Shifting the tax burden to the wealthy class does NOT harm the economy

[OnePercenter]

[
The rich in this country already pay at least 60% percent of the taxes paid. How much more would you like them to pay??

We have at least 49% who pay no Fed taxes at all. Looks to me like they get a free ride at some one else's expense.

Perhaps that 49% should start contributing. Would be nice doncha think??

If you're upset because American workers don't make enough to pay federal taxes then you should push for my plan......doncha think?


-Base Federal tax for corporations at 30% of revenue.

-Raise minimum wage to $23.50/hr. Based on where minimum wage should be using 1970-2015 rise in food, shelter, and transportation.

-Eliminate all business subsidies (deductions/write-offs/write-downs) except for employee expenses which are deducted dollar-for-dollar on all city, state, and Federal taxes and fees with the Feds refunding city, State, and fees.

-Companies with 500 employees or less, employee expenses above the deduction are subsidized at 100% with funds usually give back to the States.

-Adjust Social Security and private/public retirement and pension payments using 1970-2015 price structure.

-Remove the FICA limit.

-Back down ALL costs, prices, fees, to January 1, 2009 levels and hold them for 10 years which will eliminate inflation.

-Recall ALL off-shore investments tax free, and disallow any further off-shore investments.

-Make inversion illegal.

My plan would reduce small business costs for employees and taxes to 30%. That's a 15%-30% drop.



My plan would put BILLIONS into the economy daily.



My plan would put the $100 trillion plus currently owned by corporate America back into the economy.



My plan would end all welfare.



My plan would significantly increase social security and pension payments.



My plan would hold prices for 10 years, thus eliminating inflation.

 

[OnePercenter]

no loon; the uber-wealthy do NOT have more than enough to make up for what the poor dont pay; especially taking into account what the poor take out of the system

there is NO amount of taxation that can keep pace with things the Left promises or proposes

I wouldn't be so sure. The uber-wealthy are highly vested in the $1.5 quadrillion derivatives market. Probably why there are so many poor in this country.

 

[bedowin62]

no loon; the uber-wealthy do NOT have more than enough to make up for what the poor dont pay; especially taking into account what the poor take out of the system

there is NO amount of taxation that can keep pace with things the Left promises or proposes

I wouldn't be so sure. The uber-wealthy are highly vested in the $1.5 quadrillion derivatives market. Probably why there are so many poor in this country.

the poor are poor because of imaginary financial tools?

explain

 

[Dad2three]

Oh goodie, that 46% of ALL federal taxes, the income taxes. AND?

Do you know how to speak English at all?

I get it Bubba, you Randian fetishists ALSO have a problem with basic math

Untested since you can't write a coherent sentence in English, Republican

One day you'll actually post something that doesn't bite at the ankles, and I might have a heart attack Bubba

Hmm...but how would you know?

Thanks for proving my posit Bubba

 

[OnePercenter]

the poor are poor because of imaginary financial tools?

explain

The poor are poor because of those that believe that restaurants and Walmart only make 3% net.

 

[bedowin62]

the poor are poor because of imaginary financial tools?

explain

The poor are poor because of those that believe that restaurants and Walmart only make 3% net.

more cryptic shit. make your case.

oh wait you cant.

 

[The Rabbi]

the poor are poor because of imaginary financial tools?

explain

The poor are poor because of those that believe that restaurants and Walmart only make 3% net.

Its actually 5.6% net, based on their latest annual report.
You dont know very much, do you?

 

[OnePercenter]

the poor are poor because of imaginary financial tools?

explain

The poor are poor because of those that believe that restaurants and Walmart only make 3% net.

more cryptic shit. make your case.

oh wait you cant.

Cryptic? Nothing cryptic about it. I stated fact.

 

[bedowin62]

the poor are poor because of imaginary financial tools?

explain

The poor are poor because of those that believe that restaurants and Walmart only make 3% net.

more cryptic shit. make your case.

oh wait you cant.

Cryptic? Nothing cryptic about it. I stated fact.

if they were facts you could back them up idiot. you stated opinion, and aren't even offering anything to support that

 

[The Rabbi]

the poor are poor because of imaginary financial tools?

explain

The poor are poor because of those that believe that restaurants and Walmart only make 3% net.

more cryptic shit. make your case.

oh wait you cant.

Cryptic? Nothing cryptic about it. I stated fact.

if they were facts you could back them up idiot. you stated opinion, and aren't even offering anything to support that

Thats how he managed his "masters in business" from Columbia. LOL!

 

[bedowin62]

i love the Walmart rants; makes me believe many of the Left-wing posters here are rich douchebags with no idea of what goes on in the real world.

Ever see who shops at Walmart in the city? Lots of Black and Brown people getting things they need or want for their homes at prices they can afford.
Consider how much the Left DESPISES Walmart, and relate that to history and you can see how people like POL POT went out and murdered millions of his own countrymen trying to convince them it was for the greater good.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama, Filibuster-proof majority yet denied Americans the Era of Progressive Prosperity that would have come form a 90% Tax Rate and Wealth Confiscation

What a heartless bastage!

The Myth of Democratic Super Majority.


One of the standard Republican talking points is that the Democrats had a filibuster-proof, super majority for two years between 2008 and 2010. This talking point is usually trotted out when liberals complain that the Republicans filibustered virtually every piece of legislation proposed by Obama or the Democrats during Obama’s presidency. The implication is that Democrats had ample opportunity to pass legislation and that the reason they didn’t pass more legislation doesn’t have anything to do with the Republicans.

It is also used to counter any argument that Republican legislation, (passed during the six years of total Republican control,) has anything to do with today’s problems. They claim that the Democrats had a super majority for two years and passed all kinds of legislation, (over Republican objection and filibuster,) that completely undid all Republican policies and legislation, and this absolves them from today’s problems.

The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period, insufficient time to undo even a small portion of the legislation passed during six years of Republican control. Here are the details:

So why didn't ANY Democrat at ANY TIME offer up the 90% Income Tax Act?

They got the Stimulus and ObamaCare passed, why not the 90% Income Tax Act?

Let me guess, Boooooooooooooooooosh

 

[kaz]

no loon; the uber-wealthy do NOT have more than enough to make up for what the poor dont pay; especially taking into account what the poor take out of the system

there is NO amount of taxation that can keep pace with things the Left promises or proposes

I wouldn't be so sure. The uber-wealthy are highly vested in the $1.5 quadrillion derivatives market. Probably why there are so many poor in this country.

I still can't figure out what you think yo are a one percenter of

 

[bedowin62]

Obama, Filibuster-proof majority yet denied Americans the Era of Progressive Prosperity that would have come form a 90% Tax Rate and Wealth Confiscation

What a heartless bastage!

The Myth of Democratic Super Majority.


One of the standard Republican talking points is that the Democrats had a filibuster-proof, super majority for two years between 2008 and 2010. This talking point is usually trotted out when liberals complain that the Republicans filibustered virtually every piece of legislation proposed by Obama or the Democrats during Obama’s presidency. The implication is that Democrats had ample opportunity to pass legislation and that the reason they didn’t pass more legislation doesn’t have anything to do with the Republicans.

It is also used to counter any argument that Republican legislation, (passed during the six years of total Republican control,) has anything to do with today’s problems. They claim that the Democrats had a super majority for two years and passed all kinds of legislation, (over Republican objection and filibuster,) that completely undid all Republican policies and legislation, and this absolves them from today’s problems.

The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period, insufficient time to undo even a small portion of the legislation passed during six years of Republican control. Here are the details:

So why didn't ANY Democrat at ANY TIME offer up the 90% Income Tax Act?

They got the Stimulus and ObamaCare passed, why not the 90% Income Tax Act?

Let me guess, Boooooooooooooooooosh

the Left wants to cry about things THEY NEVER EVEN TRIED TO ADDRESS; with the canard that they just didnt have the numbers. the ACTUAL record has them voting FOR the same things they are crying about and pretend they knew were so harmful

 

[kaz]

Do you know how to speak English at all?

I get it Bubba, you Randian fetishists ALSO have a problem with basic math

Untested since you can't write a coherent sentence in English, Republican

One day you'll actually post something that doesn't bite at the ankles, and I might have a heart attack Bubba

Hmm...but how would you know?

Thanks for proving my posit Bubba

you're welcome, though proving you're butt stupid is butt easy. you and your boy, Ronnie RayGun

 

[Dad2three]

Obama, Filibuster-proof majority yet denied Americans the Era of Progressive Prosperity that would have come form a 90% Tax Rate and Wealth Confiscation

What a heartless bastage!

The Myth of Democratic Super Majority.


One of the standard Republican talking points is that the Democrats had a filibuster-proof, super majority for two years between 2008 and 2010. This talking point is usually trotted out when liberals complain that the Republicans filibustered virtually every piece of legislation proposed by Obama or the Democrats during Obama’s presidency. The implication is that Democrats had ample opportunity to pass legislation and that the reason they didn’t pass more legislation doesn’t have anything to do with the Republicans.

It is also used to counter any argument that Republican legislation, (passed during the six years of total Republican control,) has anything to do with today’s problems. They claim that the Democrats had a super majority for two years and passed all kinds of legislation, (over Republican objection and filibuster,) that completely undid all Republican policies and legislation, and this absolves them from today’s problems.

The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period, insufficient time to undo even a small portion of the legislation passed during six years of Republican control. Here are the details:

So why didn't ANY Democrat at ANY TIME offer up the 90% Income Tax Act?

They got the Stimulus and ObamaCare passed, why not the 90% Income Tax Act?

Let me guess, Boooooooooooooooooosh

Weird, who says go back to the rate Ike wanted, 90%?

 

[Dad2three]

I get it Bubba, you Randian fetishists ALSO have a problem with basic math

Untested since you can't write a coherent sentence in English, Republican

One day you'll actually post something that doesn't bite at the ankles, and I might have a heart attack Bubba

Hmm...but how would you know?

Thanks for proving my posit Bubba

you're welcome, though proving you're butt stupid is butt easy. you and your boy, Ronnie RayGun

Thanks for reiterating ALL you do is bite at the ankles Bubba

 

[kaz]

Untested since you can't write a coherent sentence in English, Republican

One day you'll actually post something that doesn't bite at the ankles, and I might have a heart attack Bubba

Hmm...but how would you know?

Thanks for proving my posit Bubba

you're welcome, though proving you're butt stupid is butt easy. you and your boy, Ronnie RayGun

Thanks for reiterating ALL you do is bite at the ankles Bubba

Sorry, Republicans don't make any sense, can you try that one again?

 

[Arizona Willie]

The amazing thing is that so many 30K a year Republicans working at the local convenience store keep voting and supporting their very worst enemies.

========

I still can't figure out what you think yo are a one percenter of

 

[thereisnospoon]

"Contrary to what Republicans would have you believe, super-high tax rates on rich people do not appear to hurt the economy or make people lazy: During the 1950s and early 1960s, the top bracket income tax rate was over 90%--and the economy, middle-class, and stock market boom."

THE TRUTH ABOUT TAXES: High Rates On Rich People Do Not Hurt The Economy - Business Insider

The true driving force of the economy is the middle class - not the wealthy. This economy depends on consumer spending. That is why you all should care about income inequality. Despite productivity skyrocketing over the previous decades, wages have remained mostly flat in the lower class and most of the income gains have gone to the top 1%.. The middle class is shrinking and the U.S. has the worst child poverty rate in the developed world.

Wealth And Inequality In America - Business Insider

This bullshit again?....Please.....Pick something else. This no longer applies.