have no problem with most of the cuts the GOP has put on the table. I find it shameful that all the burden has been put on Main Street America regarding fixing our economic situation. In times like these, EVERYONE MUST SACRIFICE or our economic issues won't be fixed.
Why is it that you folks on the right want to stick it to Main Street America and ONLY Main Street America?
Some people are serious about eliminating the debt, others want to do it selectively.

How does the wealth/income inequality cause the Crash?

What do you mean Goldman and Soros have nothing to do with your post?
If the Dems are only for the little guy and the Republicans are only for billionaires and big business, what are those morons at Goldman doing supporting the Dems?
Doesn't Soros know the Dems he throws money at want to raise his rates and only the Republicans support him?

Stick it to Main Street? You mean lowering our highest in the world corporate tax rate won't help new businesses hire more Main Streeters?
I am in favor of ending corporate welfare, ethanol subsidies, farm subsidies as well as closing the borders so Main Streeters don't have to compete with illegals for jobs.
Is that enough sticking it to big business for now?

If you went to the link I provided or even read the excerpt, you'd have a clue. Don't be lazy. Or why not prove me wrong?

Yes, American corporation taxes are high but you fail to mention that the US also has the most loopholes in the world to the point that many corporations don't even pay taxes.

Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes
Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes | Reuters

I'm outa here, as I have company on the way. But, I'll be back.

I read the excerpt about inequality. Didn't see any proof of your claims, sorry.

If most companies pay no taxes, we could cut the rates and not lose much revenue, right?
Thanks for the link to the study.........check it out.

" The GAO said corporations escaped paying federal income taxes for a variety of reasons including operating losses"

Yeah, losing money makes paying taxes moot.
And all the talk about revenue, but I didn't see anything about profits.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You seem to be the one avoiding answering the question.
Third time now: How much are you willing to cut WIC?

10%,,same as the GOP.
Now it's your turn. How much sacrifice should American corporations and the wealthy make? Zero, they should get more tax cuts, what?

It isn't about punishing people. That shoudl be the first issue we get clear.

If you cut WIC you will have fewer people dependent on a gov't program. That's inherently a good thing.

If you raise taxes you will have fewer people working. That is inherently a bad thing.

See the difference?

Only........we've tried tax cuts for the wealthy, and have yet to see any job from it.

 

[boedicca]

$700B of the Bush tax cuts went to the wealthy. $3.1T sent to the middle and lower classes.

Taking away to the tax cuts from the wealthy won't even put a dent in Obama's spending binge.

 

[Sactowndog]

If you went to the link I provided or even read the excerpt, you'd have a clue. Don't be lazy. Or why not prove me wrong?

Yes, American corporation taxes are high but you fail to mention that the US also has the most loopholes in the world to the point that many corporations don't even pay taxes.

Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes
Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes | Reuters

I'm outa here, as I have company on the way. But, I'll be back.

Kiwiman-

I think you are taking the wrong tack. I read the link and most of the companies they are looking at are major corporations. The more we try to hit them the more they have smart lawyers who will dodge what we intend and the people getting hurt are small business..

I think a better approach is to eliminate corporate income taxes altogether. This will primarily help small business owners who need the capital. Multinationals who are moving dollars around in the company to avoid taxes won't be affected.

To replace the lost income I would do 2 things:

1) Make capital gains taxes equals to income taxes. No double taxation would incur as we have eliminated corporate income taxes. This also removes the incentives to play games with how income is classified.

2) Put a tax on net capital exported from the country. If as a business you earn $1B in the country then you need to spend or invest $1B in the country. If you spend or invest $1.2B you get a credit. if you export $200M out of the country then you pay 20% tax on the capital exported.

This approach is a more American approach to dealing with the job subsidies paid by countries like China and Singapore. It will reduce the deficit and generate jobs in the country

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Kiwiman-

I think you are taking the wrong tack. I read the link and most of the companies they are looking at are major corporations. The more we try to hit them the more they have smart lawyers who will dodge what we intend and the people getting hurt are small business..

I think a better approach is to eliminate corporate income taxes altogether. This will primarily help small business owners who need the capital. Multinationals who are moving dollars around in the company to avoid taxes won't be affected.

Excellent idea!

To replace the lost income I would do 2 things:

1) Make capital gains taxes equals to income taxes. No double taxation would incur as we have eliminated corporate income taxes. This also removes the incentives to play games with how income is classified.

If you had said dividends instead of capital gains, you might be on firmer ground, as they are double taxed.
Capital gains aren't income, so how would you be playing games?

2) Put a tax on net capital exported from the country. If as a business you earn $1B in the country then you need to spend or invest $1B in the country. If you spend or invest $1.2B you get a credit. if you export $200M out of the country then you pay 20% tax on the capital exported.

All sorts of problems with this idea. We already tax earnings of foreign companies here. Now you'll tax them again, if they take the after tax money home?

This approach is a more American approach to dealing with the job subsidies paid by countries like China and Singapore. It will reduce the deficit and generate jobs in the country

I doubt it will do either, I'm sure it will lead to retaliation.

 

[Sactowndog]

Kiwiman-

To replace the lost income I would do 2 things:

1) Make capital gains taxes equals to income taxes. No double taxation would incur as we have eliminated corporate income taxes. This also removes the incentives to play games with how income is classified.

If you had said dividends instead of capital gains, you might be on firmer ground, as they are double taxed.
Capital gains aren't income, so how would you be playing games?

2) Put a tax on net capital exported from the country. If as a business you earn $1B in the country then you need to spend or invest $1B in the country. If you spend or invest $1.2B you get a credit. if you export $200M out of the country then you pay 20% tax on the capital exported.

All sorts of problems with this idea. We already tax earnings of foreign companies here. Now you'll tax them again, if they take the after tax money home?

This approach is a more American approach to dealing with the job subsidies paid by countries like China and Singapore. It will reduce the deficit and generate jobs in the country

I doubt it will do either, I'm sure it will lead to retaliation.

So do you think before you post or are so you reflexively against taxes that you don't think and just type.

One of the argument against captial gains is that you are paying taxes on earnings that have already been taxed. Also, many such as hedge fund managers classify income as captial gains merely to escape income taxes. Those games would stop.

In terms of the capital export tax, if I have eliminated income tax exactly how would I be taxing earnins of foreign companies? I wouldn't. The only tax they would incur if they export the capital out out of the country. Other countries already have anti competitive requirements so I wouldn't worry about retaliation. They need access to our market and they have it. We aren't putting tariffs in place.

 

[Charles_Main]

if you like higher taxes, then say that, calling them "additional revenues" or "revenue enhancements" is douchey and ridiculous

you don't hear those of us that favor spending cuts calling them "outlay reductions"

This is SOP for Liberals. When Pushing for something they know we don't want. They change the name. Even the Very name Liberal is replaced by Progressive because Liberal is becoming a bad word to most Americans, and of course Progressive sounds good right. I mean who would not want to be for Progress... lol

Same thing with this new BS. Calling Tax In creases Revenue Enhancements, Or pounding republicans for "being against Raising Revenue" Is Just what they do. They can not win a debate on the Facts. The Polices are not popular with the MAJORITY of Americans. Less than 30% of Americans even say they are Liberal. So they can not possibly win at the Ballot Box, By being honest about their Agenda. They have to lie, attack, and Smear.

 

[Charles_Main]

Kiwiman-

To replace the lost income I would do 2 things:

1) Make capital gains taxes equals to income taxes. No double taxation would incur as we have eliminated corporate income taxes. This also removes the incentives to play games with how income is classified.

If you had said dividends instead of capital gains, you might be on firmer ground, as they are double taxed.
Capital gains aren't income, so how would you be playing games?All sorts of problems with this idea. We already tax earnings of foreign companies here. Now you'll tax them again, if they take the after tax money home?

This approach is a more American approach to dealing with the job subsidies paid by countries like China and Singapore. It will reduce the deficit and generate jobs in the country

I doubt it will do either, I'm sure it will lead to retaliation.

So do you think before you post or are so you reflexively against taxes that you don't think and just type.

One of the argument against captial gains is that you are paying taxes on earnings that have already been taxed. Also, many such as hedge fund managers classify income as captial gains merely to escape income taxes. Those games would stop.

In terms of the capital export tax, if I have eliminated income tax exactly how would I be taxing earnins of foreign companies? I wouldn't. The only tax they would incur if they export the capital out out of the country. Other countries already have anti competitive requirements so I wouldn't worry about retaliation. They need access to our market and they have it. We aren't putting tariffs in place.

The Real Problem with the Capital Gains Tax is who it hits, and the Effect it has on Business. All those evil Rich, who invest in stocks, and make big Capital Gains they need to Pay Taxes on. Are the people who keep Cooperate America, and any Company that Sells Public Stock to Raise money, Going. That's how they raise Capital. Taxing that activity, Puts a damper on how much Capital Business can raise threw selling stock, and therefore Hampers the some very people we depend on to Hire people.

And don't even get me started on the Capital Gains tax on selling a second home. That is a hindrance to what has always been the easiest way for someone to go from Rags to riches in this country. More than Half of all self made Millionaires in America. Became that way through Real Estate Investment. Buying low selling high, Buy it fix it up, sell it. This is how more than Half of the Millionaires in this country who started out not rich, Became rich. Applying the Capital Gains tax to the sale of even a second home, is a direct hindrance on Peoples Ability to become wealthy in that way.