House Dems to call for expiration of Bush tax rates in debt-limit deal

quote TurtleDude

those who benefit the most are those who have full citizenship and pay no federal income taxes.

Click to expand...

Kinda looks like you're saying that a person that was making a subsistence wage in the early eighties and is doing the same now, is benefiting the most? At today’s subsistence wage?

they need to pay more if taxes have to be raised.

Click to expand...

I’m OK with poverty level wages earners paying the same % of their income in taxes that the top 1% pay.

when 95% of the country pay less taxes than the other 5% the problem is not what the five percent pay but what the rest do.

Click to expand...

When they are the only ones that have benefited for the last forty years… sure they should cough up with the dough.

you also labor under the delusion that those who are at the top "benefitted the most" from government.

Click to expand...

When were talking about earnings, me and almost every statistician in the country(not in some winger think tank) are operating under the same delusion.

we have always had people who prospered but its our poor who have improved their lots the most with the advent of welfare socialism and the only reason why they don't pay their fair share is because they have the same voting rights as those who have taxation and representation

Click to expand...

Yep, we should never have let them scoundrels pass the Fifteenth Amendment.:2wave:

So what you are saying is that a man should work hard most of his life, and when he dies he should expect just under half of the fruits of his labor be confiscated rather than passed onto his family?
And you think this is good and fair?

This is the strongest form of wealth destruction. What a person builds in their life should be passed onto those that were there with them through the good and the bad, not the government. It was taxed when they made it and taxed after they pulled it from investments in the form of capital gains tax and will be taxed when it is spent by those they bequeath it to. The government taking a large cut right off the top just illustrates how greedy it has become to grab every loose dollar they can to support a government that cannot live within its means.

People build wealth, the government takes it. Destroying wealth generationally should be something government never does, if only because that money will be there for the government to take throughout his or her life.

donc said:

Taxes are at the lowest level as a % of gdp since the fifties

Click to expand...

yes, when you expand government that rapidly, you lower revenue as a % of GDP, given as the federal government taxes itself, shall we say, somewhat less than it taxes income and investment.

we are the lowest taxed industrial nation.

Click to expand...

we also have the most progressive tax system of the industrialized nations. if we are low-taxed, it is because they tax their middle and lower classes more than we do.

Speaken of the fifties, consumer spending made up about 60% to 65% of gdp, which held until the gipper years of the early eighties, where it grew to 70%, which is where it is now.

Click to expand...

which is problematic agreed; and not a little bit due to our idiotic tax code, which rewards overspending but punishes thrift.

take out a HELOC to buy a new H2 and a 60-inch flatscreen? Hey, we'll give you a tax break and let you write off your interest.

tried to save for your later years? Pay up, mister rich guy.

:roll:

The only (real income) growth from the early eighties was concentrated at the top 1 percent, which increased 176% adjusted for inflation, versus 69% for the top 20% overall…

Click to expand...

the problem with establishing real income growth is the use of the CPI as a measuring tool. as goods move into and out of the basket (and improve qualitatively within it), "real" wages are driven down even as the standard of living that they support increases. So, for example, it costs more for a middle class family to own two personal computers in 2010 than it did for them to own 1 in 2000 and 0 in 1990 - and their "real wages" are driven down. It costs more to own two cars with a dozen safety upgrades, OnStar, and a GPS in 2010 than it did to own one car without those items in 1980 - and so the "real wages" of the consumer are driven down.

and so on and so forth.

Saying that we shouldn’t raise taxes is so much winger bull****. We should be raising taxes on those that have benefited the most.

Click to expand...

Medicare recipients?

OpportunityCost said:

So what you are saying is that a man should work hard most of his life, and when he dies he should expect just under half of the fruits of his labor be confiscated rather than passed onto his family?

Click to expand...

yup, and if he owned a family farm, it should be broken up and sold off rather than staying within the family. and if he owned a small business, it needs to be similarly broken up and sold off, with all the workers who were employed there being laid off. If they wanted to be able to take care of their families then they should have thought of that before they went to work for a Rich Guy.

we need to destroy inter-generational wealth development, you see, because only when people are utterly dependent upon the all-wise all-powerful government will we ever be free. some animals are more equal than others.