• 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!

Do The Rich Need Saving?

Do The Rich Need Saving?


  • Total voters
    54
anything that interferes with your bash the rich nonsense you will reject no matter how strong the proof

I am supplying facts to a faith based dogmatic

Nope, so far just your opinion. You posted nothing relevant to refute that over the last 30 years of trickle down economics, the rich have been paying less and less in percentage of their income in taxes, at the same time the working class have been paying a higher percentage of their income in taxes.
 
Wrong, I am not the one who blames others for being a failure. I have done quite well and I laugh at those who are mad about that fact

Read your list of whinings. Don't they include: the liberal media, unions, teachers, workers, liberals, and the Obama monster. :coffeepap
 
Read your list of whinings. Don't they include: the liberal media, unions, teachers, workers, liberals, and the Obama monster. :coffeepap


Ahhheeemmm you left out parasites and leeches.

Please note this for the future:mrgreen:
 
why should ability to pay trump use? maybe if those who cannot "afford" more taxes had to pay more every time they voted for big spending dems they might figure out not to vote for those pimps

Repubs spend more than dems.. Look it up.. How many repubs have left the next president budget surplus?? None.. How many dems?? At least one..

Again your views are still flawed..
 
that a funny claim given several of you make the same nonsensical points at me over and over

you are emotobabbling nonsense-I supplied facts that counter your faith based claims

Like I said.. Your still missing the point.. Typical of a conservative.. Anything dealing with math seems to be to much for conservatives.. No wonder you historically suck at the handling of the economy..

The U.S. Economy Does Better Under Democrats

eRiposte Economy - Democrats v. Republicans on the U.S. economy

http://www.slate.com/id/2266174/slideshow/2266174/fs/0//entry/2266218/

Have a nice day..

Oh.. When you get a chance.. Figure out who is really spending the money.. It isn't the dems..
 
Last edited:
The top rate was always a red herring argument, since nobody ever paid it, and mostof the income of the top brackets was from capital gains and dividends, which got an automatic 50% deduction on the tax schedules. For example, on $100 in capital gains only $50 was counted as taxable, and that is after a ton of other deductions in the tax code that nobody else was rich enough to qualify for and even customized laws passed especially for a particular corporation. Anyone who has read the tax schedules would know this, and for those who don't just find them somewhere and see for yourself.

It has already been documented a few pages back that the actual rate back then after deductions was about 50 - 60%. Still much, much higher than today.
 
Last edited:
Repubs spend more than dems.. Look it up.. How many repubs have left the next president budget surplus?? None.. How many dems?? At least one..

Again your views are still flawed..
In fact their beloved icon Ronald Regan tripled the national debt in his term from 1 trillion to 3 trillion. In fact he spent more than every president before him combined.
 
why should ability to pay trump use? maybe if those who cannot "afford" more taxes had to pay more every time they voted for big spending dems they might figure out not to vote for those pimps

Let's see your evidence the working class benefit from taxes more than the rich. You keep making that absurd claim without any evidence. Let's see it?

It was the majority of GOP that voted us into Iraq and the tax cuts for the rich, which is the most wasteful part of our debt for the last decade. Perhaps if the rich were paying their fair share of the taxes they wouldn't be so quick to vote for wasteful spending that is killing our country!
:sun
 
Funny, I was thinking the same thing about your poor comparison. Go figure. :coffeepap

Hey all you have to do is show me the numbers where the rich use more of what the government offers .. thats all .. I'll be waiting
 
It has already been documented a few pages back that the actual rate back then after deductions was about 50 - 60%. Still much, much higher than today.

That works out to an actual tax rate of 25% to 30%.
 
That works out to an actual tax rate of 25% to 30%.

Nope, the actual tax rate was 90% for the top bracket and after deductions and loopholes, it came to an effective rate of about 50 - 60%.
 
Hey all you have to do is show me the numbers where the rich use more of what the government offers .. thats all .. I'll be waiting

I believe I linked some earlier. We talked about corporate welfare, about who uses the courts and other services, and about an educated work force. We dicussed the bailouts, and the breaks. But here's some more:
Middle class income has not risen in thirty years, while the speculators and the loan sharks who are responsible for this current crisis still get their inflated bonuses.
How do the rich make their profits? Do they manufacture goods? Then they must ship them on the roads and rails that are built with public money. Did they invent Ebay or Facebook? Then they profit from the internet which was developed originally with government support. Do they hire workers? Then much of their workforce has been educated and trained in public schools, community colleges, universities that are publicly funded. All business and commerce depends on the common infrastructure. Those who benefit extraordinarily from the commons must contribute back their fair share. If they do not, they siphon wealth away from the rest of us. They are asking us to subsidize their luxuries while we pinch pennies and scrape the bottom of the pan.
Some people might say that the rich deserve their golden hordes, that they earn their wealth by providing jobs. But subsidizing the wealthy at the expense of the rest of us does not create jobs--witness the current levels of unemployment! Moreover, it comes at the direct expense of the real, productive work of the world. Those who choose professions that involve caring for others, nurturing children, teaching, nursing, healing, farming, providing food, clothing and shelter surely deserve rewards for their labor. Now they are being asked to forego the pensions they counted upon for comfort in their old age, the health care they need to remain strong, the education that could allow their children to thrive, the homes they've scrimped and saved for, and to mortage their grandchildren's futures all so that the ultra-rich who profit from their work can avoid their share of our common social responsibilities.

On Faith Panelists Blog: The rich benefit from society and should give back - Starhawk

Urbanomics: How the rich and poor benefit from government

Raise taxes on the rich | Marketplace From American Public Media

Now anyone can do this google search thingie. Just follow the posts of the prof. But the point is, the rich get a bunch from the government. More than poor, and **** lot more than the middle class. I can find the worlds smallest violin for them if you want. :coffeepap
 
I believe I linked some earlier. We talked about corporate welfare, about who uses the courts and other services, and about an educated work force. We dicussed the bailouts, and the breaks. But here's some more:
Middle class income has not risen in thirty years, while the speculators and the loan sharks who are responsible for this current crisis still get their inflated bonuses.
How do the rich make their profits? Do they manufacture goods? Then they must ship them on the roads and rails that are built with public money. Did they invent Ebay or Facebook? Then they profit from the internet which was developed originally with government support. Do they hire workers? Then much of their workforce has been educated and trained in public schools, community colleges, universities that are publicly funded. All business and commerce depends on the common infrastructure. Those who benefit extraordinarily from the commons must contribute back their fair share. If they do not, they siphon wealth away from the rest of us. They are asking us to subsidize their luxuries while we pinch pennies and scrape the bottom of the pan.
Some people might say that the rich deserve their golden hordes, that they earn their wealth by providing jobs. But subsidizing the wealthy at the expense of the rest of us does not create jobs--witness the current levels of unemployment! Moreover, it comes at the direct expense of the real, productive work of the world. Those who choose professions that involve caring for others, nurturing children, teaching, nursing, healing, farming, providing food, clothing and shelter surely deserve rewards for their labor. Now they are being asked to forego the pensions they counted upon for comfort in their old age, the health care they need to remain strong, the education that could allow their children to thrive, the homes they've scrimped and saved for, and to mortage their grandchildren's futures all so that the ultra-rich who profit from their work can avoid their share of our common social responsibilities.

On Faith Panelists Blog: The rich benefit from society and should give back - Starhawk

Urbanomics: How the rich and poor benefit from government

Raise taxes on the rich | Marketplace From American Public Media

Now anyone can do this google search thingie. Just follow the posts of the prof. But the point is, the rich get a bunch from the government. More than poor, and **** lot more than the middle class. I can find the worlds smallest violin for them if you want. :coffeepap

Excellent work Boo! I knew that line about the rich benefiting least was a crock. :sun
 
It has already been documented a few pages back that the actual rate back then after deductions was about 50 - 60%. Still much, much higher than today.

The Tax Foundation - Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary
here are two sites that maybe you should look at .. the first shows tax receipts collected by the government for each year .. look closely at the years before Reagan cut the top tax rate .. and the years following it … you will notice that the government took in more after the tax cuts .. then before the tax cuts .. .in fact by 1990 government revenue actually doubled ..

Now the 2nd site .. shows that the top 5% bracket actually paid more in taxes in every year after the tax cuts given by Reagan ..

So lets see … after tax cuts we increased government revenue … and increased what the top bracket was paying in taxes .. so what part of that is it that you don't agree with ??
 
The Tax Foundation - Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary
here are two sites that maybe you should look at .. the first shows tax receipts collected by the government for each year .. look closely at the years before Reagan cut the top tax rate .. and the years following it … you will notice that the government took in more after the tax cuts .. then before the tax cuts .. .in fact by 1990 government revenue actually doubled ..

Now the 2nd site .. shows that the top 5% bracket actually paid more in taxes in every year after the tax cuts given by Reagan ..

So lets see … after tax cuts we increased government revenue … and increased what the top bracket was paying in taxes .. so what part of that is it that you don't agree with ??

Still trying to defend the tax cuts for the rich?

You are trying to compare apples and oranges. Your point is irrelevant to the discussion of tax rates. GDP has gone up through history irregardless of tax rates, so naturally revenues will be higher due to that alone. Now, if you can prove that the revenues wouldn't have been even higher without the tax cuts, it would be relevant.
 
NO.

They don't deserve our help or votes.

Why should we vote to help the rich person who neither knows nor cares about you???

They buy the better food and clothes. They live high on the hog. They have huge houses. They have the better cars. They DON'T DESERVE OUR HELP.

They're proud, selfish, and materialistic. They deserve greater taxes.

No, I am NOT playing Devil's Advocate on this issue.

___

I don't like how proud, selfish, and vain rich people can be. Don't even dare to think the rich don't primarily embody these behaviors. Those people don't deserve their mansions and expensive houses.

I'm still conservative in the social sector and the belief in working had to earn money... but that was warped and perverted into CEOs earning obscene bonuses and the rich living lavishly; well above what is necessary.

There should be a cap on total wage. Bring it down. Business profits should not be used for personal gratification. It's materialism at its finest.

They live in such posh houses and live so far above people who are struggling. How can a conservative who can barely pay for insurance have the audacity to vote for the rich and wealthy... to enrich them further... while you take further cuts and suffer?

Many perverted conservatives and Republicans actually dare to use the Bible to support their vain and materialistic lifestyle.

Are you broke? Were your benefits cut? Lost your insurance? How could you vote for Republicans who vote to further enrich the poor????

If you're frugal and you work for what you earn, then I have no problem so long as you don't spend money on things you don't need, like a Hummer or a huge house. It's obscene, materialistic decadence. Get them to understand by taxing them painfully.

___

Simply put, we're suffering while we cut their taxes. It is injustice.
 
Nope, the actual tax rate was 90% for the top bracket and after deductions and loopholes, it came to an effective rate of about 50 - 60%.

Not on capital gains. A '90% tax rate' on $100 in capital gains would be $45 maximum, i.e.45%, in the days when the top rate was '90%'. Read the tax forms themselves, and not what somebody on the internet says. Nobody ever paid the top rate then, either.
 
The Tax Foundation - Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary
here are two sites that maybe you should look at .. the first shows tax receipts collected by the government for each year .. look closely at the years before Reagan cut the top tax rate .. and the years following it … you will notice that the government took in more after the tax cuts .. then before the tax cuts .. .in fact by 1990 government revenue actually doubled ..

Now the 2nd site .. shows that the top 5% bracket actually paid more in taxes in every year after the tax cuts given by Reagan ..

So lets see … after tax cuts we increased government revenue … and increased what the top bracket was paying in taxes .. so what part of that is it that you don't agree with ??

Tax revenues increased because Reagan raised Federal taxes at least 6 times, and then there were the huge capital gains from the wave of LBO's and mergers, i.e. Wall Street junk bond fever, and a real estate bubble. It had squat to with Reagan's tax cuts, and much more to do with Paul Volcker's Fed policies, which are worthy of a thread all by themselves
 
Not on capital gains. A '90% tax rate' on $100 in capital gains would be $45 maximum, i.e.45%, in the days when the top rate was '90%'. Read the tax forms themselves, and not what somebody on the internet says. Nobody ever paid the top rate then, either.

I have not claimed they paid the top rate. I said 50-60% of the top rate. You say it was 45%. Go with that if you wish. It is still much higher than the effective rate today.
 
I believe I linked some earlier. We talked about corporate welfare, about who uses the courts and other services, and about an educated work force. We dicussed the bailouts, and the breaks. But here's some more:
Middle class income has not risen in thirty years, while the speculators and the loan sharks who are responsible for this current crisis still get their inflated bonuses.
How do the rich make their profits? Do they manufacture goods? Then they must ship them on the roads and rails that are built with public money. Did they invent Ebay or Facebook? Then they profit from the internet which was developed originally with government support. Do they hire workers? Then much of their workforce has been educated and trained in public schools, community colleges, universities that are publicly funded. All business and commerce depends on the common infrastructure. Those who benefit extraordinarily from the commons must contribute back their fair share. If they do not, they siphon wealth away from the rest of us. They are asking us to subsidize their luxuries while we pinch pennies and scrape the bottom of the pan.
Some people might say that the rich deserve their golden hordes, that they earn their wealth by providing jobs. But subsidizing the wealthy at the expense of the rest of us does not create jobs--witness the current levels of unemployment! Moreover, it comes at the direct expense of the real, productive work of the world. Those who choose professions that involve caring for others, nurturing children, teaching, nursing, healing, farming, providing food, clothing and shelter surely deserve rewards for their labor. Now they are being asked to forego the pensions they counted upon for comfort in their old age, the health care they need to remain strong, the education that could allow their children to thrive, the homes they've scrimped and saved for, and to mortage their grandchildren's futures all so that the ultra-rich who profit from their work can avoid their share of our common social responsibilities.

On Faith Panelists Blog: The rich benefit from society and should give back - Starhawk

Urbanomics: How the rich and poor benefit from government

Raise taxes on the rich | Marketplace From American Public Media

Now anyone can do this google search thingie. Just follow the posts of the prof. But the point is, the rich get a bunch from the government. More than poor, and **** lot more than the middle class. I can find the worlds smallest violin for them if you want. :coffeepap

Good gawd you use some real winners to try and prove your point ..

On Faith Panelists Blog: The rich benefit from society and should give back - Starhawk
Starhawk is a prominent voice in modern Wiccan spirituality and cofounder of reclaiming.org, an activist branch of modern Pagan religion
not a single fact given there what so ever .. just a pagan witch's thoughts ..

Urbanomics: How the rich and poor benefit from government

This site is a blog, author unknown …. and shows a circle graph with no numbers as far as actual usage or dollars ..

Raise taxes on the rich | Marketplace From American Public Media

another site that says absolutely nothing .. but goes back to the ranting and raving of how the 80's was America's death ..

If thats the best you can produce you have less than nothing .

But just for the sake of fun .. lets post some facts .. lets us walmart use of our road ways

Semi's average about 9 miles per gal (fact)
Walmart has a fleet of semi's that number 7,200 (fact)
each truck averages about 2000 miles per week (fact)
federal tax on a gallon of diesel fuel is 24.4 cents (fact)

now you can do the math .. I have already …. and that will work out to just over 2 million dollars walmart pays the federal government to use the road ways …. and another 2 million dollars they pay the states on fuel taxes.

So besides all the other taxes paid, they pay an addition 4 million dollars to use our roads via the fuel taxes. The average person pays 225 dollars … so walmart pays as much as 17,777 people to use there road ways. Next time you are out driving .. let me know when you count 17,000 cars before seeing a walmart truck on the road .

Not sure about you .. . but to rational people .. it seems they are paying more then fair share for using the highways, in just fuel taxes alone.

But hey maybe that Wiccan witch put a spell on you and told you her opinions were fact ..
 
Back
Top Bottom