[POLL] - Liberals, how much is a "fair share?" - Taxes

[RKMBrown]

Even if you were able to take 90% of the one percentile's wealth and they did not run away, even then... what would stop them from deciding to pay themselves 8x more so they would end up with the same amount of incoming money as they had before? Oh and guess how they would do it... hire ten people to do your job in Asia, Africa for the price of a bowl of rice a day. Taxes are not a useful tool to correct bad behavior.

 

[PMZ]

How am I doing that? Nearly all of my income is personal income.

Wealth is goods and services created by workers. Money is token wealth.

What goods and services do you as a worker produce?

Wrong, money is a representation of resources. Resources includes tangible and intangible resources such as natural resources, ideas, and goods & services produced by workers.

As a worker I'm the sole author of Custom Insurance and Financial software products in use today by hundreds of corporations. I've also participated in the creation of hundreds of goods and services that are used by hundreds of millions of people. On a side note, I'm the author of hundreds of patents. How about you, what have you done?

How come I've never heard of you?

 

[PMZ]

wHAT'S THAT GOT TO DO WITH THE SUCCESS OF THE FLAT TAX IN THOSE COUNTRIES?

Because if the wealth distribution was flat, everyone the same, a Gini coefficient of 1, the purported goal of Communism, a flat tax would work fine.

However, the distribution was NOT flat. It was far worse than we have it as a matter of fact. The richest might not have been as rich as our rich are BUT the poor were FAR FAR FAR worse than the poorest here. Something that many seem completely unable to grasp when looking at something as vapid as income distribution.

The distribution in those areas was not even close to 1 and that has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that flat taxes were successful in those areas. The current distribution has nothing to do with flat taxes. The entire point of flat taxes is that they take away the government social engineering. What you also seem to miss entirely7 is that most of your mega rich are ONLY that rich as a direct result of that engineering. You know what that means – your progressive tax code is at the heart of terrible income distributions.

Evidence Pancho, evidence.

 

[RKMBrown]

Wealth is goods and services created by workers. Money is token wealth.

What goods and services do you as a worker produce?

Wrong, money is a representation of resources. Resources includes tangible and intangible resources such as natural resources, ideas, and goods & services produced by workers.

As a worker I'm the sole author of Custom Insurance and Financial software products in use today by hundreds of corporations. I've also participated in the creation of hundreds of goods and services that are used by hundreds of millions of people. On a side note, I'm the author of hundreds of patents. How about you, what have you done?

How come I've never heard of you?

6billion people on the planet, why would you expect to have heard of me?

 

[Gadawg73]

The Corporate Tax Rate Is Lowest in Decades; Is Business Paying Its Fair Share? | TIME.com

Federal Income Taxes on Middle-Income Families Remain Near Historic Lows ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

These Republicans. Their greed and selfishness has over powered their common sense. Freedom is expensive. It costs money. You have bastards like Mitt Romney saying the reason none of his five sons ever went into the military is because they were doing something more important. Helping him get elected president.

Where do most of our soldiers come from? The middle class and the poor. The very people Republicans want to screw over in the worst way.

And they cry about government taking their money. Fuckers should leave. Go someplace you can live for "free".

Listen up fucktards. It's NOT your country if you don't want to help pay for it.

Responsibility is a tough issue for conservatives. They like it in others, but hate it for themselves.

True. You can't get the right wing to take responsibility for anything except taking out Bin Laden. The one thing they had nothing to do with.

They take responsibility for themselves and their families without demanding government plunder the resources of what others earned to give to them.

 

[Gadawg73]

"mommy, Johnny has a bigger piece of pie than me. THAT IS NOT FAIR MOMMY"
We have a nation full of these folks now and they are over 18 and still act like children.

 

[PMZ]

Wrong, money is a representation of resources. Resources includes tangible and intangible resources such as natural resources, ideas, and goods & services produced by workers.

As a worker I'm the sole author of Custom Insurance and Financial software products in use today by hundreds of corporations. I've also participated in the creation of hundreds of goods and services that are used by hundreds of millions of people. On a side note, I'm the author of hundreds of patents. How about you, what have you done?

How come I've never heard of you?

6billion people on the planet, why would you expect to have heard of me?

Hundreds of patents. Rivaling Edison.

 

[PMZ]

Responsibility is a tough issue for conservatives. They like it in others, but hate it for themselves.

True. You can't get the right wing to take responsibility for anything except taking out Bin Laden. The one thing they had nothing to do with.

They take responsibility for themselves and their families without demanding government plunder the resources of what others earned to give to them.

For people who take care of themselves you certainly do an awful lot of childish whining.

 

[RKMBrown]

How come I've never heard of you?

6billion people on the planet, why would you expect to have heard of me?

Hundreds of patents. Rivaling Edison.

Typical lib, always making assumptions. You'll note I did not say I owned the patents, I was just the author. I was only in the top ten in my last company in filing patents for the company, and you will not have heard of any of us. Do you know the guys that worked for Edison? Yeah, well I don't. The people that we hear about are not the worker bees, its the CEOs, Actors, Athletes, Media, and Politicians.

 

[PMZ]

6billion people on the planet, why would you expect to have heard of me?

Hundreds of patents. Rivaling Edison.

Typical lib, always making assumptions. You'll note I did not say I owned the patents. I was only in the top ten in my last company in filing patents for the company, and you will not have heard of any of us. Do you know the guys that worked for Edison? Yeah, well I don't. The people that we hear about are not the worker bees, its the CEOs, Actors, Athletes, Media, and Politicians.

Fame = contribution?

Wow! The Kardasians are going to love that!

 

[RKMBrown]

Hundreds of patents. Rivaling Edison.

Typical lib, always making assumptions. You'll note I did not say I owned the patents. I was only in the top ten in my last company in filing patents for the company, and you will not have heard of any of us. Do you know the guys that worked for Edison? Yeah, well I don't. The people that we hear about are not the worker bees, its the CEOs, Actors, Athletes, Media, and Politicians.

Fame = contribution?

Wow! The Kardasians are going to love that!

Who said fame is contribution? Go back to doing your crossword old man.

 

[PMZ]

Typical lib, always making assumptions. You'll note I did not say I owned the patents. I was only in the top ten in my last company in filing patents for the company, and you will not have heard of any of us. Do you know the guys that worked for Edison? Yeah, well I don't. The people that we hear about are not the worker bees, its the CEOs, Actors, Athletes, Media, and Politicians.

Fame = contribution?

Wow! The Kardasians are going to love that!

Who said fame is contribution? Go back to doing your crossword old man.

'' Do you know the guys that worked for Edison? Yeah, well I don't. The people that we hear about are not the worker bees, its the CEOs, Actors, Athletes, Media, and Politicians.''

 

[RKMBrown]

Fame = contribution?

Wow! The Kardasians are going to love that!

Who said fame is contribution? Go back to doing your crossword old man.

'' Do you know the guys that worked for Edison? Yeah, well I don't. The people that we hear about are not the worker bees, its the CEOs, Actors, Athletes, Media, and Politicians.''

Who said fame is contribution?

 

[PMZ]

Who said fame is contribution? Go back to doing your crossword old man.

'' Do you know the guys that worked for Edison? Yeah, well I don't. The people that we hear about are not the worker bees, its the CEOs, Actors, Athletes, Media, and Politicians.''

Who said fame is contribution?

You seem quite slow today. Bad night last night?

 

[FA_Q2]

Because if the wealth distribution was flat, everyone the same, a Gini coefficient of 1, the purported goal of Communism, a flat tax would work fine.

However, the distribution was NOT flat. It was far worse than we have it as a matter of fact. The richest might not have been as rich as our rich are BUT the poor were FAR FAR FAR worse than the poorest here. Something that many seem completely unable to grasp when looking at something as vapid as income distribution.

The distribution in those areas was not even close to 1 and that has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that flat taxes were successful in those areas. The current distribution has nothing to do with flat taxes. The entire point of flat taxes is that they take away the government social engineering. What you also seem to miss entirely7 is that most of your mega rich are ONLY that rich as a direct result of that engineering. You know what that means – your progressive tax code is at the heart of terrible income distributions.

Evidence Pancho, evidence.

Typical. You make vapid claims and then demand that others provide evidence that you were never interested in presenting yourself (or even capable). Lets recap - we push the flat tax where you make the claim that it does not work. Then you are provided with places where it has indeed worked quite well. Then you push another claim that those examples are not applicable because income distribution. No evidence that the distribution was better or worse than here but that didn't matter to you. That was YOUR claim. You can go back that up whenever you want but I suspect that you are not going to bother.

I don't claim that it was better on paper anyway. The sad part is that income distribution is completely meaningless when everyone is dirt poor. It might LOOK better because there are not enough rich people to skew the numbers but it certainly is not better by any stretch of the imagination. The US ranks below countries like South Korea, Israel, Philippines and Turkey in income distribution yet I don't think that anyone here would believe they have better prospects in those nations than they do in this one. If you think Turkey is a better place to be economically then I suggest you try living there. You will find that such a measure is completely useless without looking at a MUCH larger picture than that single statistic. The Philippinesis even worse. The poverty there is extreme and yet they rank better than the US in income distribution.

Useless statistic is, well, useless.

Oh, as far as evidence: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2172rank.html




Sent from my ADR8995 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Foxfyre]

Fall out from Obamacare to date:

1. Two of my friends have been laid off as companies are downsizing due to Obamacare.

2. Several (not sure exactly how many) have had their hours cut from full time to part time due to Obamacare.

3. Two (different) friends still working full time have lost their healthcare insurance through their employer who could not afford the gigantic increase in the premium.

4. Hundreds are out of work here because companies they once could depend on to hire them are not hiring now - due to Obamacare.

5. Mr. Foxfyre and my Medicare premiums have been increased a whopping 38% while many things Medicare once covered are no longer covered and most of the copays have doubled or more - due to Obamacare.

6. Mr. Foxfyre's beloved primary physician is taking early retirement this year because he just can't cope with the ridiculous regulations, extra paperwork, and unjustifiable restrictions imposed by Obamacare. Among a dozen doctors that my aged Aunt and Uncle have to see for their mutliple health issues, one--count it ONE--of those doctors is American born. This is going to be the norm as fewer and fewer Americans are willing to jump through government hoops that are now required in healthcare.

7. Every local hospital is laying off staff and the understaffing has become very apparent to those needing healthcare in those institut6ions. All due to Obamacare.

Now then you 'fair share' people, the Supreme Court has ruled Obamacare legal only because it is a TAX. Do you think we're all getting our fair share of benefits for the whopping big increase in that tax most of us will have to pay?

 

[emilynghiem]

1. I answered a flat rate for everyone.
a. in truth, I believe it should be proportional, that if you commit crimes or abuses that cost taxpayers money you should be held accountable for the amount that you incur, and that exercising rights of citizenship should be based on such an agreement
b. I believe 10% would be a good rate because the math would be instant and cut down on excessive calculations, paperwork, errors etc.
I still believe people should be rewarded for tax deductions for investing in sustainable effective services and solutions which replaces govt having to provide for these costs

2. so in short the same way people have a tradition of donating 10% to churches or charity equivalents, govt should be the same way. If you can do a better job than govt, you should have the option to invest your taxes directly into better solutions. Where govt works well, I don't see that people have a problem paying voluntarily. Where people are incurring added costs to govt and public taxpayers, that's where financial accountability should be enforced. I believe we could clean up the criminal justice system this way and use that to fund health care, housing and education with the billions in taxes already wasted on crimes and abuses.

3. Also for services/duties that all people and parties agree belong on the federal level, the income taxes should cover that. But for things like health care we disagree on politically, I believe such programs or policies should be funded by party or other affiliation. So maybe local taxes can be paid to the party of one's choice to cover programs not agreed by all. If you want it, you fund it; similar to churches or other charities funded freely by choice.

 

[emilynghiem]

P.S. whoever voted for 91%
yeah that works if you're not the ones putting in the most income to cover those without

Who is going to join that group and pay for it?

Like going to dinner and sitting at the table where everyone agrees that everyone else with money is going to pay the whole bill for everyone who doesn't have enough to pay in.

So all the people with money sit at the table where people each pay for their own meal.
And all the people without sit at the table waiting for other people to pay for them?

How does that work?

P.S. This can work if you have charitable people AGREEING to cover the difference where people don't have equal ability to pay. But that becomes a voluntarily system.

My brother complained that when my older sister was in charge of splitting the cost of a suit for my mother, she insisted younger siblings still in school without jobs paid the same amount as those who had money.

When I was splitting the cost of an antique table as a present among family members,
I ended up paying the share of people who even had more money than I did
but never got around to paying. I wrote that off because that family always hosts the Christmas dinners and does all the cooking and cleaning up for everyone else.

So just watch who you put in charge before you decide you really want everyone sharing equally. It rarely comes out that way. Usually there is some adjustment so it depends on the situation.

If you voted for this because you already segregate yourself from or discriminate against "rich people" instead of treating people equally that's already a problem.

Fair negotiations require working together to accommodate differences with equal respect.

 

[RKMBrown]

'' Do you know the guys that worked for Edison? Yeah, well I don't. The people that we hear about are not the worker bees, its the CEOs, Actors, Athletes, Media, and Politicians.''

Who said fame is contribution?

You seem quite slow today. Bad night last night?

Nope not at all. Who said fame is contribution?

 

[PMZ]

Who said fame is contribution?

You seem quite slow today. Bad night last night?

Nope not at all. Who said fame is contribution?

You did. I showed you your quote. Now you're trying to claim that it doesn't say what it says. Desperate.