• 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!

Obama to call for new tax increases in State of the Union address

Conservative said:
No, you just bought the Obama rhetoric and believe govt. is the answer. Govt. hasn't provided the incentive for businesses to grow and create jobs but then again I have seen you don't understand incentive, even your own. "Your" President and your economic model are disasters and the problems seems to be you can never accept responsibility for your own failures.
Click to expand...

We moved away form tickle down economics?
 
Conservative said:
Incentive, my socialist friend, something you don't seem to understand. Investment comes from risk taking and the more incentive to invest(lower taxes) the more investment capital generated thus long term growth and job creation.
Click to expand...

You're viewing all taxes as the same. You would have an argument if you were arguing for a lower corporate income tax, because it gives corporations more money to allocate towards hiring new employees, but even in that case, it's debatable as to whether or not corporations would choose to invest into new employees. With Capital Gains, there's no reason to suggest that a lower tax is going to guarantee job creation.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
We moved away form tickle down economics?
Click to expand...

Yes, liberalism and socialists don't like incentive and the private sector at all. There is a reason that the United States has the greatest economy in the world that Obama is trying to change. it is the private sector not big govt. and wealth redistribution
 
SocialDemocrat said:
You're viewing all taxes as the same. You would have an argument if you were arguing for a lower corporate income tax, because it gives corporations more money to allocate towards hiring new employees, but even in that case, it's debatable as to whether or not corporations would choose to invest into new employees. With Capital Gains, there's no reason to suggest that a lower tax is going to guarantee job creation.
Click to expand...

Lower taxes gives businesses a choice, higher taxes take that private sector choice away. Which do you prefer?
 
SlevinKelevra said:
Benefitting those with a higher Marginal propensity to consume usually helps a consumer driven economy
Click to expand...

Benefitting the vast majority who spend ALL or nearly all their income in the economy helps consumer spending far more than coddling the 1% who spend a small % of their incomes. Taxing income NOT spent at a higher rate is the best way to boost growth. Taxing high income earners more does not change their spending habits only their deposits in hedge funds.
 
Blue_State said:
You could probably guess, but I believe they have taxed us enough. I am also on the side that we should not be taxed by the Federal Government. Only the state. Unfortunately, that is never going away.
Click to expand...

It seems we are on the same side of that issue.

SlevinKelevra said:
how in the world would this function?
Click to expand...

Until 1861 the US had no federal income tax. Essentially the states payed into the federal government to fund federal services. Once the federal government began taxing on a federal level you will notice two things happened. First the Federal government could now self fund federal expansion which has lead to massive growth on the Federal level while diminishing states powers. Secondly the Federal government now uses its self printed money to financially manipulate state programs. Federal money is promised to fund state programs that the federal government wishes to be put in place. Our elected officials sure seem to have a hard time turning away "free" money regardless of the strings attached.
 
Conservative said:
So tell me why we need 50 state and thousands of local governments requiring their tax structure along with a 3.9 trillion dollar Federal Govt? Seems you haven't learned the roles of the various governments we have or what the taxes you pay fund. Not surprised, a lot of people don't understand it either. Why don't you find out the role of the Federal govt. and get back to me. Hint, it has nothing to do with police, fire, teachers, local roads, highways, and bridges.
Click to expand...

How am I supposed to guess what you think the role of the federal government should be? Just tell me what you're getting at.
 
Conservative said:
Lower taxes gives businesses a choice, higher taxes take that private sector choice away. Which do you prefer?
Click to expand...

We have already seen the choices the 1% made when we lowered their taxes. Outsource or keep our employee wages low so we can sock more money away for ourselves. Now that the tax rates are so reasonable, why share the prosperity with others? Raise them back and they might make a different choice. It's amazing how generous people can become with money when their choice is either share it with their employees or give it to the Govt.
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
Lower taxes gives businesses a choice, higher taxes take that private sector choice away. Which do you prefer?
Click to expand...

I don't support a corporate income tax, as it's a relatively inefficient form of taxation, IMO. So you do admit that there is no guarantee that lower taxes will create jobs. Personally I support everyone having a right to a job in a (near) full employment economy, which actually guarantees the reduction of unemployment.
 
Conservative said:
Yes, liberalism and socialists don't like incentive and the private sector at all. There is a reason that the United States has the greatest economy in the world that Obama is trying to change. it is the private sector not big govt. and wealth redistribution
Click to expand...

No we havent. Despite all the rhetoric from the Obama White House, we have kept the same system. Keep taxes low, prioritize big business, stimulate the private sector, and provide special incentives to big business.
 
iguanaman said:
Benefitting the vast majority who spend ALL or nearly all their income in the economy helps consumer spending far more than coddling the 1% who spend a small % of their incomes. Taxing income NOT spent at a higher rate is the best way to boost growth. Taxing high income earners more does not change their spending habits only their deposits in hedge funds.
Click to expand...

I have to ask you when did you develop this hatred for anyone who has more than you? Did you start at a young age? Were you never taught the value of hard work and making something of yourself so that you can be in position to truly help your neighbor? When did you start believing that it was the government's role to do that and that earning more money was a detriment to providing help to those truly in need?

Your hatred of the private sector is misguided. It was the private sector that gave you the freedom you have today to make a total fool of yourself and demonize the system that made this the economic powerhouse of the world. I sure benefited from it and get tired of hearing the bs coming from people like you. I probably donate more to charity than you make in a year and do more good with that investment than the dollars you want sent to the federal bureaucrats to spend it for me. Keep buying the liberal rhetoric and ignoring the liberal results.
 
iguanaman said:
Benefitting the vast majority who spend ALL or nearly all their income in the economy helps consumer spending far more than coddling the 1% who spend a small % of their incomes. Taxing income NOT spent at a higher rate is the best way to boost growth. Taxing high income earners more does not change their spending habits only their deposits in hedge funds.
Click to expand...

socialists think that the wealth of those who earn it should be confiscated to buy votes for the scumbags socialists want in office. Taxing high income earners changes the behavior of the parasites as they become more and more dependent on government handouts and more and more receptive to leftwing pandering
 
iguanaman said:
We have already seen the choices the 1% made when we lowered their taxes. Outsource or keep our employee wages low so we can sock more money away for ourselves. Now that the tax rates are so reasonable, why share the prosperity with others? Raise them back and they might make a different choice. It's amazing how generous people can become with money when their choice is either share it with their employees or give it to the Govt.
Click to expand...

What a bunch of bull****, the Rich aren't the problem liberal bureaucrats are as are the people that support them. You make up this bs based upon what you are told with no specifics to support your contention. There aren't enough that outsource or keep wages low to make a difference but that doesn't stop you from making the claim and hurting the vast majority in this to make a living for their family. Rather sad to see people like you spouting rhetoric not backed by any facts.
 
Conservative said:
What a bunch of bull****, the Rich aren't the problem liberal bureaucrats are as are the people that support them. You make up this bs based upon what you are told with no specifics to support your contention. There aren't enough that outsource or keep wages low to make a difference but that doesn't stop you from making the claim and hurting the vast majority in this to make a living for their family. Rather sad to see people like you spouting rhetoric not backed by any facts.
Click to expand...


people like him believe the government owns all the wealth
 
SocialDemocrat said:
I don't see a reason why the two should be treated differently under the taxation system.
Click to expand...

Ok, so government should not encourage risk investing. I have to ask: have you ever signed the front of a paycheck?
 
AliHajiSheik said:
Ok, so government should not encourage risk investing. I have to ask: have you ever signed the front of a paycheck?
Click to expand...

socialists whine about investment income being taxed less than earned income but what they really don' like is that the wealthy aren't screwed over as much

socialists really don't believe in even taxation but rather they think the progressive structure of earned income should apply to all taxation

its a idiotic argument which assumes the progressive structure created by the income tax law is "proper" and other tax structures also created by laws with the same validity as the Income tax law-are "improper
 
Conservative said:
I have to ask you when did you develop this hatred for anyone who has more than you? Did you start at a young age? Were you never taught the value of hard work and making something of yourself so that you can be in position to truly help your neighbor? When did you start believing that it was the government's role to do that and that earning more money was a detriment to providing help to those truly in need?

Your hatred of the private sector is misguided. It was the private sector that gave you the freedom you have today to make a total fool of yourself and demonize the system that made this the economic powerhouse of the world. I sure benefited from it and get tired of hearing the bs coming from people like you. I probably donate more to charity than you make in a year and do more good with that investment than the dollars you want sent to the federal bureaucrats to spend it for me. Keep buying the liberal rhetoric and ignoring the liberal results.
Click to expand...

I don't blame the wealthy they don't know any better but the income inequality spiral cannot continue indefinitely without bringing down all of us in a painful way. Now that Republican are also talking about the income gap I would have thought you would be less of a prick about looking at ways to at least moderate the trend. I do understand that you want to protect that nest you have been feathering but doing nothing will endanger it too.

chart_income_inequality.top.gif


How the rich became the
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
What a bunch of bull****, the Rich aren't the problem liberal bureaucrats are as are the people that support them. You make up this bs based upon what you are told with no specifics to support your contention. There aren't enough that outsource or keep wages low to make a difference but that doesn't stop you from making the claim and hurting the vast majority in this to make a living for their family. Rather sad to see people like you spouting rhetoric not backed by any facts.
Click to expand...

You are the one without facts. There is plenty of data that suggest we are on course for disaster. Without a healthy middle class there will be no more America to be prosperous in. You need to face it, supply-side economics has failed and without change it is unsustainable. The wealthy can't keep racking up a larger and larger share of the economy forever. It will all come crashing down on our heads.

Income trends among 90% of Americans are relatively unchanged over the last decade. Nearly all segments of the population are moving relatively in proportion. Which is to say, they're barely moving at all.

But look at the top 10th percentile and a different story begins to emerge. The super wealthy are getting much richer, as everyone else's incomes are practically stagnant.

In 2009, the richest 10% of Americans accounted for about half the nation's wealth. Narrow that focus a bit further, and the trend is even more alarming. The top 0.1% -- those who make at least $2 million each year -- controlled 10% of the economy.

That's a far cry from the 1950s, when the suburban American dream ruled: the bottom 90% of Americans controlled about 68% of the economy
Click to expand...

How the rich became the
 
iguanaman said:
You are the one without facts. There is plenty of data that suggest we are on course for disaster. Without a healthy middle class there will be no more America to be prosperous in. You need to face it, supply-side economics has failed and without change it is unsustainable. The wealthy can't keep racking up a larger and larger share of the economy forever. It will all come crashing down on our heads.



How the rich became the
Click to expand...

encouraging class warfare, dependency on government handouts and bloated government is the real recipe for disaster-not the lack of collectivist income redistribution that the socialist left always clamors for so they can pretend they are helping the failures while dipping their beaks into the stream of confiscated wealth and gaining wealth and power from the votes of those given the money of other
 
AliHajiSheik said:
Ok, so government should not encourage risk investing. I have to ask: have you ever signed the front of a paycheck?
Click to expand...

There is a glut of money out there for risk investing, so much that the banks drive to get some of it caused the Great Recession. I think we can stop encouraging it now.
 
Blue_State said:
Submit a budget, let's debate it, show what you want to add with the tax money and let's if we can justify a tax increase.

I don't think it can be done.
Click to expand...

The government needs to learn to manage money. Once they do that, I believe that tax decreases would be justified.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom