• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

So a couple rich people are saying that in order to make jobs in the US, they should fork over more money, and then uncle same, can, what, employ more cops, firemen, and soldiers?

Someone explain the logic behind this? Why does one need a law in order to say, hey, i want to have more of my money taken away in taxes...? Why not just say, hey, I think I can help, here's some money? Sorry, but this is the reason I don't trust it. There is an agenda here, and it ain't to help the common man.

Also, again, to think that giving more money to government = more jobs...is just stupid. Already the federal government is the single LARGEST employer in america, more so than any other 2 mega corporations and all their subsidiaries combined. Anyone ever think maybe that's a problem? What happens when the majority of americans work government jobs? They pay taxes on their incomes, which come to them by the good graces of the taxes non government people pay...and then you just watch it all funnel down a drain...
 
Dickieboy said:
The problem is that this $447b is proposed revenue from 2012-2021. The spending is proposed 2012-2014. Until the revenue is collected we will have to borrow to enable the spending.
Click to expand...

Less money we can waste on the military/industrial complex to create jobs, we spend less on welfare, and help stimulate the economy. I don't see a downside.

And what if these revenues do not materialize?
Click to expand...

Tax increases, throughout US history, have increased revenues.
 
Catawba said:
Less money we can waste on the military/industrial complex to create jobs, we spend less on welfare, and help stimulate the economy. I don't see a downside.



Tax increases, throughout US history, have increased revenues.
Click to expand...

Under that theory, why not raise taxes to 99% and everyone will be rich?
 
Grant said:
it's amazing that so many people are complaining that jobs are leaving America and yet you haven't even noticed, or don't know why.
Click to expand...

Yes, its amazing alright:

GOP, U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Beat Back Bill To Combat Outsourcing

"Senate Republicans beat back an effort by Democrats Tuesday to end tax breaks for companies who send jobs offshore only to import products back into the United States."
GOP, U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Beat Back Bill To Combat Outsourcing
 
Objective Voice said:
Sure I do...to counter your arguments.

EDIT: First, you claimed that the only way the fed generated revenue was through taxes from the private sector. I reminded you that there are other ways the government makes money, i.e., via the sell of bonds and other financial instuments.

Second, you claimed government employees don't pay taxes. My own experience proves you wrong there.

Third, you questioned whose tax policies where costing the country. I reminded you we're still under the Bush tax cut policies (as extended by Pres. Obama).

And before you say it, I also corrected myself concerning Clinton raising taxes.

So, yes, I know what my points were. Problem is, you'll continue to deny your claims.
Click to expand...

You can edit that post all you want and I still didn't say that.
 
Thunder said:
actually, you said civil-servants don't pay income & other taxes.

this is of course, a lie.
Click to expand...

That's what I said. Thank you for agreeing that I never said that the government get's 100% of it's revenue from taxes.

EDIT: I never said anything about other taxes. I meant income taxes.
 
Grant said:
No. That's just what Barrack Obama spent on one useless solar company. Why would you want to take money earned by other people in order that Barrack Obama, someone with no business experience whatsoever, can use it as venture capital to buy useless stock that the smart money won't touch?
Click to expand...

FYI: $500 billion and $500 million are not equal.

It's too late. That money is not going to make any difference now. It will just encourage more people to leave rather than see their money going down some federal sinkhole.
Click to expand...

What do you mean its too late? Are you thinking the debt that took 30 years to accumulate can be addressed in just a few years? It took 30 years of spending too much and taking in too little revenue. It is going to take the reversed to fix it.


It doesn't matter. You're still looking for fault rather than looking to the future. Lashing out, blaming this person or that, this partyor that. It's too late. It doesn't matter anymore.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter except when selecting our future leaders. We need our problems to be addressed, not ignored.



The rich don't have enough money to get the country out of this massive debt but even if they did, unless attitudes change, the US will just go back in debt again. They simply cannot carry their weight.
Click to expand...

It will take 30 years of more progressive taxation and cutting wasteful spending. There are no magic shortcuts.
 
Thunder said:
and it is a lie.

civil servants pay lots of taxes, including federal, state, and local income taxes.
Click to expand...

And where do their wages that get taxed come from?
 
Thunder said:
and it is a lie.

civil servants pay lots of taxes, including federal, state, and local income taxes.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. Think about it.

Are there local income taxes? :lamo Whose lieing, now?
 
Thunder said:
interesting strawman.
Click to expand...

Yes , it is interesting but not a strawman.

In fact there is a limit as to how much taxes people will honestly pay before a black market begins anf there is a revolution of some sort. The idea that the government can just "tax the rich" is true but at what point does it become self defeating?

At one time the taxes were at 7%, which some might feel too low while 99% is obviously too high.

So where is the magic spot? That''s the point. And by many Americans leaving the country or sending their businesses elsewhere, it strongly suggests that point has been reached.

Therefore the problem doesn't appear to be not enough taxing but instead too much spending. In other words the government has to learn to live within its means with what it has. That idea is not as revolutionary as it might seem.
 
Grant said:
Yes , it is interesting but not a strawman.

In fact there is a limit as to how much taxes people will honestly pay before a black market begins anf there is a revolution of some sort...
Click to expand...

you mean like the OWS folks?

why would there be a "revolution" just because tax-rates return to where they were under Clinton?

the rich are gonna take up arms and fight the govt.?
 
Last edited:
Grant said:
Under that theory, why not raise taxes to 99% and everyone will be rich?
Click to expand...

For pretty much the same reason people take a prescribed daily dosage of medicine rather than drinking the whole bottle at once.
 
Thunder said:
you mean like the OWS folks?
Click to expand...

I don't know which is more absurd, that you think OWS is revolutionary in any way, or that OWS carries a higher tax burden than say, the 1% that they ignorantly discriminate against and ant to take money from...via taxation.
 
Thunder said:
and it is a lie.

civil servants pay lots of taxes, including federal, state, and local income taxes.
Click to expand...

The government pays their employee $100,000 a year, for example, and takes back $10,000 (as anther example).

Net loss to the non-governmental taxpayer is $90,000.
 
KevinKohler said:
And where do their wages that get taxed come from?
Click to expand...

It doesn't really matter where the money comes from, be it tax revenue, or non-tax revenue, they still don't pay taxes.
 
Grant said:
The government pays their employee $100,000 a year, for example, and takes back $10,000 (as anther example).

Net loss to the non-governmental taxpayer is $90,000.
Click to expand...

what about all the sales tax the govt. collects from the guy's purchases?
 
apdst said:
More taxes have never created jobs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and the Bush Tax Cuts have not created jobs. The country needs more revenue, letting the tax cuts expire is a good thing.
 
Catawba said:
For pretty much the same reason people take a prescribed daily dosage of medicine rather than drinking the whole bottle at once.
Click to expand...

That's the point. What is the daily dosage? What is the maximum, or minimum, someone should be taxed?

Where does it stop being healthy and starts to become unhealthy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom