• 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!"

No they don't.

Gotta love when you lay out a carefully constructed case like you do filled with verifiable evidence.;):roll:
 
this is a joke..right?

civil servants don't pay income taxes? they dont pay sales taxes?

they don't pay property taxes?

what are you talking about?

There is a joke in there all right.
 
Of course these private-sector workers are enslaved, but not, as you claim, by their employers. While they are the ones doing actual productive work, creating wealth and value, and contributing to the economy and to society as a whole; they are enslaved in that they are forced to give up some of their own earnings in taxes to support the government workers whom you lionize, who receive much higher wages and benefits than their private-sector counterparts do (and at the expense of their private-sector counterparts) while contributing much less.

Your public-sector workers, are, in fact, the true “pigs at the trough”, consuming the wealth created by the private-sector workers.


Bob your just wrong sir...
 
this is a joke..right?

civil servants don't pay income taxes? they dont pay sales taxes?

they don't pay property taxes?

what are you talking about?

They get paid with tax dollars, then turn around and and give part of that back in the form of taxes. It's in no way a net profit for the government. Let's not act as if it is. It's nothing more than recycling money.

The only way the government can see any kind of actual revenue, is when the private sector creates wealth and pays a portion of it in taxes.
 
Gotta love when you lay out a carefully constructed case like you do filled with verifiable evidence.;):roll:

The real joke is how Libbos thing that an employee can pay the employer a fee to keep their job and some how that results in a profit for the employer.

But, hey, I live in the real world.
 
They get paid with tax dollars, then turn around and and give part of that back in the form of taxes. It's in no way a net profit for the government. Let's not act as if it is. It's nothing more than recycling money.

The only way the government can see any kind of actual revenue, is when the private sector creates wealth and pays a portion of it in taxes.

you're moving the goalposts.

I said that civil servants pay taxes. you responded, claiming they do not....which is of course a blatant lie.

nevermind the fact that some civil servants are paid from capital bonds and NOT tax-revenue.
 
They get paid with tax dollars, then turn around and and give part of that back in the form of taxes. It's in no way a net profit for the government. Let's not act as if it is. It's nothing more than recycling money.

So what? Its irrelevant and a silly claim that means nothing. that is pure Mad Hatter - falling down the rabbit hole twisted thinking... if it even rises to that level.
 
Last edited:
you're moving the goalposts.

I said that civil servants pay taxes. you responded, claiming they do not....which is of course a blatant lie.

nevermind the fact that some civil servants are paid from capital bonds and NOT tax-revenue.

Right! That's why Obama wants to raise taxes, so we can, "create", more government jobs?
 
But, hey, I live in the real world.

Your last line reminds me from a great line from my favorite film MR SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON. Jefferson Smith is engaged in a filibuster in the Senate and utters a statement... "either I'd dead right or I'm crazy."
A senator from across the aisle replies with
" you wouldn't care to put that to a vote would you Senator?"
 
I know the stardard rhetorical argument from Conservatives/Republicans "why do you hate the rich?, why do you want to take money from wealthy people? all poor people want are hand-outs" and all the other "redistribution of wealth" arguments, but I've got news for you people. It's no longers just Warren Buffet saying "tax me! I'm good for it" to create jobs in America.

These promonent BILLIONAIRES are also saying "TAX ME! We want to create jobs IN AMERICA because the People want...NEED to work!" Watch these video interviews given by Barbara Walters on ABC's "20/20" of BILLIONAIRES who are saying "TAX ME! CREATE JOBS IN AMERICA!" Even they agree with the Occupiers need to put America back to work!!

Again, the Occupy Movement IS NOT anti-capitalism. It IS anti-corruption. The People just want a job and for AMERICA to get back to work!!!

OWS are a bunch of whining assholes. They are whining about their own failings.
 
Right! That's why Obama wants to raise taxes, so we can, "create", more government jobs?

he wanted to raise taxes several months ago to cut the national debt.

but apparently that's not a good enough reason for the Tea Party.
 
the government can allocate more money to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. that requires revenue, and it creates jobs.

the government can allocate money to address our domestic energy problem head on by funding the research to discover what comes after oil, a problem which the private sector will not address in earnest until there's an even more serious crisis. and by then, we might not have enough time. a moonshot domestic energy infrastructure and research program will create a lot of jobs.

the government can allocate money for numerous problems that are not being effectively addressed by the private sector.

Not that the government doesn't put up all sorts of roadblocks.
 
Apology accepted...no harm, no foul.



You have to see both parts of the the President's proposals. So many people are focused on his jobs plan they forget about his deficit reduction plan. They are designed to work together, not separately.

His deficit reduction plan is very similar, if not identical, to what he proposed during the debt limit negotiations - across the board spending cuts with some tax hikes/subsidy eliminations. If implemented, his proposals will reduce the debt and and pay down the deficit gradually over time. Considering that the conservatives on both sides of the political divide have been calling for less government spending, I see this as a good thing.

I don't see how his jobs plan adds to the debt when it is designed to be deficit neutral. He's not asking to borrow more money, just use what revenues are generated via creative tax schemes (i.e., the "Buffet Rule" intended to increase the tax on hedge fund managers or by implementing the millionaire surtax as amended by Sen. Reid) or by offsetting spending by eliminating subsidies on industries that have shown they can compete in the free market place on their own. I find nothing wrong with either concept. Now, while these measures are not being advertised as being "permanent" long-term measures, I can understand how people see them as a prelude to permanent changes in the tax code. To that, I say simply watch to ensure if these such measures aren't terminated within the timeframe outlined in the deficit proposal. If Congress is to be trusted again with doing its job, we have to do ours. And that means holding our congressman accountable. That's what you have the Tea Party/Blue Dog Democrats for, but neither can be so "dogmatic" that their idealogy becomes so rabbid that they lose sight of the bigger picture. And to keep career politicians from starting in on their rhetorical :spin:, the best the voting public can do is fire them now! and avoid that inevitability.

You want to take back this country? Put the power back in the hands of the People. I think the moment is now. For me, that means getting rid of those who are out for self and not for the people who elected them to office.

Giving the government more money isn't putting power back in the hands of the people. After this administrations huge give aways to Wall Street I don't even know how you could trust it to.
 
Most Republicans (and liberals) are a-ok with crony capitalism.

Don't expect this to change soon.
 
People who think government spending can't create jobs should ask Boeing about that.

Or Lockheed-Martin.

Or Halliburton...


"Oh but that money came from citizens!"

What's that? So what are those citizens supposed to do with that money? Oh... SPEND it. Creating demand. Weird, when you guys talk about "job creators" you always seem to forget about that demand side of the equation.

Anyway. Government is different than the citizens. The government can borrow money at lower interest rates and in higher volumes than you can. During a recession when nobody is spending money and therefore no demand exists to justify job creation, the government can borrow the sum of money required to shore up some of that demand.
 
I'm not talking about all millionaires/billionaires. I'm referring to the ones that think they don't pay enough taxes. They can easily increase their tax burden by taking fewer write offs. It begs the question: If they're so hip on paying more taxes, why aren't they taking fewer write offs?

Whose to say they aren't?

err.....civil servants pay income and other taxes too.

No they don't.

Yeah, they do! My sister is a Civil Service insurance claims processor...files her federal tax returns every years same as everyone else.

They get paid with tax dollars, then turn around and and give part of that back in the form of taxes. It's in no way a net profit for the government. Let's not act as if it is. It's nothing more than recycling money.

The only way the government can see any kind of actual revenue, is when the private sector creates wealth and pays a portion of it in taxes.

Are you kidding me?

apdst,

Have you ever heard of Series EE, HH or I savings bonds? Simple federal monitary instruments used to generate revenue for the Treasury while providing long and short-term investment options for the general public. And that's just one revenue source available by the government. There are others.
 
Last edited:
I'm not talking about all millionaires/billionaires. I'm referring to the ones that think they don't pay enough taxes. They can easily increase their tax burden by taking fewer write offs. It begs the question: If they're so hip on paying more taxes, why aren't they taking fewer write offs?

That does beg the question. Maybe they're just shameless hypocrites. :shrug:
 
People who think government spending can't create jobs should ask Boeing about that.

Or Lockheed-Martin.

Or Halliburton...


"Oh but that money came from citizens!"

What's that? So what are those citizens supposed to do with that money? Oh... SPEND it. Creating demand. Weird, when you guys talk about "job creators" you always seem to forget about that demand side of the equation.

Anyway. Government is different than the citizens. The government can borrow money at lower interest rates and in higher volumes than you can. During a recession when nobody is spending money and therefore no demand exists to justify job creation, the government can borrow the sum of money required to shore up some of that demand.
Just think Al Gore created the Internet.:mrgreen:

Where would Jeff Bezos be without the internet?
 
Last edited:
I have a hard time believing any billionaire is being genuine about the idea that paying more in taxes would allow the government to create jobs more efficiently than what he himself can do. After all, don't billionaires tend to create jobs along their paths to becoming billionaires? They invest their money in a business endeavor and employ people to guide that business endeavor to success. If billionaires were looking for a way to create jobs, they'd just reinvest more of their money into their business ideas. And that's what most of them do, but then they just get richer, and more foam then gathers around the mouths of the masses.

What's really going on here? I have a hunch. With more and more people joining these movements against "the rich," billionaires can try to shield their reputations from some of the public's outcries if they go on the record with their hands in the air saying "Hey, I support higher taxes too!!!" Sure, sure.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom