Why we have to redistribute income through taxes

[daveman]

The problem is obvious to anyone capable of reading charts. Unfortunately, most right wingers aren't that bright.

A chart that says that, is the reason why GOVERNMENT must step in, in violation of the Constitution?

In this example, "government stepping in" means increased taxation for the One Percent, which is not unConstitutional. It would serve as an expedient adjustment to the Nation's troubled economy. And increasing the tax rate of the rich won't hurt them. It will simply make them a little less rich.

It is important to understand that any such adjustment will have absolutely no negative effect on 99.9% of those who are protesting against it.

It's even more important to understand that your childish "Tax the rich!!" greed and envy completely falls apart if you do the math:

Milking the Millionaires | National Review Online

• Millionaires accounted for just 0.17 percent (236,883) of the more than 140 million tax returns filed in 2009, and reported income totaling $727 billion.
• The federal government will spend about $3.6 trillion this year (a rate of $300 billion per month), running an annual deficit of about $1.3 trillion. So, even if the IRS decided to confiscate every cent earned by millionaires in a given year, it would amount to less than half of the new debt we are taking on each year, and would barely be enough to fund the government for two months.
• According to Forbes, the 400 wealthiest individuals in the U.S. are worth a combined $1.37 trillion. Confiscating all their wealth (not just annual earnings) would buy us another 4.5 months.
• The top 1 percent of income earners (just a quarter of which are millionaires) earn just 20 percent of the country’s personal income, yet pay 38 percent of federal income taxes. For the top 10 percent of earners, those figures rise to 46 percent and 70 percent, respectively.

Get it? It's like robbing the bank and finding only enough money to buy two carts of groceries. It's not enough to live on forever.

Progressivism never withstands collision with reality. NEVER.

 

[sealybobo]

f course. Who do you think is pushing gun control? The wealthy can't kill you till you're disarmed. The multinational corporations are not our friends. All these laws that are passed to regulate corporations really serve to harm the smaller corporations that are in local competition with the multinationals.

I love the small LLC's and the mom and pop businesses that I support, I don't like the big box stores and assholes like Goldman Sachs that you progressives bend over backwards to support.

Well the people you vote for don't care about about llc's or mom and pop shops. If you notice who defends Walmart on USMB it's usually the right not us liberal progressives.

Great example. In secrecy Bush lifted the regulations on chinese tire companies shipping their cheap inferior tires into the USA. No regard for our domestic tire industry. Just one small example but it sort of explains why you are a stupid brainwash ****.

the sad part is they don't get it ... they just believe what their handlers tell them ... its them Damn unions... its them high taxes ... never mind they are dumping cheep tires on the marked ....never mind they are dumping cheep steel on the market ... in their minds its taxes and unions ... thats what they've been told ... thats what they will believe ... never looking at why ... the whole why.. sad ...just plan sad

Even when people understand these policies don't benefit them and only benefit the rich, there is this mentality in America that one day I/They will be rich. But the reality is most of them are going to need ss and medicare and not be rich.

And sure the unions are to blame. They demanded a fair wage for their members. So of course corporations if allowed would send all those jobs to China, India and Mexico. The question is, what country would allow them to leave, GIVE THEM TAX BREAKS on the way out, and then not tariff them when they ship that shit back her for Walmart to sell.

P.S. I love Walmarts business model. Pay your employees so low that they qualify for food stamps. And where do the employees spend those foodstamps? At Walmart!! Brilliant!

They play the American people for fools because they are. Thanks for the reply. Good to know I'm not alone on USMB.

 

[sealybobo]

A chart that says that, is the reason why GOVERNMENT must step in, in violation of the Constitution?

In this example, "government stepping in" means increased taxation for the One Percent, which is not unConstitutional. It would serve as an expedient adjustment to the Nation's troubled economy. And increasing the tax rate of the rich won't hurt them. It will simply make them a little less rich.

It is important to understand that any such adjustment will have absolutely no negative effect on 99.9% of those who are protesting against it.

It's even more important to understand that your childish "Tax the rich!!" greed and envy completely falls apart if you do the math:

Milking the Millionaires | National Review Online

• Millionaires accounted for just 0.17 percent (236,883) of the more than 140 million tax returns filed in 2009, and reported income totaling $727 billion.
• The federal government will spend about $3.6 trillion this year (a rate of $300 billion per month), running an annual deficit of about $1.3 trillion. So, even if the IRS decided to confiscate every cent earned by millionaires in a given year, it would amount to less than half of the new debt we are taking on each year, and would barely be enough to fund the government for two months.
• According to Forbes, the 400 wealthiest individuals in the U.S. are worth a combined $1.37 trillion. Confiscating all their wealth (not just annual earnings) would buy us another 4.5 months.
• The top 1 percent of income earners (just a quarter of which are millionaires) earn just 20 percent of the country’s personal income, yet pay 38 percent of federal income taxes. For the top 10 percent of earners, those figures rise to 46 percent and 70 percent, respectively.

Get it? It's like robbing the bank and finding only enough money to buy two carts of groceries. It's not enough to live on forever.

Progressivism never withstands collision with reality. NEVER.

What a dope. Lets explain it to you like this. There is 10 dollars. The way things work properly is the rich get 4 dollars, the middle class gets 4 and the poor get 2. Right now the rich get 80 and we're stuck with the crumbs.

Now how is it you say your policies will put more money into the middle class? This I got to hear.

 

[billyerock1991]

your view of history is very interesting, very wrong but interesting. Steel making left the USA for two reasons----------unions and taxes. same reason that the textile industry and the commercial shipbuilding industry no longer exist in the USA

its interesting how the right spins things ... yes it is true that wages, taxes, and what you won't admit the dumping of steel in the country caused these companies to close... where you believe, but are afraid to leave out here, the part where the dumping of cheep steel on the country didn't have any affect on the company is you being disingenuous...
the dumping of cheep steel cause the companies to sell less steel ... by selling less steel, wages come into play ... the dumping of cheep steel cause you to have to pay your taxes on your company that not selling steel like it was ... making it appear that taxes and labor was too hight ... which they weren't ... if they were selling steel which we already know that cheep steel was being dumped in this country, that you choose to admit it wasn't the cause ... you would rather believe it was higher taxes and union labor that cause steel companies to fail ... Ive always know to make a company to work you have to have sales if your sales are gone down the toilet then you have to cut your expenses by you just choosing unions and taxes is the furtherest from the whole truth

dumping would not have been effective if the US companies did not have to deal with union wages and high taxes. Other countries help their industries, the US hobbles theirs.

if you want to remain stupid I can't stop you .. its a free country... unions wages and taxes didn't cause it steel to fail... its that plain, its that simple ...the dumping of cheep steel caused it ... just like the dumping of cheep tires in the US caused the tire companies to almost fail ... thanks to the democrats we put a stop to it ... we put tariffs on their tires ...and the tire companies are very strong here now, UNION wages and taxes to-boot... so whats' your great response to that??? they kept their union JOBS, they pay their TAXES without fail or bitching, cause why ??? cause they are selling their product ... its that simple ... you just can't admit that the unions weren't the problem ... that taxes weren't the problem, that sales was the problem... the only reason that republicans hate unions is the republicans don't support union workers causes ... they would rather support corporations cause thats were more money is ... what they forget, republicans, that is, the voter is what gives them a job ...if they don't come up with a cause for them then they can't convince others to vote for them ... so what do the republicans do??? voter ID ... case closed ... now you know why republican don't win as often as you may think ... I think they will have a big awaking in 2014 ... canter lost for a reason and illegals isn't the reason ...

 

[Wyatt earp]

You must be mad
South Carolina is on one heck of a roll when it comes to tires.

The Palmetto State in the fourth quarter of 2013 elbowed aside Oklahoma as the nation’s leading tire producer, churning out 89,000 a day compared to the Sooner State’s 88,000 a day, according to estimates by Tire Business magazine.

 

[MikeK]

it would be nice if there were a socialist country that has actually prospered. they don't though. The middle class gets fucked over and they get to enjoy downward mobility while the wealthy STAY wealthy, because they can hide their wealth.

No, socialist countries have merely enjoyed the same level of misery. That's why all those illegals are escaping from their socialist utopias to come here!

Rather than accept what you are told by right-wing propagandists you should look more closely at their claims. First of all, how many Danes do you know? I've never met one and I've been living in America for seventy-eight years. And Denmark, which is a socialist country, is widely known as the happiest place on Earth (Google that if you doubt it), and we can believe that because no Danes ever come here.

Next, I am not suggesting that America convert to fully socialist policies. This Nation is much to large and complicated for that. We need a capitalist system -- but not Laissez-faire (unregulated) capitalism. We need the kind of capitalism we had before Reagan commenced the de-regulation which has caused the problems we're seeing now. And the way to do that is to re-impose the socialist regulations that existed from the 40s to the 80s.

In simple terms, we need a capitalist vehicle with a socialist driver.

 

[daveman]

A chart that says that, is the reason why GOVERNMENT must step in, in violation of the Constitution?

In this example, "government stepping in" means increased taxation for the One Percent, which is not unConstitutional. It would serve as an expedient adjustment to the Nation's troubled economy. And increasing the tax rate of the rich won't hurt them. It will simply make them a little less rich.

It is important to understand that any such adjustment will have absolutely no negative effect on 99.9% of those who are protesting against it.

The problem that you will have of course is if you make the tax rates too high they simply leave and take their money and buying power with them. You guys can kill the goose that lays the golden egg once....and then you are left to fight amongst yourselves. Which historically is what always happens. It would be nice if you idiots could learn from the mistakes the others who came and died before you made so you don't do it again....

Sadly, 'tis not to be....

 

[Wyatt earp]

More

t is also expanding its lead as the export king – last year shipping 30 percent of the nation’s overseas market, three times as many tires as its nearest competitor, Ohio.

“South Carolina is No. 1,” Dave Zielasko, the magazine’s publisher and editor-in-chief, said. “And its not surprising. South Carolina has really been aggressive in attracting these factories.”

 

[Wyatt earp]

Not a stupid **** btw

 

[The Rabbi]

boy are you really fucked in the head .... you have no Idea what a liberal or a progressive is about... I don't know of any Progressive or liberal that supported Goldman sack or any multinational corporations ... we have been for years trying to get these multinational corporations from dumping their cheep products ... that are way cheeper then these small corporation here for years ... where the hell have you been
what do you think the liberals and progressive have been trying to do for years ??? we have been trying to pass regulations on these multinational corporations to pay tariffs on their products coming to this country ... so we can compete ... how can we compete with a multinational corporations that pays 12 cents a day to their 12 year old worker ??? heres how ...put a tariffs on their products ... thats all you can do ...but your republican masters say NOooooooooooo we won't allow that ... and it keeps getting worse...

as for gun laws ... we liberals and progressive don't like large mag.. and we want back ground check on all gun sales whether its done at a gun show, gun store or you do it from your home, thats it ... what's so god damn bad about that ...

If protecting industries through tariffs worked East Germany would be a powerhouse.

If countries protecting the industries that are vital to their economies didn't work every other country in the world EXCEPT the USA wouldn't be doing it but they are because it does work. American companies didn't want to protect industries that are vital to our economy because they wanted to ruin the economy. Renig on pensions, ship jobs overseas, lower wages, break unions.

Clearly NOT protecting vital industies in your country doesn't work unless you are the corporation and then you clean the **** up. Are you a worker or a rich guy? If you aren't rich, shut the **** up stupid.

Ok, don't like tariffs? Then just don't allow those companies to ship in products that are vital to your economy. Problem solved.

Democratic fallacy.
Rabbi Rules!

Other countries do it as part of crony capitalism. It doesnt work. It makes their own citizens poorer and does nothing for the competitiveness or health of domestic industries.

 

[The Rabbi]

it would be nice if there were a socialist country that has actually prospered. they don't though. The middle class gets fucked over and they get to enjoy downward mobility while the wealthy STAY wealthy, because they can hide their wealth.

No, socialist countries have merely enjoyed the same level of misery. That's why all those illegals are escaping from their socialist utopias to come here!

Rather than accept what you are told by right-wing propagandists you should look more closely at their claims. First of all, how many Danes do you know? I've never met one and I've been living in America for seventy-eight years. And Denmark, which is a socialist country, is widely known as the happiest place on Earth (Google that if you doubt it), and we can believe that because no Danes ever come here.

Next, I am not suggesting that America convert to fully socialist policies. This Nation is much to large and complicated for that. We need a capitalist system -- but not Laissez-faire (unregulated) capitalism. We need the kind of capitalism we had before Reagan commenced the de-regulation which has caused the problems we're seeing now. And the way to do that is to re-impose the socialist regulations that existed from the 40s to the 80s.

In simple terms, we need a capitalist vehicle with a socialist driver.

Another fallacy!
Denmark is beset with stagnant economy and large unemployed Muslim population. That in no way equates to economic growth.
The measure is economic growth. That is the only importnt measure. And socialist policies do not foster growth. Which is why most of the socialist countries in Europe have been scaling back their governments.

 

[sealybobo]

If protecting industries through tariffs worked East Germany would be a powerhouse.

If countries protecting the industries that are vital to their economies didn't work every other country in the world EXCEPT the USA wouldn't be doing it but they are because it does work. American companies didn't want to protect industries that are vital to our economy because they wanted to ruin the economy. Renig on pensions, ship jobs overseas, lower wages, break unions.

Clearly NOT protecting vital industies in your country doesn't work unless you are the corporation and then you clean the **** up. Are you a worker or a rich guy? If you aren't rich, shut the **** up stupid.

Ok, don't like tariffs? Then just don't allow those companies to ship in products that are vital to your economy. Problem solved.

Democratic fallacy.
Rabbi Rules!

Other countries do it as part of crony capitalism. It doesnt work. It makes their own citizens poorer and does nothing for the competitiveness or health of domestic industries.

Sure they do pal. Fact is, the corporate American media lies to you and Americans quality of life is going down while the rest of the world is going up. They are investing in their infrastructure and their people, we are not.

America rules...at crony capitalism. Rabbi sucks.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The problem is obvious to anyone capable of reading charts. Unfortunately, most right wingers aren't that bright.

You assume the increase in productivity is because of the middle class.

You mean the people doing the work who are making more stuff? Those guys?

You mean the shrinking work force dependent on technology that they didn't invent that is the reason for the productivity increases ?

 

[sealybobo]

it would be nice if there were a socialist country that has actually prospered. they don't though. The middle class gets fucked over and they get to enjoy downward mobility while the wealthy STAY wealthy, because they can hide their wealth.

No, socialist countries have merely enjoyed the same level of misery. That's why all those illegals are escaping from their socialist utopias to come here!

Rather than accept what you are told by right-wing propagandists you should look more closely at their claims. First of all, how many Danes do you know? I've never met one and I've been living in America for seventy-eight years. And Denmark, which is a socialist country, is widely known as the happiest place on Earth (Google that if you doubt it), and we can believe that because no Danes ever come here.

Next, I am not suggesting that America convert to fully socialist policies. This Nation is much to large and complicated for that. We need a capitalist system -- but not Laissez-faire (unregulated) capitalism. We need the kind of capitalism we had before Reagan commenced the de-regulation which has caused the problems we're seeing now. And the way to do that is to re-impose the socialist regulations that existed from the 40s to the 80s.

In simple terms, we need a capitalist vehicle with a socialist driver.

Another fallacy!
Denmark is beset with stagnant economy and large unemployed Muslim population. That in no way equates to economic growth.
The measure is economic growth. That is the only importnt measure. And socialist policies do not foster growth. Which is why most of the socialist countries in Europe have been scaling back their governments.

We’d been discussing taxes on the air and the fact that Denmark has an average 52 percent income-tax rate. I asked him why people didn’t revolt at such high taxes, and he smiled and pointed out to me that the average Dane is very well paid, with a minimum wage that equals roughly $18 per hour. Moreover, what Danes get for their taxes (that we don’t) is a free college education and free health care, not to mention four weeks of paid vacation each year and notoriety as the happiest nation on earth, according to a major study done by the University of Leicester in the United Kingdom.

But it was once we were off the air that he made the comment that I found so enlightening.

“You Americans are such suckers,” he said. “You think that the rules for taxes that apply to rich people also apply to working people, but they don’t. When working peoples’ taxes go up, their pay goes up. When their taxes go down, their pay goes down. It may take a year or two or three to all even out, but it always works this way—look at any country in Europe. And that rule on taxes is the opposite of how it works for rich people!”

My Danish guest was right. So before we get into the larger consequences of tax increases or tax cuts for the nation’s economic health, let’s parse this business about what tax increases or cuts mean for the rich and for the not-so-rich.

Read the whole thing Rabbi so you completely understand what a ******* fool you are.

Thom Hartmann | Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts

 

[Wyatt earp]

Ya do know most real Republicans hate big companies right? GM lobbyied hard for Obama to save them and bail them out for there union pensions

 

[daveman]

the difference is you know what the unions are asking for ... you don't know what these corporations are wanting, you dolts ... unions are asking for more money for the worker, more workers ... the corporations are asking to take that money back and do it so they all lose ... look at all the retirement plans that have been stolen from retired Union workers under the disguise of keep the corporation open ... what do these corporations do ??? the get it to where its making good money, then move that plant to over seas to make larger profits ... you haven't a clue in what's going on here ..... you just listen to your repub-lie-tard masters all the way to the poor house ...then blame it on us liberals for not stopping it ... you're to stupid to pay attention

Of course we do. Unions are asking for things to make the unions stronger that's what they do. My dad was a lifelong Teamster and he watched his pension robbed repeatedly so the Teamster bosses could live large on the backs of the membership.

My dad despises the Teamsters.

you got a source for that lie of your ??? you know the lie about Teamster and he watched his pension robbed repeatedly so the Teamster bosses could live large on the backs of the membership. the unions couldn't touch his retirement ... only the corporation could thats the law ... it was designed to save it self from closing ... he should have been angry at the company not the union ... union can't touch or with draw any money from a retirement account ... you're lying here ...

No one shouts "Liar!!" as loudly as the liar himself.

Kid, shut up and learn something.

Jimmy Hoffa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hoffa was also convicted of fraud later that same year for improper use of the Teamsters' pension fund, in a trial held in Chicago. Hoffa had illegally arranged several large pension fund loans to leading organized crime figures.​

Allen Dorfman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alleged ties to organized crime dogged Dorfman during his time as a Teamsters' leader, as he was the stepson of the Chicago-based gangster Paul "Red" Dorfman. Dorfman, based mostly in Chicago, was eventually indicted, along with several other Teamsters' leaders, for embezzlement from the union pension fund, in 1970.[4] Dorfman and Hoffa ran for several years a large-scale program of unsecured loans from Teamsters' pension funds to major figures in organized crime.[5]

--

In February 1974, Dorfman was indicted for fraud involving $1.4 million in loans made by the Teamster's pension fund to Gaylur Products/American Pail Company, a plastics manufacturing company in Deming, New Mexico. Indicted along with Dorfman were Joseph Lombardo (aka “Joey the Clown”), Anthony Spilotro (aka "The Ant"), Irwin Weiner, and several others. Between 1959 and 1969 the Central States Pension Fund Plan the loans had gone unpaid. But in 1971, Irwin Weiner a prominent bailbondsman, organized crime associate and friend of Jack Ruby had purchased stock in the company and received another $1.4 million loan from the fund with a mere $7000 deposit.​

 

[daveman]

In this example, "government stepping in" means increased taxation for the One Percent, which is not unConstitutional. It would serve as an expedient adjustment to the Nation's troubled economy. And increasing the tax rate of the rich won't hurt them. It will simply make them a little less rich.

It is important to understand that any such adjustment will have absolutely no negative effect on 99.9% of those who are protesting against it.

It's even more important to understand that your childish "Tax the rich!!" greed and envy completely falls apart if you do the math:

Milking the Millionaires | National Review Online

• Millionaires accounted for just 0.17 percent (236,883) of the more than 140 million tax returns filed in 2009, and reported income totaling $727 billion.
• The federal government will spend about $3.6 trillion this year (a rate of $300 billion per month), running an annual deficit of about $1.3 trillion. So, even if the IRS decided to confiscate every cent earned by millionaires in a given year, it would amount to less than half of the new debt we are taking on each year, and would barely be enough to fund the government for two months.
• According to Forbes, the 400 wealthiest individuals in the U.S. are worth a combined $1.37 trillion. Confiscating all their wealth (not just annual earnings) would buy us another 4.5 months.
• The top 1 percent of income earners (just a quarter of which are millionaires) earn just 20 percent of the country’s personal income, yet pay 38 percent of federal income taxes. For the top 10 percent of earners, those figures rise to 46 percent and 70 percent, respectively.

Get it? It's like robbing the bank and finding only enough money to buy two carts of groceries. It's not enough to live on forever.

Progressivism never withstands collision with reality. NEVER.

What a dope. Lets explain it to you like this. There is 10 dollars. The way things work properly is the rich get 4 dollars, the middle class gets 4 and the poor get 2. Right now the rich get 80 and we're stuck with the crumbs.

Now how is it you say your policies will put more money into the middle class? This I got to hear.

I just proved to you that progressive economic policies CAN'T work. You can't make any demands until you acknowledge that basic fact.

The rich pay their fair share of taxes. They pay YOUR fair share of taxes, too.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It is impossible for you to soundly show how this fact, assuming that it is true, creates a condition where the government MUST take form the have and give to the have nots.

expecting logical thought from a liberal is a waste of time.

first you have to be able to understand logic ... its obvious you don't ... so for you to grasp what's being shown would be a waste of time ... on our part...

Translation:
You know you cannot soundly show how this fact, assuming that it is true, creates a condition where the government MUST take from the have and give to the have nots.
I accept your concession of the point.

 

[M14 Shooter]

hmmmmmmmm !!!! so you're ok with corporations buying ads here that help their selected candidates get laws passed that allow corporations to be paid by tax dollars, to ship their machines, their technology, that was invented here in the united states, to build a corporation on your tax dollar ... then sell the product that they use to make it back here in this country at a higher profit ... allowing those lazy non-workers force, how did you say it ??? choose not to work... because their are no ******* jobs to be had for them to not work ... and you don't think its a good thing to help these "not workers"...

Wow... you're just FULL of mindless, bigoted drivel.

Want to take a stab at showing how the data on the OP necessarily leads to the conclusion of the OP?

yes its real easy ... you won't understand ... but its real easy ... right now they are dumping cheep Chinese steel in this country ... for these steel companies to be able to compete here they have to close down their plants and move to a different country or go out of business or where they can compete with the chinese steel thats being dumped here causing these steel workers to lose their jobs ... this all happen under reagan bush one bush two ..the passed laws that allow the corporations to move out of country be paid by tax payer dollars to do so the sell back their product here at a cheeper rate ... causing their profit margins to go up ... now show us there this doesn't happen .... and I call you a liar ...cause thats how Mit wit Romney made his Millions of dollars .... what's mindless, bigoted drivel is your inability to understand what's been going on ...you are blinded by your mindless, repub-lie-tard bigoted drivel

As I suspected -- you havent the faintest hope of demonstrating the sound argument I asked for.

 

[Dad2three]

A chart that says that, is the reason why GOVERNMENT must step in, in violation of the Constitution?

Your interpretation of the Constitution is flawed. And even if it wasn't, then it would mean the Constitutions had failed to serve the interests of the people and should have been amended.

The US Constitution is meant to provide a frame work to manage a union of STATES, the only provision in it that should effect the daily lives of individuals is to make sure you get your mail. Now show me where I got it wrong, quote the Constitution.

Ignorance of the REAL Constitution and the STRONG federal Constitution our Founders gave US?

We had what you describe called it the Articles of Confederation. Didn't work. You know Madison wanted veto power rover the states right? And Washington agreed with him the Constitution needed to be able to have a strong federal Gov't?




If there’s one thing that we know about the Founding Fathers, it’s that they didn’t want a weak national government.

But there was a group who wanted a weak national government. They were called the anti-Federalists, and they were appalled by the proposed Constitution. Guess who lost?