Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

[Toddsterpatriot]

What's awful about raising other people's taxes?

"Ronald Reagan is loved by conservatives and was loved by big business throughout his presidency and there's a reason for it.

When Reagan came into office in January of 1981, the top tax rate was 70%, but when he left office in 1989 the top tax rate was down to only 28%.

"As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government.

"In order to bring money back into the government, Reagan was forced to raise taxes eleven times throughout his time in office.

"One example was when he signed into law the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982.

"Reagan raised taxes seven of the eight years he was in office and the tax increases were felt hardest by the lower and middle class."

Surely you're not too stupid to doubt Reagan was anything except a corporate tool (like you)

10 reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime - Orlando liberal | Examiner.com

"As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government.

Prove it. Use facts and numbers, not feelings.

Let us see if we agree on some facts and numbers.
Revenues for the 1980s increased by 99.6%.
Does that sound factual or sentimental to you?

Wait, revenues increased in the 1980s?
But you said there was a lack of revenue.
Were you lying, or stupid?

 

[OnePercenter]

We get it. You hate rich people.

Stay poor my friend.

Liberals don't hate rich people you moron. They hate the inequitable system that currently exists under which wages, benefits and wealth are all rising for the top 5% only. Wages need to go up for everyone, not just the wealthy. The wealthy need to be taxed at the same or higher rates than the middle class. Jobs need to be created that pay living wages, not just minimum wage service sector jobs.

If the poor and middle class, don't start getting a fair shake in wages taxes, the US will turn into a Third World country. This is the economic legacy of Ronnie Reagan and the Friedman economists.

The wealthy need to be taxed at the same or higher rates than the middle class.

They are taxed at a higher rate.
Will your whining end now?

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Increases in the debt started with the late 80's recessions and increased even more with the 82 recession. A lot of the increase in spending was due to military spending which would establish increased spending levels into the future.

It was all very effective. Reaganomics worked. I am not sure why people try and act like Reagan didn't use debt spending to help the economy when he so clearly did.

If deficit spending was good for the economy, then it should be booming right now, shouldn't it?

How do all you libturd morons explain the failure of deficit spending to work during the Obama administration?

Why do you think it didn't work????
The US would be in a much deeper depression if not for deficit spending.

And it's not all speculation. First, this is what economics textbook have been saying all along. And, for a change, this time we have experimental results -- in Europe some governments had to cut spending, while others let it grow. And the more a government had to cut spending, the deeper was depression:

Your chart doesn't prove anything at all.

The reason for that is quite simple, it is unreadable. What is change in G? How does it measure private demand? What period of time is covered?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We get it. You hate rich people.

Stay poor my friend.

Liberals don't hate rich people you moron. They hate the inequitable system that currently exists under which wages, benefits and wealth are all rising for the top 5% only. Wages need to go up for everyone, not just the wealthy. The wealthy need to be taxed at the same or higher rates than the middle class. Jobs need to be created that pay living wages, not just minimum wage service sector jobs.

If the poor and middle class, don't start getting a fair shake in wages taxes, the US will turn into a Third World country. This is the economic legacy of Ronnie Reagan and the Friedman economists.

They hate the government?

Forgive me, but I can't tell.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Liberals don't hate rich people you moron. They hate the inequitable system that currently exists under which wages, benefits and wealth are all rising for the top 5% only. Wages need to go up for everyone, not just the wealthy. The wealthy need to be taxed at the same or higher rates than the middle class. Jobs need to be created that pay living wages, not just minimum wage service sector jobs.

If the poor and middle class, don't start getting a fair shake in wages taxes, the US will turn into a Third World country. This is the economic legacy of Ronnie Reagan and the Friedman economists.

The wealthy need to be taxed at the same or higher rates than the middle class.

They are taxed at a higher rate.
Will your whining end now?

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

 

[Bombur]

The wealthy need to be taxed at the same or higher rates than the middle class.

They are taxed at a higher rate.
Will your whining end now?

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

Those who have a lot of capital gains. If you include payroll taxes the issue is even more pronounced.

 

[bayoubill]

Where is Democracy to be found in a world where the three richest individuals have assets that exceed the combined GDP of 47 countries?

A world where the richest 2% of global citizens "own" more than 51% of global assets?

Ready for the best part?

Capitalism ensures an already bad problem will only get worse.

"The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) states that income inequality 'first started to rise in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s in America and Britain (and also in Israel)'.

"The ratio between the average incomes of the top 5 per cent to the bottom 5 per cent in the world increased from 78:1 in 1988, to 114:1 in 1993..."

"Stiglitz relays that from 1988 to 2008 people in the world’s top 1 per cent saw their incomes increase by 60 per cent, while those in the bottom 5 per cent had no change in their income.

"In America, home to the 2008 recession, from 2009 to 2012, incomes of the top 1 per cent in America, many of which no doubt had a greedy hand in the causes of the meltdown, increased more than 31 per cent, while the incomes of the 99 per cent grew 0.4 per cent less than half a percentage point."

Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality

There are alternatives that don't require infinite "growth."

folks that put this kinda crap up will insist that the economic pie is a zero-sum equation...

but it ain't... capital is built up and increased by the hard work and sweat of millions of lowly folks workin' their asses off...

'n if you don't know what I'm talkin' about... go take a lesson in basic economics...

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

Those who have a lot of capital gains. If you include payroll taxes the issue is even more pronounced.

Poor people with capital gains pay the same rate, but don't let the facts spoil your rant.

 

[Bombur]

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

Those who have a lot of capital gains. If you include payroll taxes the issue is even more pronounced.

Poor people with capital gains pay the same rate, but don't let the facts spoil your rant.

Don't worry you didn't.

 

[OnePercenter]

The wealthy need to be taxed at the same or higher rates than the middle class.

They are taxed at a higher rate.
Will your whining end now?

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

All of them.

Last year I paid 3% effective.

Romney, after the additional six moths of moving numbers paid 12%.

The average middle-class American pay 15% average.

 

[bripat9643]

Liberals don't hate rich people you moron. They hate the inequitable system that currently exists under which wages, benefits and wealth are all rising for the top 5% only. Wages need to go up for everyone, not just the wealthy. The wealthy need to be taxed at the same or higher rates than the middle class. Jobs need to be created that pay living wages, not just minimum wage service sector jobs.

If the poor and middle class, don't start getting a fair shake in wages taxes, the US will turn into a Third World country. This is the economic legacy of Ronnie Reagan and the Friedman economists.

The wealthy need to be taxed at the same or higher rates than the middle class.

They are taxed at a higher rate.
Will your whining end now?

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Congress can't vote on an "effective tax rate." They can only vote on actual tax rates.

 

[bripat9643]

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

Those who have a lot of capital gains. If you include payroll taxes the issue is even more pronounced.

So you want to raise the tax rate on capital gains to 40%?

That will do wonders for the economy.

 

[bayoubill]

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

Those who have a lot of capital gains. If you include payroll taxes the issue is even more pronounced.

higher capital-gains taxes only inhibits the capital holders from budging from where they are now... and mebbe moving their money into areas that can create appreciable economic growth...

bujt I 'spect you're too dense to understand what I'm talking about...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

Those who have a lot of capital gains. If you include payroll taxes the issue is even more pronounced.

Poor people with capital gains pay the same rate, but don't let the facts spoil your rant.

Poor people with capital gains pay a lower rate.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

All of them.

Last year I paid 3% effective.

Romney, after the additional six moths of moving numbers paid 12%.

The average middle-class American pay 15% average.

Last year I paid 3% effective.

Show me.

Romney, after the additional six moths of moving numbers paid 12%.

If most of your income is taxed at 15% and you donate millions to charity, your rate would drop below 15% as well.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

Those who have a lot of capital gains. If you include payroll taxes the issue is even more pronounced.

The government already had one bite at that apple( Capital gains).
I've heard this music before. You flaming libs are incensed that you cannot get your sticky hands on capital gains income.
Why is it you feel entitled to take from people that which you have no right?

 

[thereisnospoon]

It's about equality of opportunity to share equally in the steadily rising US productivity over the last forty years. If the minimum wage increase during that time period had matched that of the richest 1%, so would all other income quintiles. The richest 1% earned about 8% of US income in the 70s and they earn almost 25% today. Their gain didn't come from working harder or from longer hours; it came from bribing politicians from both parties for favorable tax and trade policies. Had US workers shared proportionally in the productivity gains since the 80s, the richest 1% would have much less and everyone else would have more. Relatively speaking, you can think of it as Economic Democracy.

Share? There is no "share"....What someone else's income may be is nobody else's business.
Productivity rises with for example, technology, education and technical training. Productivity is realized when fewer people are required to increase output.
The most wealthy people are not the stereotypical blue blooded Greenwich CT mansion dwelling people you equate with wealth. The fact is most wealthy people work very hard to earn their wages. They also take the highest risk.
The one constant is this. Higher education and better training lead to higher wages. It has to be that way.
BTW, opportunity is EARNED. Not given. Not deserved.
There are far too many of us who work hard so that we may EARN opportunity to see it given away to those who refuse to make it their business to improve their skill set so that they are in the running for higher pay.

Where did you get the idea opportunity was something you had to earn, and who have you selected as the judge for deciding who among us deserves opportunity?

"op·por·tu·ni·ty noun \ˌä-pər-ˈtü-nə-tē, -ˈtyü-\
: an amount of time or a situation in which something can be done
plural op·por·tu·ni·ties

Full Definition of OPPORTUNITY

1
: a favorable juncture of circumstances <the halt provided an opportunity for rest and refreshment>
2
: a good chance for advancement or progress"

Opportunity - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

ok....I own a business. I post on line an ad for applicants in my landscaping company. I am looking for a supervisor with a ground applicators license and prefer at least an associates degree in turf management. Plus I prefer at least two years combined supervisory and practical experience.
I get two applicants looking for an opportunity to work for me in a supervisory capacity.
One has no supervisory experience but has a turf degree. The other meets all of the criteria in the ad. The latter by meeting the criteria has EARNED the opportunity to come work for me. While the former has not. Very simple concept.
By acquiring certain skills, the second applicant EARNED that opportunity.
You object to this concept, why?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Or the rich should pay the same effective rate as the middle class.

Which rich pay a lower effective rate?
Show me.

All of them.

Last year I paid 3% effective.

Romney, after the additional six moths of moving numbers paid 12%.

The average middle-class American pay 15% average.

3%...Despite the fact that you think that is unfair, you certainly kept the money though, didn't you?
BTW, you were for specific people who paid effective rates to which you object.
One other thing...There is no nobility in giving more of your earnings to government.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Those who have a lot of capital gains. If you include payroll taxes the issue is even more pronounced.

Poor people with capital gains pay the same rate, but don't let the facts spoil your rant.

Poor people with capital gains pay a lower rate.

They pay based on the amount of capital gains they earn, just like Warren Buffett.

 

[ilia25]

If deficit spending was good for the economy, then it should be booming right now, shouldn't it?

How do all you libturd morons explain the failure of deficit spending to work during the Obama administration?

Why do you think it didn't work????
The US would be in a much deeper depression if not for deficit spending.

And it's not all speculation. First, this is what economics textbook have been saying all along. And, for a change, this time we have experimental results -- in Europe some governments had to cut spending, while others let it grow. And the more a government had to cut spending, the deeper was depression:

Your chart doesn't prove anything at all.

The reason for that is quite simple, it is unreadable. What is change in G? How does it measure private demand? What period of time is covered?

The chart is only unreadable if you don't want to read it. Change in G, as you might have guessed, is change in the govt. spending. Private demand is measured by private spending, how else?.. And the depression stared in 2008, so i guess it is from that time till now or maybe a year ago -- but it does not really matter, whether these changes happened in 2 years, or in five.