Majority of Americans favor wealth tax on very rich: Reuters/Ipsos poll

[Bush92]

National Debt No Big Deal? More Economists Unconcerned With Trillion-Dollar Government Deficits

he Congressional Budget Office estimates that the federal budget deficit for fiscal year 2019, which ended September 30, was $984 billion. That is about 4.7 percent of the American gross domestic product, and fiscal year 2019 marks the fourth year in a row that the federal deficit increased as a percentage of GDP. Through 2029, if current spending trends continue, the CBO projects that the total national debt will reach $29.3 trillion, or 95 percent of GDP.

That sounds scary to a lot of laypeople. But more and more economists look at those projections, and shrug.

High national debt levels have long been thought to cause interest rates to rise. Investors are supposed to demand higher returns for taking on additional risk, and national debt levels that are too high could stifle growth or trigger inflation. Yet, investors have remained eager to lend to the United States, without seeming to care how much it borrows. It’s been a safe bet. So far, we do not seem to be close to the “too high” threshold.

One thing that is clear: the modern national debt does not function just like a household debt, which is how it was sold as a campaign issue by the deficit hawks who pretended to care about deficit spending before Trump was elected. More national debt is not “bad” under any and all conditions, and less is not “good” under any and all conditions. It really depends on what you’re doing with the money. Try as I might to make it happen though, I don’t think “it’s more complicated than that” will ever really catch on as a successful campaign rally chant.

I’ve said this a thousand times before...those here whom love to pretend to care about the debt and deficit spending refuse to wrap their heads around the fact that this nation has obviously reached the point where it will always carry a debt-load relative to GDP.
Trust me when I tell you...none of the self proclaimed fiscally responsible here can tell you how their quality of lives are impacted by debt and spending nor can they tell you how their children and grandchildren will be affected by it....All they know is they are supposed to be outraged by it if the Orange Man is writing the checks...that’s all.
Ain’t that right Golfing Gator ?

That is what I was asking myself. WHO exactly are my children/grandchildren going to owe money too? It seems our country isn't the only country that owes money to other countries, and the countries we owe money to owe money too!

What
The problem is going to be maintaining the debt

As we all know government spends more than it takes in

When interest rates rise as they inevitably will more of our taxes paid will go to the debt holders and less will go to government services

and when that happens we are all screwed

Like I said earlier, the more money the government takes in, the more and more and more it spends.

We should definitely demand that they be accountable for every SINGLE penny that they spend, and it should be examined with a fine tooth comb.

Giving the federal government more $$$ is like giving more heroin to an addict. They can never get enough.

 

[ChrisL]

I would love nothing more for us to be an isolationist nation, but I think it is a bit late for that. We are a part of the great "one world economy" now.

 

[Bush92]

You democrats want a "global economy?" Then be prepared to go to war to protect it.

Spot on!

 

[LaDairis]

Because Saddam Hussein was a pain in the ass who was affecting the "global economy."

This apparently is the latest post 1998 Republican reason for the Iraq invasion in 2003.

Notice..... no mention of WMD, no mention of 911, and carefully worded to not mention the real reason


ISRAEL WANTED THE US TO INVADE IRAQ, and ISRAEL IS WHO WANTS US TO STAY THERE

 

[Bush92]

The invasion of Iraq

Tucker Carlson of Fox had a "$$ trillions" as the total cost of invading Iraq to date....


Why did we invade Iraq?

Did Iraq have WMD? NO
Was Iraq a threat? NO
Did Iraq have anything to do with 911? NO


So tell us, supporter of Israel, WHY did we, the United States, invade Iraq, and cost ourselves TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS according to the "news" network that supported the Iraq invasion the most - and they ALL supported it....

Because Saddam Hussein was a pain in the ass who was affecting the "global economy."

Global oil supply. I fought his Republican Guard.

 

[j-mac]

Really, please quote where I said that, or quit lying for a quippy rhetorical slap....It's stupid.

I have mentoined the debt in like 5 post in a row and you never once agreed it was a problem, why is that if you view it as such?

Because we haven't gotten to a place where we can discuss that...If I can't get answers to my questions, why should I answer yours?

If I were king for a day I would raise everyone's taxes enough to cover every bit of planned spending along with 10% extra to pay down the debt.

So what does that look like to the average working American, that is working each day to cover their bills? Let's make it easy....Say a family of 4 making $80K a year, with a mortgage, and a car payment.....They pay now about $20K a year in taxes to the federal government, what would their increase be?

I would make everyone feel the pain so they know what all the spending we have really cost. Then see if people cry out for a cut in spending or not.

What do you see as the ramifications to the economy in that world?

As for spending, I would start with 15% across the board in every department in the government, 3% per year for 5 years. Then after that I would make more targeted spending cuts.

You could achieve the same results with spending freezes and the penny plan.

You say you agree, but who was the last person you voted for that actually cut spending?

Who I voted for is irrelavant, as much so as who YOU voted for....Our individual representitives don't work in a bubble...Plus, this isn't about me....

 

[Nostra]

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - The idea of imposing a wealth tax on the richest Americans has elicited sharply divergent views across a spectrum of politicians, with President Donald Trump branding it socialist and progressive Democratic presidential contenders Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders prominently endorsing it.

snip

Among the 4,441 respondents to the poll, 64% strongly or somewhat agreed that “the very rich should contribute an extra share of their total wealth each year to support public programs” - the essence of a wealth tax. Results were similar across gender, race and household income. While support among Democrats was stronger, at 77%, a majority of Republicans, 53%, also agreed with the idea.

Majority of Americans favor wealth tax on very rich: Reuters/Ipsos poll

If this is true, then the experiment called the United States of America as we know it is done....

The United States as we know it is done, because of the will of the majority of the United States?

Interesting concept.

Well, that's right....America was never a pure democracy....And when you have a 50+1% that can vote to steal from the other 49.99% then yes, that's a problem.

Which is why the 99% that are being stolen from by the 1%, are demanding the Great Republican Tax Scam be repealed.

Which it's going to be.

Everyone got a tax cut, dummy.

 

[j-mac]

You really think that insults are winning the debate?

What does post #33 say?

Do I have to re-post it for you to actually read it???

Sure, I don't go on goose chases. Besides, you don't control the debate.

 

[LaDairis]

Global oil supply. I fought his Republican Guard.

and another reason..... not

getting yellowcake from Niger
imminent nuclear threat
our cities are about to be nuked by Saddam


What percent of global oil was Iraq in 2003, and were they not pumping it out big time??


Every reason given for invading Iraq in 2003 by post 1998 GOP supporters is 100% BULLSHIT.


It starts here, in Book of Joshua....


Joshua 1 - NIV Bible - After the death of Moses the servant of the LORD,...


"
Joshua Installed as Leader
1 After the death of Moses the servant of the LORD, the LORD said to Joshua son of Nun, Moses’ aide:
2 “Moses my servant is dead. Now then, you and all these people, get ready to cross the Jordan River into the land I am about to give to them—to the Israelites.
3 I will give you every place where you set your foot, as I promised Moses.
4 Your territory will extend from the desert to Lebanon, and from the great river, the Euphrates—all the Hittite country—to the Mediterranean Sea in the west.




According to Da BiBULL, Promised Land ISRAEL extends to the Euphrates River.... in IRAQ......

and that explains why Dianne Feinstein and Lindsay Graham were 100% for a US invasion of Iraq regardless of reason....

 

[j-mac]

Society is a collective effort. Everyone in the society benefits from the others in that society. The amount one benefits, or profits, should indicate the level that the person participates, especially monetarily. That is only fair. It should be voluntary, like tithing.

Society is a collective effort? Maybe in the old USSR, or California....How's that workin out for them?

 

[Nostra]

Our taxation system should NOT be used for democrats' social justice schemes. That is not what it is all about, and that is not what America is all about.

Wrong. That is exactly what taxes are for, and exactly what America is about.

What our taxes are not for is subsidies to oil companies, and defense contractors.

That is not what our taxes are for, or what America is about.

And just so you know, the general welfare of the people is not a scheme. Taking away the general welfare of the people to enrich a few is a scheme.

Wrong. Taxes are to fund the very few things the govt is allowed to do by the Constitution.

They have been hijacked.

 

[Bush92]

hold our elected officials accountable for their spending, keep voting them out till someone cuts spending

The "US" media doesn't do that.

The Democrats do not care.

The post 1998 Republicans do not understand basic math and only care about killing Muslims until FRAUD JESUS floats down from the clouds....


The LIBERTARIAN PARTY is our ONLY HOPE

The only thing I would change is that it is post 1980 Repubs that do not care

I like the Libertarian Party...but their view on globalization and foreign policy are ridiculous.

 

[LaDairis]

Sure, I don't go on goose chases. Besides, you don't control the debate

Translation - I accused you of not posting your ideas, and when you informed me you already did, and provided the exact post number, I got pissed off and changed the subject

 

[Nostra]

Wealth-tax supporters do not seem concerned about the likely damage to economic growth. But they should know that from a practical standpoint, wealth taxes in other countries have raised little money and have been a beast to administer.

More than a dozen European countries used to have wealth taxes, but nearly all of these countries repealed them, including Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Sweden. Wealth taxes survive only in Norway, Spain, and Switzerland.

Before repeal, European wealth taxes — with a variety of rates and bases — tended to raise only about 0.2 percent of gross domestic product in revenue, based on Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data. That is only 1/40th as much as the U.S. federal income tax raises.

Yet for little revenue, wealth taxes are difficult to administer and enforce. They may require taxpayers to report the values of financial securities, homes, furniture, artwork, jewelry, antiques, vehicles, boats, pension rights, family businesses, farm assets, land, intellectual property, and much else. But owners do not know the market values of many assets, and values change over time, so costly wealth-tax compliance would only make accountants wealthy.

And what about wealth held abroad? There is no way the Internal Revenue Service would be able to track down and value everything U.S. residents owned on a global basis.

In the 1970s, the British Labour government pushed for a national wealth tax and failed. The minister in charge, Denis Healey, said in his memoirs, “We had committed ourselves to a Wealth Tax; but in five years I found it impossible to draft one which would yield enough revenue to be worth the administrative cost and political hassle.”

Another problem is that wealth taxes have disappearing tax bases. In Europe, politicians carved out an increasing number of exemptions from tax bases to appease special interests. Exemptions were often provided for farm assets, small businesses, pension assets, artwork, and other items.

And here’s the kicker: Since the base of wealth taxes is net wealth, debt is deductible. That allowed wealthy Europeans to jack up their borrowing and invest in the exempted assets to shrink their tax bases. If a wealth tax were imposed in the United States, the farm lobby would most certainly get farmland excluded. Then rich people would borrow heavily and invest in farmland, thus shrinking the tax base and distorting the economy.

Magnus Henrekson and Gunnar Du Rietz studied the history of the Swedish wealth tax. They found that “people could with impunity evade the tax by taking appropriate measures,” including taking on excessive debt to buy exempted assets.

The Swedish wealth tax also prompted large outflows of capital and the expatriation of well-known business people, such as the founder of Ikea, Ingvar Kamprad. Henrekson and Du Rietz conclude, “The magnitude of these outflows was a major motivation for the repeal of the wealth tax in 2007.”

It was the same story with the French wealth tax, which was imposed in 1982 and repealed in 2017. Over the years, a parade of French businesspeople and celebrities left the country to avoid the tax — many going to Belgium, which is also a high-tax country but has no wealth tax. The government estimated in 2017 that “some 10,000 people with 35 billion euros worth of assets left in the past 15 years” for tax reasons. French economist Eric Pichet estimated that the outflows were much larger.

As the wealthy moved abroad, the government lost revenues from a range of other taxes they would have paid. Pichet calculated that while the wealth tax raised about 3.5 billion euros a year, the government lost 7 billion euros a year from reductions in other taxes.

In a 2018 article for the International Monetary Fund, economists James Brumby and Michael Keen conclude: “The design of wealth taxes is notoriously prone to lobbying and the granting of exemptions that the wealthiest can exploit. Furthermore, the rich have proved adept avoiding or evading taxes by placing their wealth abroad in low tax jurisdictions.”
.
.
If liberals want tax fairness, they should push to close existing income-tax loopholes. The tax exemption for municipal-bond interest, for example, would be a good target because it mainly benefits the wealthy. Closing such loopholes would reduce distortions and simplify taxation — the exact opposite effects of adding a wealth tax.

Why European Nations Ended Wealth Taxes | National Review


Progressive Liberals always make the same mistake: they get out the calculators and look at the best estimates of current wealth and figure out that by taking 1% or 2% (whatever) of all that means they get hundreds of billions of dollars in more revenue. Except that it never works out that way. NEVER HAS AND NEVER WILL. Why? Because rich people can afford to find ways to reduce their tax burden one way or another, hook or crook. They hire smart people to find loopholes or bribe the pols to create loopholes and then they exploit them. Or they flat out sell out, pack up, and leave. There's an associated cost to that for our economy.

Dimwingers will ignore history.

 

[j-mac]

Because Saddam Hussein was a pain in the ass who was affecting the "global economy."

This apparently is the latest post 1998 Republican reason for the Iraq invasion in 2003.

Notice..... no mention of WMD, no mention of 911, and carefully worded to not mention the real reason


ISRAEL WANTED THE US TO INVADE IRAQ, and ISRAEL IS WHO WANTS US TO STAY THERE

Oh, so it was the JOOOOOOS eh? Get out with that BS.

 

[LaDairis]

but their view on globalization and foreign policy are ridiculous.

Yeah, they don't actually have a one sentence platform like the post 1998 GOP

THE US exists to serve, fund, defend, and expand Israel until FRAUD JESUS floats down from the clouds.....


Gosh, the nerve of those Libertarians.....

 

[Bush92]

Society is a collective effort. Everyone in the society benefits from the others in that society. The amount one benefits, or profits, should indicate the level that the person participates, especially monetarily. That is only fair. It should be voluntary, like tithing.

Society is a collective effort? Maybe in the old USSR, or California....How's that workin out for them?

The only collective effort required of Americans is to pay taxes, defend your nation, and be a responsible citizen. Democrats and socialist don’t subscribe to this. They think the collective effort should be to think exactly as they do.

 

[BrokeLoser]

We need to energize the Libertarian Party. It is our only hope.

Haha..,good luck with that.
See, you’ve degraded the moral fabric and foundation of this once great nation by recruiting 100 million filthy wetbacks to the fold...these disgusting subhumans love free shit, they NEED free shit, they think they are owed free shit...They will never vote for anybody fiscally responsible.

 

[j-mac]

Sure, I don't go on goose chases. Besides, you don't control the debate

Translation - I accused you of not posting your ideas, and when you informed me you already did, and provided the exact post number, I got pissed off and changed the subject

You asked if I wanted you to repost it and I said sure....If you didn't want to why'd you say you would....I see, it's easier to now start attacking me personally....Ok.

 

[LaDairis]

Oh, so it was the JOOOOOOS eh? Get out with that BS.

From liberals like Ed Koch, Feinstein, Schumer, Waxman etc. to "conservatives" like Graham, Peter King, Billy Graham (oppps, you might think those actually are "Chrsitians" and not JEWS disguised as Chrsitians).....

Jewish support for a US war with Iraq became overwhelming when Jewish leaders pilloried HW for not occupying Iraq....

HW "didn't finish the job" was the parrot line....

HW did AMERICA's JOB.

W did ISRAEL's.....