Page 59 of 63 FirstFirst ... 9495758596061 ... LastLast
Results 581 to 590 of 629

Thread: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

  1. #581
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Why are billionaires waiting on tax law? Why don't they just send in the money?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  2. #582
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Why are billionaires waiting on tax law? Why don't they just send in the money?
    Probably for the same reason that no one else voluntarily pays taxes.

  3. #583
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Probably for the same reason that no one else voluntarily pays taxes.
    But they're asking to be taxed aren't they? Why not just send it in?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #584
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,340
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    But they're asking to be taxed aren't they? Why not just send it in?
    Because you can't pay for programs off the possibility people send in money.

  5. #585
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    Because you can't pay for programs off the possibility people send in money.
    Nor can you expect everyone in the same income group to follow your lead. Somehow I don't think the tax system would work very well if we operated the whole thing on the honor system.

  6. #586
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Why are billionaires waiting on tax law? Why don't they just send in the money?
    Does anyone do math these days before asking dumb questions???

    "Paul Egerman, founder of a medical transcription company called eScription, also scoffed at the suggestion millionaires who advocate for higher taxes should take it upon themselves to send money to the government.
    "Running any government is a shared responsibility of its citizens," Egerman said. "Government is not a charity, and you can’t imagine a situation where the Department of Defense runs a bake sale to build an aircraft carrier."


    "According to the Treasury Department, the government has received $1.7 million worth of donations to relieve the public debt so far this year. In 2009, it received $3 million worth of donations, the most ever.

    But even if each of the nearly 200 millionaires who signed a letter demanding congressional Republicans consider tax increases donated $1 million to the government, they wouldn't put a dent in the government's debt, which currently stands at $14.3 trillion. According to CTJ, if the tax cuts are extended beyond their current expiration date of January 2013, they'll add another $5.5 trillion to the debt.

    The cuts disproportionately benefit the richest 1 percent of Americans, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a project of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute."

    Why Millionaires Who Want Higher Taxes Don't Just Donate Money To The Government
    Last edited by Catawba; 12-05-11 at 04:16 PM.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  7. #587
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Does anyone do math these days before asking dumb questions???

    The cuts disproportionately benefit the richest 1 percent of Americans, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a project of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute."
    Yes, I do alot of math concerning this and find that there is no way the 1% can be taxed enough to aleviate the ANNUAL DEFICIT, much less address the national debt.

    Further, the link contained in your link states:

    The percentage change in after-tax income, TPC’s preferred measure for comparing the benefits of tax cuts across income groups, rises under this scenario as income rises, from an increase of 0.3 percent in after-tax income in the bottom quintile (see table) to a rise of 4.3 percent in the top quintile. It rises even further within the top quintile, with a 6.4 percent increase for the top 1 percent and a 7.5 percent increase for the top 0.1 percent (not shown). Thus the tax cuts would be regressive, raising after-tax income by a greater percentage for high-income households than for all others.

    Doesn't it seem logical that if the taxable income is small, bottom two quintiles, then the effect of tax cuts on 'percentage change in after-tax income' will be small thusly?

  8. #588
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    Yes, I do alot of math concerning this and find that there is no way the 1% can be taxed enough to aleviate the ANNUAL DEFICIT, much less address the national debt.
    That's what's called a red herring, because I know of NO ONE suggesting that eliminating the tax cuts for the rich alone will fix our debt problem. It took 30 years of tax breaks to the rich and too much spending on the military to create our debt, and is going to take 30 years of tax increases on the rich and a return to defense only levels of military spending to lower our debt. We will also need to switch to a UHC system to get our health care cost under control.

    Further, the link contained in your link states:

    The percentage change in after-tax income, TPC’s preferred measure for comparing the benefits of tax cuts across income groups, rises under this scenario as income rises, from an increase of 0.3 percent in after-tax income in the bottom quintile (see table) to a rise of 4.3 percent in the top quintile. It rises even further within the top quintile, with a 6.4 percent increase for the top 1 percent and a 7.5 percent increase for the top 0.1 percent (not shown). Thus the tax cuts would be regressive, raising after-tax income by a greater percentage for high-income households than for all others.

    Doesn't it seem logical that if the taxable income is small, bottom two quintiles, then the effect of tax cuts on 'percentage change in after-tax income' will be small thusly?
    Which link? I need context as the part you included does not appear to include the Bush tax cuts to capital gains and dividends.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  9. #589
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    That's what's called a red herring, because I know of NO ONE suggesting that eliminating the tax cuts for the rich alone will fix our debt problem. It took 30 years of tax breaks to the rich and too much spending on the military to create our debt, and is going to take 30 years of tax increases on the rich and a return to defense only levels of military spending to lower our debt. We will also need to switch to a UHC system to get our health care cost under control.
    First, I didn’t state ‘eliminating the tax cuts for the rich alone will fix our debt problem’. Not sure how you read that into my post. But I must have miss-read the portion you posted ‘But even if each of the nearly 200 millionaires who signed a letter demanding congressional Republicans consider tax increases donated $1 million to the government, they wouldn't put a dent in the government's debt, which currently stands at $14.3 trillion’. ‘Tax increases (eliminating tax cuts)…wouldn’t put a dent in the debt’ sure sound like they are suggesting…albeit sarcastically.

    Your opinion on the military spending is spot on though. As to the 30 years, we don’t have that long. Given the projected deficits by WHOEVER’S charts (CBO, BHO, PTP, etc.) over the next 10 years, which are probably optimistic, the debt service (interest) will easily overtake discretionary spending (no reference as they are personal calculations) at which point there isn't enough revenue to tax across the board. Of course there are many variables such as if the credit agencies cause an increase in this debt service, slower than expected growth, failure to address spending/revenue quickly (especially spending…on MIC for instance).

    Which link? I need context as the part you included does not appear to include the Bush tax cuts to capital gains and dividends.
    The link in the last paragraph of the article on Huffpo you linked to:
    If we ignore how the cuts are paid for, who benefits from them?

  10. #590
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: ABC's "20/20 - Lessons from Billionaires: Tax ME to create jobs IN AMERICA!"

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    First, I didn’t state ‘eliminating the tax cuts for the rich alone will fix our debt problem’. Not sure how you read that into my post. But I must have miss-read the portion you posted ‘But even if each of the nearly 200 millionaires who signed a letter demanding congressional Republicans consider tax increases donated $1 million to the government, they wouldn't put a dent in the government's debt, which currently stands at $14.3 trillion’. ‘Tax increases (eliminating tax cuts)…wouldn’t put a dent in the debt’ sure sound like they are suggesting…albeit sarcastically.
    Yes, you did mis-read it.

    Your opinion on the military spending is spot on though. As to the 30 years, we don’t have that long. Given the projected deficits by WHOEVER’S charts (CBO, BHO, PTP, etc.) over the next 10 years, which are probably optimistic, the debt service (interest) will easily overtake discretionary spending (no reference as they are personal calculations) at which point there isn't enough revenue to tax across the board. Of course there are many variables such as if the credit agencies cause an increase in this debt service, slower than expected growth, failure to address spending/revenue quickly (especially spending…on MIC for instance).
    That's why over the next ten years we will need to both cut spending and eliminate the Bush tax cuts on income which included Capital gains, dividends, and inheritance, and eliminate the tax breaks for companies that outsource American jobs, and eliminate tax cuts to big oil and big agriculture.
    This in addition to entitlement reform should have us well on our way to a strong recovery.


    The link in the last paragraph of the article on Huffpo you linked to:
    If we ignore how the cuts are paid for, who benefits from them?
    That doesn't factor in capital gains, dividends, inheritance, or payroll taxes. They even provided this disclaimer in the paragraph you referenced:
    "(but not of total federal tax)"
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

Page 59 of 63 FirstFirst ... 9495758596061 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •