Cutting taxes sounds great till

[Skull Pilot]

It's called natural law. There are consequences for bad behavior that come regardless of what the government does.

I understand what you're saying. I get it, you hate the government and wish it would be abolished, and would rather live in anarchy. That's your right to feel that way, and even though I disagree with you, I respect your views. But personally, I'm a little patriotic. I love my country and our constitution, and our system of government. It's not perfect, but I love living in a country were the people all band together to protect our common rights, and to strive for the common good.

Do you prefer giving a homeless man a dollar....or giving the government that dollar to give to the holmeess man and by the time it gets to him it is only worth 25 cents?

It is not a hatred for government. Our government was designed to do what it has done for nearly 300 years....but when it comes to spending...they just plain old suck at it.

Actually our government is doing much more than it was originally designed to do

 

[boedicca]

It's called natural law. There are consequences for bad behavior that come regardless of what the government does.

I understand what you're saying. I get it, you hate the government and wish it would be abolished, and would rather live in anarchy. That's your right to feel that way, and even though I disagree with you, I respect your views. But personally, I'm a little patriotic. I love my country and our constitution, and our system of government. It's not perfect, but I love living in a country were the people all band together to protect our common rights, and to strive for the common good.

Do you prefer giving a homeless man a dollar....or giving the government that dollar to give to the holmeess man and by the time it gets to him it is only worth 25 cents?

It is not a hatred for government. Our government was designed to do what it has done for nearly 300 years....but when it comes to spending...they just plain old suck at it.

Actually, it's the opposite problem. They are far too proficient at spending Other People's Money if one judges on Quantity vs. Quality.

 

[G.T.]

If Charity worked well to keep the homeless and the poor getting enough dollars so that they weren't adversely effecting the prosperity of the rest of the Country, there never would have been Welfare.

 

[Avatar4321]

Now, businesses that are taxed less and have less restrictions placed on them are more likely to grow, and thereby need to hire additional employees, but again that's up to them to determine how and when to hire people, not the Federal Government.

Okay. While I disagree with your analysis (I find it a little too simplistic, personally) at least you're articulating something cognent, unlike most people in this thread. So let me ask you this: If businesses, after being taxed less, still do not create jobs, being their prerogative, should they still enjoy having their taxes eased? How does that benefit the country?

Why would you think a business would be more likely to create more jobs when you syphon away their profits?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Now, businesses that are taxed less and have less restrictions placed on them are more likely to grow, and thereby need to hire additional employees, but again that's up to them to determine how and when to hire people, not the Federal Government.

Okay. While I disagree with your analysis (I find it a little too simplistic, personally) at least you're articulating something cognent, unlike most people in this thread. So let me ask you this: If businesses, after being taxed less, still do not create jobs, being their prerogative, should they still enjoy having their taxes eased? How does that benefit the country?

Private businesses do not exist to benefit the country.

 

[Bern80]

I know one thing is for sure, I am retired and fairly well off, but who is paying you guys to sit on this board 24/7. do any of you have a real JOB?

I highly doubt that. I'm highly skeptical that someone with such poor communication skills is well off. Now, I could be wrong, but still I'm skeptical.

I am sorry to hear that you are retired. I can't imagine not working. It's too much fun.

Ah, but are you really working then? This is the question I pose to you grasshoppa.

 

[Jarhead]

If Charity worked well to keep the homeless and the poor getting enough dollars so that they weren't adversely effecting the prosperity of the rest of the Country, there never would have been Welfare.

I do not agree with this.

Living in NYC area....welfare or not, nmo one starves to death and everyone has a roof over their head if they want it.
Soup kitchens, shelters. churches and temples...
you NEVER hear of ANYONE starving to death.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I know one thing is for sure, I am retired and fairly well off, but who is paying you guys to sit on this board 24/7. do any of you have a real JOB?

I highly doubt that. I'm highly skeptical that someone with such poor communication skills is well off. Now, I could be wrong, but still I'm skeptical.

I am sorry to hear that you are retired. I can't imagine not working. It's too much fun.

Ah, but are you really working then? This is the question I pose to you grasshoppa.

When you do what you love, you will never work a day in your life.

 

[G.T.]

If Charity worked well to keep the homeless and the poor getting enough dollars so that they weren't adversely effecting the prosperity of the rest of the Country, there never would have been Welfare.

I do not agree with this.

Living in NYC area....welfare or not, nmo one starves to death and everyone has a roof over their head if they want it.
Soup kitchens, shelters. churches and temples...
you NEVER hear of ANYONE starving to death.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

In NYC, there is Welfare, so how can you assume that without it there'd be enough Shelter and Food? You can't, quite frankly. Without the safety net, ESPECIALLY in NYC, Homelessness and Hunger existing now would be increased exponentially.

 

[The T]

Cutting taxes sounds great till those cuts affect you. America is understanding more every day about what is going on here since the election. Tax cutting has consequences and when most all the cuts go to help one sector of the nation while everything else is force to either cut benefits or programs or make the general public do without or get by with less.

What were told is govt is costing us too much, and it should be cut. Putting money in the hands of people who will create jobs was/is being the big push behind most tax cuts, but where are the JOBS?

People who have money have proven that if you can get to this point where you can use that money you can increase your wealth and never lift a finger, create a job, start a business or help anyone but their own self worth.

So what is the new group in congress all about, there is only one thing that shows up at every step of the process, make the rich have a better oppertunity to get wealthier and those in the middle made to pick up more of the cost of running our nation and our local govts.

So we get to that point when we have the top 20% who have anything they want, the next 20% who have a decent life and then the rest of you that have so little chance to improve it will be sad.

People who's moral compass changes as the situation effects them have no moral compass and are void of integrity.

Where are the jobs? Such an asanine questions presumes it's someone elses job to make sure you have a job in the first place. Newsflash: it isn't.

And companies don't exist just to give jobs either.

 

[The T]

I highly doubt that. I'm highly skeptical that someone with such poor communication skills is well off. Now, I could be wrong, but still I'm skeptical.

I am sorry to hear that you are retired. I can't imagine not working. It's too much fun.

Ah, but are you really working then? This is the question I pose to you grasshoppa.

When you do what you love, you will never work a day in your life.

Yep. And the pay is just gravy on top.

 

[Jarhead]

If Charity worked well to keep the homeless and the poor getting enough dollars so that they weren't adversely effecting the prosperity of the rest of the Country, there never would have been Welfare.

I do not agree with this.

Living in NYC area....welfare or not, nmo one starves to death and everyone has a roof over their head if they want it.
Soup kitchens, shelters. churches and temples...
you NEVER hear of ANYONE starving to death.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

In NYC, there is Welfare, so how can you assume that without it there'd be enough Shelter and Food? You can't, quite frankly. Without the safety net, ESPECIALLY in NYC, Homelessness and Hunger existing now would be increased exponentially.

And the availablilty of shelters and local charities would increase as well.
You are assuming the resources would remain constant.
It would not.

 

[gekaap]

Do you prefer giving a homeless man a dollar....or giving the government that dollar to give to the holmeess man and by the time it gets to him it is only worth 25 cents?

It is not a hatred for government. Our government was designed to do what it has done for nearly 300 years....but when it comes to spending...they just plain old suck at it.

Actually, I prefer giving him a ham sandwich. But that's not really the point. Avatar was invoking "natural law" and arguing that any act of "bad behavior" or what have you will naturally be punished sufficiently, and possibly better, than any government law can accomplish. IOW, there's no need for the government to prohibit murder. It's better to simply do away with such laws, and let the family of the victim exact personal vengeance, and let that fear be what keeps people in check in society. There's, apparently, no need for government, we're better without it. I, for one, reject such a notion, and I embrace the need for government in society, and I embrace the system of government that our constitution establishes. I may not always agree with where that system leads, but I'll take it over anarchy any day.

 

[gekaap]

Why would you think a business would be more likely to create more jobs when you syphon away their profits?

You weren't paying attention. Go back and read.

 

[G.T.]

I do not agree with this.

Living in NYC area....welfare or not, nmo one starves to death and everyone has a roof over their head if they want it.
Soup kitchens, shelters. churches and temples...
you NEVER hear of ANYONE starving to death.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

In NYC, there is Welfare, so how can you assume that without it there'd be enough Shelter and Food? You can't, quite frankly. Without the safety net, ESPECIALLY in NYC, Homelessness and Hunger existing now would be increased exponentially.

And the availablilty of shelters and local charities would increase as well.
You are assuming the resources would remain constant.
It would not.

If the resources would remain constant, there wouldn't be a Welfare.

Also, if Welfare was enough, there wouldn't be a Soup Kitchen.

 

[boedicca]

What if the homeless guy is a VEGAN? Wouldn't giving him a ham sammich offend him?

 

[MikeK]

Cutting taxes sound great until the economy improves, companies start investing and hiring, people and businesses work less hard to avoid taxes and government revenue goes up as it has for every tax cut in history.

[...]

If you study modern history you will find that reduced taxes on the rich contributed significantly to the Great Depression.

One of the most effective approaches to stimulating the economy during that period was Roosevelt's CCC program in which government construction and infrastructure rejuvenation projects were created and financed with money derived from increased taxes. Obama intended to do something similar but his proposed projects were stonewalled by the GOP and Republican governors.

I respectfully suggest that you do not allow yourself to be misled by the propaganda being put forth by the likes of Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Mahlsberg, Levin, O'Reilly, et. al. These people are millionaires or aspiring millionaires in the service of the rising plutocracy and their job is to recruit and delude as many decent, hard-working Americans as they can to serve as their misguided messengers. If you are a middle class American who has not yet been affected by the ambitions of this new Robber Baron cult of the super-rich, your time will surely come. Because their objective is to eliminate the middle class and the effects of their efforts thus far are plainly visible in the rapidly rising rate of poverty, unemployment and homelessness.

The way to repair the U.S. economy is to redistribute the Nation's wealth resources and the way to do that is to restore the tax rate to its pre-Reagan level. Doing so will not ruin the super-rich. It will just make them less rich.

 

[gekaap]

Private businesses do not exist to benefit the country.

You're right, businesses don't. That's what the government is for. I never said businesses existed for the well being of the country. I asked about government policies. If taxes on big businesses are reduced, in order to benefit the country with the hopes that such cuts will allow companies to create more jobs...but the jobs are not created, why should the government retain those tax cuts? What benefit to the country comes from such government policies?

 

[Bern80]

Now, businesses that are taxed less and have less restrictions placed on them are more likely to grow, and thereby need to hire additional employees, but again that's up to them to determine how and when to hire people, not the Federal Government.

Okay. While I disagree with your analysis (I find it a little too simplistic, personally) at least you're articulating something cognent, unlike most people in this thread. So let me ask you this: If businesses, after being taxed less, still do not create jobs, being their prerogative, should they still enjoy having their taxes eased? How does that benefit the country?

But that's what I really loved about my econ classes. The concepts were so easy to understand.

As price goes up, quantity demanded goes down. Makes sense.

As quantity supplied goes up, price goes down. Makes sense.

To answer your question I have to ask another question. You seem to want to penalize business for not creating jobs by taxing them more meaning they will have less money. How does THAT benefit the country in terms of job creation?

 

[Bern80]

Private businesses do not exist to benefit the country.

You're right, businesses don't. That's what the government is for. I never said businesses existed for the well being of the country. I asked about government policies. If taxes on big businesses are reduced, in order to benefit the country with the hopes that such cuts will allow companies to create more jobs...but the jobs are not created, why should the government retain those tax cuts? What benefit to the country comes from such government policies?

But by asking that, whether you say you know it or not, you're assuming the purpose of business is to benefit other people, thus leading you to conclude that if a business is not benefitting society it should be taxed more. Again I really don't see how taking more money from a business is beneficial to society either. The only way to believe that is to believe that government will do more good things with that extra money it's taking. THAT in turn asssumes a few things; that whatever government spends money on is beneficial to society AND that government trying to do more and more for society is really what is in societies best interest. And I have never believed absolving people of the repsonsibility of providing for themsleves what they are able to provide for themselves in societies best interest. Because human nature says most peope who don't really have to do something, won't, which will lead to weakening the society over all.