Page 5 of 36 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 358

Thread: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

  1. #41
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    You sock away 80% of your income and say you are taxed too much? What are you going to do with that nest egg? We are a consumer economy and you need to get with it. Buy something.
    You don't have a clue about the difference between gross and net income. Do you?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  2. #42
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Growing the economy is the ONLY way out of deficits. Drastic cuts in spending will only collapse the economy , cutting GDP and dropping revenues which will increase our deficits.
    Look at what austerity has done for Greece.

    "On the current path - which is not sustainable in my view - we may very well see Greek GDP go down 25-30 percent, which would be historically unprecedented. It's a disastrous crisis for them, Dadush, a former senior World Bank official, said.



    Read more: Is Greece About To See The Biggest Drop In Output In Modern Economic History? - Business Insider
    The government can't grow the economy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  3. #43
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue_State View Post
    Has the percentage of people paying into the tax revenue increased or decreased in those 60 years?
    That I don't know, but I would guess that the percentage has gone down -- mostly as a result of the EITC and various other tax expenditures. Ultimately the wealthy are paying a higher percentage of taxes these days because they are earning much more relative to the other 99% than they used to.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  4. #44
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Common sense dictates that raising taxes won't close the deficit. Deficit spening has nothing to do with income revenue.
    Basic logic would tell you that you're out of your mind. Deficits are nothing more than a negative balance between revenue and spending. If you increase revenue without increasing spending, you will lower deficits.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  5. #45
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You've never filed a 1040. Have you?

    And, before you say, "uhhh...yeah-huh!", I know that you've never filed a 1040 if you actually believe what you posted.
    I'm guessing that you have no clue how marginal tax rates work. You would have to work really hard to end up with a 30% effective tax rate (and be pretty stupid).
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  6. #46
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Basic logic would tell you that you're out of your mind.
    You claim that an expenditure and a tax credit are the same thing, and I'm out of my mind?

    Deficits are nothing more than a negative balance between revenue and spending. If you increase revenue without increasing spending, you will lower deficits.
    Caused by too much spending...

    The current government doesn't mind deficit spending, now; they're not going to mind deficit spending after taxes are increased. They're not going to kep spending levles where they are. Give'em more money and more money they will spend. It ain't rocket science.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  7. #47
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I'm guessing that you have no clue how marginal tax rates work. You would have to work really hard to end up with a 30% effective tax rate (and be pretty stupid).
    You don't have a job. Do you?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #48
    Sage
    mike2810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    arizona
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    15,043

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Basic logic would tell you that you're out of your mind. Deficits are nothing more than a negative balance between revenue and spending. If you increase revenue without increasing spending, you will lower deficits.
    I will agree to a point with your statement. You really don't think its that simple regarding the federal budget issues. Let me ask, if the Buffet rule was made law, what is in the law that would have the increased revenue brought in go towards the deficit and debt we have? The issue I have is not lowering the deficit but eliminate it and work towards reducing the debt.

    In your own words, "you will lower the deficit. OK, what does that really mean? Instead of borrowing .40 of every dollar spent, Congress will what, borrow .20 or .30 of every dollars. Doesn't that means the debt still increases? When is Congress and the President going to realize we must have a balanced budget which includes a lowering of the debt. If we don't do this soon, what is that doing for future generations?
    "I can explain it to you but, I can't understand it for you"

  9. #49
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You claim that an expenditure and a tax credit are the same thing, and I'm out of my mind?
    A tax credit is a tax expenditure, though it's not the only kind of tax expenditure. Do you actually deny that?

    Caused by too much spending...
    "Too much" spending simply means spending more money than you can pay for with current revenue. You claim to run a business, right? When you do your books (or hopefully, when someone does them for you), do you ONLY look at how much you're spending to determine how you're doing? Or do you maybe consider how much revenue you're taking in, too?

    The current government doesn't mind deficit spending, now; they're not going to mind deficit spending after taxes are increased. They're not going to kep spending levles where they are. Give'em more money and more money they will spend. It ain't rocket science.
    That's not what happened under Clinton, when we actually raised taxes and balanced the budget.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  10. #50
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You don't have a job. Do you?
    Do you know what a non sequitur is? Hint: ^^^^^
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

Page 5 of 36 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... 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
  •