Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

[SAYIT]

REAGANOMICS.

Greekonomics - Outspend your ability to sustain or repay then hope some capitalists write a check to cover your failing "Worker's Paradise."

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

BFD. Who cares how much wealth someone else has? Only pea-green-with-envious people who constantly compare themselves to others.

When income inequality continues to get worse worldwide, when the middle class has lost income over decades, when wages are stagnant, when the rich are recovering better then everyone else.. It's already been proven by the IMF that redistribution of wealth has more benefits then "trickle down" bullshit.

I bet you can't accurate describe what has caused this situation.

CONservative policy like low taxes on "job creators", policy that off shores jobs AND gives the person tax benefits AND cons "free trade", to name 3!

Three that are all lies.

How about the real truth which is the American consumer has become cheap. We flood our Wal-Mart stores to buy the cheapest Chinese garbage we can buy. Stores like Wal-Mart cater to the demands of their customers, so they don't bring in more expensive American made products.

You can't have the cheapest products and the best paying jobs. It's impossible. So producers look for ways to cut every corner they can to sell their goods to the American consumer, and that means low wage jobs and automation.

Weird you can't critically think and understand the 3 things are NOT mutually exclusive to your posit, but actually goes hand in hand. It's called GOV'T POLICY. Hint the US USED to have tariffs (since the US Founding) that kept US jobs in America

So isolationism is your solution?

If you remember back in the Bush years, he tried tariffs on imported steel. It was a failed attempt because those countries placed tariffs on our exported goods to their country.

 

[SAYIT]

The moonbats in this thread put me in mind of an R.A. Heinlein quote:

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

This is known as “bad luck.”

Their redistributionist schemes are failing around the world, and yet they fail to understand why.

Ineptocracy - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or even try are rewarded - in exchange for their votes - with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Loony leftists are persistent idiots.
Income taxes do not (nor were they ever intended to) apply to WEALTH.
Income taxes apply only to - drum roll, please - INCOME.
You do know the diff, right Lefty?

That doesn't change the fact they own most of the wealth, and it was obvious I was referencing income as well.

BFD. Who cares how much wealth someone else has? Only pea-green-with-envious people who constantly compare themselves to others.

When income inequality continues to get worse worldwide, when the middle class has lost income over decades, when wages are stagnant, when the rich are recovering better then everyone else.. It's already been proven by the IMF that redistribution of wealth has more benefits then "trickle down" bullshit.

I don't know about that. If you want equality, then I suggest you go to Cuba and see how equity works when it comes to money. Nearly everybody there is equally poor.

Only low informed or the ideologically driven don't understand NO serious person want economic equality for all, but less INEQUALITY at rates not since since the first Gilded Age. Weird you don't get that!



This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality

Everybody knows the story of the rise and fall and rise again of the top 1 percent. Income inequality was at Downton Abbey levels in the 1920s, fell between the 1940s and 1960, paused during the 1970s, and then exploded since the 1980s. It's gone so far that the top 1 percent now get as big a slice of the income pie—about 22 percent of it—as they ever have.

....It turns out, though, that even if a rising tide lifts all boats, most people can't afford a boat. The bottom 90 percent, in other words, haven't done much better the last 30 years, even as the top 1 percent have created a second Gilded Age.

This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality - The Washington Post

"The liberal belief is that if you create money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell.

So who should be in charge of this wealth redistribution? The government? And just how would that work? Taxation?

So if the government would tax the wealthy, how does that help my paycheck? How does that help me pay the mortgage, my car payment, the college for my children?

Lying liberal politicians have been promoting this redistribution, however the reality is that if they ever had enough support, all that would do is transfer wealth from the producers to the government who would undoubtedly waste the money as history shows while at the same time, empower government even more.

 

[Dad2three]

REAGANOMICS.

Greekonomics - Outspend your ability to sustain or repay then hope some capitalists write a check to cover your failing "Worker's Paradise."

Weird, I thought cons would ;LOVE Greece and their Gov't. They borrowed heavily and it's estimated they collect less than 60% of taxes owed?

 

[Dad2three]

When income inequality continues to get worse worldwide, when the middle class has lost income over decades, when wages are stagnant, when the rich are recovering better then everyone else.. It's already been proven by the IMF that redistribution of wealth has more benefits then "trickle down" bullshit.

I bet you can't accurate describe what has caused this situation.

CONservative policy like low taxes on "job creators", policy that off shores jobs AND gives the person tax benefits AND cons "free trade", to name 3!

Three that are all lies.

How about the real truth which is the American consumer has become cheap. We flood our Wal-Mart stores to buy the cheapest Chinese garbage we can buy. Stores like Wal-Mart cater to the demands of their customers, so they don't bring in more expensive American made products.

You can't have the cheapest products and the best paying jobs. It's impossible. So producers look for ways to cut every corner they can to sell their goods to the American consumer, and that means low wage jobs and automation.

Weird you can't critically think and understand the 3 things are NOT mutually exclusive to your posit, but actually goes hand in hand. It's called GOV'T POLICY. Hint the US USED to have tariffs (since the US Founding) that kept US jobs in America

So isolationism is your solution?

If you remember back in the Bush years, he tried tariffs on imported steel. It was a failed attempt because those countries placed tariffs on our exported goods to their country.

Yep, DON'T critically think or be honest, just point to ONE small part of the puzzle and say it failed *shaking head*



NOT like Heritage Foundations NAFTA deal given to US the day Ronnie Reagan announced his run for Prez had ANYTHING to do with off shoring jobs, or the fact that there IS still tariffs in the world, yet the US has, BY FAR, the lowest tariffs.

Nah, just take a bite and say MY solution MUST be to go back to that horrible time in the late 1980's when the US practiced "isolation" right? lol

 

[Dad2three]

The moonbats in this thread put me in mind of an R.A. Heinlein quote:

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

This is known as “bad luck.”

Their redistributionist schemes are failing around the world, and yet they fail to understand why.

Ineptocracy - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or even try are rewarded - in exchange for their votes - with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Sure Bubba, sure, NOT that the US has been captured by the rich, and the Repubs who don't "believe in" Gov't get elected then destroy it from within!

 

[SAYIT]

REAGANOMICS.

Greekonomics - Outspend your ability to sustain or repay then hope some capitalists write a check to cover your failing "Worker's Paradise."

Weird, I thought cons would ;LOVE Greece and their Gov't. They borrowed heavily and it's estimated they collect less than 60% of taxes owed?

Don't be silly. Greece is a black eye for the worldwide socialist dream which explains the whirling dervish routine employed in defense of the profligate gov't policies, arrogance and Game-Theory playing that essentially crashed Greece's economy. Only loony leftists and anarchists could love what has become of Greece, and they do ... or at least they hate those who believe one should have the integrity to repay ones debts.

 

[Dad2three]

That doesn't change the fact they own most of the wealth, and it was obvious I was referencing income as well.

BFD. Who cares how much wealth someone else has? Only pea-green-with-envious people who constantly compare themselves to others.

When income inequality continues to get worse worldwide, when the middle class has lost income over decades, when wages are stagnant, when the rich are recovering better then everyone else.. It's already been proven by the IMF that redistribution of wealth has more benefits then "trickle down" bullshit.

I don't know about that. If you want equality, then I suggest you go to Cuba and see how equity works when it comes to money. Nearly everybody there is equally poor.

Only low informed or the ideologically driven don't understand NO serious person want economic equality for all, but less INEQUALITY at rates not since since the first Gilded Age. Weird you don't get that!



This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality

Everybody knows the story of the rise and fall and rise again of the top 1 percent. Income inequality was at Downton Abbey levels in the 1920s, fell between the 1940s and 1960, paused during the 1970s, and then exploded since the 1980s. It's gone so far that the top 1 percent now get as big a slice of the income pie—about 22 percent of it—as they ever have.

....It turns out, though, that even if a rising tide lifts all boats, most people can't afford a boat. The bottom 90 percent, in other words, haven't done much better the last 30 years, even as the top 1 percent have created a second Gilded Age.

This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality - The Washington Post

"The liberal belief is that if you create money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell.

So who should be in charge of this wealth redistribution? The government? And just how would that work? Taxation?

So if the government would tax the wealthy, how does that help my paycheck? How does that help me pay the mortgage, my car payment, the college for my children?

Lying liberal politicians have been promoting this redistribution, however the reality is that if they ever had enough support, all that would do is transfer wealth from the producers to the government who would undoubtedly waste the money as history shows while at the same time, empower government even more.

Weird you are TYPICAL conservative who buys into the right wing memes. The US has ALWAYS used tax policy for redistribution dummy, read a gawddam history book

.....Ronald Reagan's answer to all this was to cut taxes for the rich and deregulate the economy. The idea was to give the top 1 percent the freedom and incentive to work more and invest more, which was supposed to make the economy grow more—and, yes, trickle down to everybody else. It didn't


This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality - The Washington Post

 

[Dad2three]

REAGANOMICS.

Greekonomics - Outspend your ability to sustain or repay then hope some capitalists write a check to cover your failing "Worker's Paradise."

Weird, I thought cons would ;LOVE Greece and their Gov't. They borrowed heavily and it's estimated they collect less than 60% of taxes owed?

Don't be silly. Greece is a black eye for the worldwide socialist dream which explains the whirling dervish routine employed in defense of the profligate gov't policies, arrogance and Game-Theory playing that essentially crashed Greece's economy. Only loony leftists and anarchists could love what has become of Greece, and they do ... or at least they hate those who believe one should have the integrity to repay ones debts.

Heritage, CATO, AEI's, etc playbook Bubba. Good job...

 

[SAYIT]

"The liberal belief is that if you create money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell...

Weird you are TYPICAL conservative who buys into the right wing memes...

Yanno, if I thought you were kidding I'd be impressed with your sense of irony but as it is I'm certain you can't see it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

BFD. Who cares how much wealth someone else has? Only pea-green-with-envious people who constantly compare themselves to others.

When income inequality continues to get worse worldwide, when the middle class has lost income over decades, when wages are stagnant, when the rich are recovering better then everyone else.. It's already been proven by the IMF that redistribution of wealth has more benefits then "trickle down" bullshit.

I don't know about that. If you want equality, then I suggest you go to Cuba and see how equity works when it comes to money. Nearly everybody there is equally poor.

Only low informed or the ideologically driven don't understand NO serious person want economic equality for all, but less INEQUALITY at rates not since since the first Gilded Age. Weird you don't get that!



This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality

Everybody knows the story of the rise and fall and rise again of the top 1 percent. Income inequality was at Downton Abbey levels in the 1920s, fell between the 1940s and 1960, paused during the 1970s, and then exploded since the 1980s. It's gone so far that the top 1 percent now get as big a slice of the income pie—about 22 percent of it—as they ever have.

....It turns out, though, that even if a rising tide lifts all boats, most people can't afford a boat. The bottom 90 percent, in other words, haven't done much better the last 30 years, even as the top 1 percent have created a second Gilded Age.

This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality - The Washington Post

"The liberal belief is that if you create money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell.

So who should be in charge of this wealth redistribution? The government? And just how would that work? Taxation?

So if the government would tax the wealthy, how does that help my paycheck? How does that help me pay the mortgage, my car payment, the college for my children?

Lying liberal politicians have been promoting this redistribution, however the reality is that if they ever had enough support, all that would do is transfer wealth from the producers to the government who would undoubtedly waste the money as history shows while at the same time, empower government even more.

Weird you are TYPICAL conservative who buys into the right wing memes. The US has ALWAYS used tax policy for redistribution dummy, read a gawddam history book

.....Ronald Reagan's answer to all this was to cut taxes for the rich and deregulate the economy. The idea was to give the top 1 percent the freedom and incentive to work more and invest more, which was supposed to make the economy grow more—and, yes, trickle down to everybody else. It didn't


This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality - The Washington Post

Yes the liberals have used government for redistribution. And how has that worked out for us? Care to see a study on "ending poverty" the last 50 years and the results after trillions of dollars spent? Just ask, I have it right here in my folder.,

Read a history book? Okay, I will, and here is what I found:

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, that grants Congress the right of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, annals of Congress, 1794

 

[SAYIT]

REAGANOMICS.

Greekonomics - Outspend your ability to sustain or repay then hope some capitalists write a check to cover your failing "Worker's Paradise."

Weird, I thought cons would ;LOVE Greece and their Gov't. They borrowed heavily and it's estimated they collect less than 60% of taxes owed?

Don't be silly. Greece is a black eye for the worldwide socialist dream which explains the whirling dervish routine employed in defense of the profligate gov't policies, arrogance and Game-Theory playing that essentially crashed Greece's economy. Only loony leftists and anarchists could love what has become of Greece, and they do ... or at least they hate those who believe one should have the integrity to repay ones debts.

Heritage, CATO, AEI's, etc playbook Bubba. Good job...

It is silly (but waaay typical) to assume that because you parrot the Socialists-R-Us.com handbook that everyone needs that sort of guidance to form their opinions. Some of us are actually capable of thinking for ourselves ... not that one such as you could possibly understand.

 

[Dad2three]

When income inequality continues to get worse worldwide, when the middle class has lost income over decades, when wages are stagnant, when the rich are recovering better then everyone else.. It's already been proven by the IMF that redistribution of wealth has more benefits then "trickle down" bullshit.

I don't know about that. If you want equality, then I suggest you go to Cuba and see how equity works when it comes to money. Nearly everybody there is equally poor.

Only low informed or the ideologically driven don't understand NO serious person want economic equality for all, but less INEQUALITY at rates not since since the first Gilded Age. Weird you don't get that!



This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality

Everybody knows the story of the rise and fall and rise again of the top 1 percent. Income inequality was at Downton Abbey levels in the 1920s, fell between the 1940s and 1960, paused during the 1970s, and then exploded since the 1980s. It's gone so far that the top 1 percent now get as big a slice of the income pie—about 22 percent of it—as they ever have.

....It turns out, though, that even if a rising tide lifts all boats, most people can't afford a boat. The bottom 90 percent, in other words, haven't done much better the last 30 years, even as the top 1 percent have created a second Gilded Age.

This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality - The Washington Post

"The liberal belief is that if you create money, you are not entitled to it, but if you want money, you are."
Ken Blackwell.

So who should be in charge of this wealth redistribution? The government? And just how would that work? Taxation?

So if the government would tax the wealthy, how does that help my paycheck? How does that help me pay the mortgage, my car payment, the college for my children?

Lying liberal politicians have been promoting this redistribution, however the reality is that if they ever had enough support, all that would do is transfer wealth from the producers to the government who would undoubtedly waste the money as history shows while at the same time, empower government even more.

Weird you are TYPICAL conservative who buys into the right wing memes. The US has ALWAYS used tax policy for redistribution dummy, read a gawddam history book

.....Ronald Reagan's answer to all this was to cut taxes for the rich and deregulate the economy. The idea was to give the top 1 percent the freedom and incentive to work more and invest more, which was supposed to make the economy grow more—and, yes, trickle down to everybody else. It didn't


This chart explains everything you need to know about inequality - The Washington Post

Yes the liberals have used government for redistribution. And how has that worked out for us? Care to see a study on "ending poverty" the last 50 years and the results after trillions of dollars spent? Just ask, I have it right here in my folder.,

Read a history book? Okay, I will, and here is what I found:

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, that grants Congress the right of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, annals of Congress, 1794

Weird, how much has the US spent on wars? Have wars ended?

Madison? Oh right the guy who wanted the federal Gov't to have the ability to veto states laws! Good thing SCOTUS said he was wrong right? BTW, That was from the Federalists papers though right (you know propaganda to get NY to vote for the Constitution)?

I like this better

“[T]he laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They [Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose.” TJ



YES,REDISTRIBUTION WORKED PRETTY WELL 1945-19809. CAN YOU THINK OF WHAT CHANGED?

U.S. income inequality on rise for decades is now highest since 1928 Pew Research Center

SEE HOW THE EFFECTIVE RATES DROPPED FOR THE "JOB CREATORS"?

AND THIS:

 

[Dad2three]

REAGANOMICS.

Greekonomics - Outspend your ability to sustain or repay then hope some capitalists write a check to cover your failing "Worker's Paradise."

Weird, I thought cons would ;LOVE Greece and their Gov't. They borrowed heavily and it's estimated they collect less than 60% of taxes owed?

Don't be silly. Greece is a black eye for the worldwide socialist dream which explains the whirling dervish routine employed in defense of the profligate gov't policies, arrogance and Game-Theory playing that essentially crashed Greece's economy. Only loony leftists and anarchists could love what has become of Greece, and they do ... or at least they hate those who believe one should have the integrity to repay ones debts.

Heritage, CATO, AEI's, etc playbook Bubba. Good job...

It is silly (but waaay typical) to assume that because you parrot the Socialists-R-Us.com handbook that everyone needs that sort of guidance to form their opinions. Some of us are actually capable of thinking for ourselves ... not that one such as you could possibly understand.

Sorry, I forgot its not in the right wingers brain to actually have those that benefited the very most the past 40 years, as debt increased, actually be expected to pay for it. How socialists of me!

 

[SAYIT]

Greekonomics - Outspend your ability to sustain or repay then hope some capitalists write a check to cover your failing "Worker's Paradise."

Weird, I thought cons would ;LOVE Greece and their Gov't. They borrowed heavily and it's estimated they collect less than 60% of taxes owed?

Don't be silly. Greece is a black eye for the worldwide socialist dream which explains the whirling dervish routine employed in defense of the profligate gov't policies, arrogance and Game-Theory playing that essentially crashed Greece's economy. Only loony leftists and anarchists could love what has become of Greece, and they do ... or at least they hate those who believe one should have the integrity to repay ones debts.

Heritage, CATO, AEI's, etc playbook Bubba. Good job...

It is silly (but waaay typical) to assume that because you parrot the Socialists-R-Us.com handbook that everyone needs that sort of guidance to form their opinions. Some of us are actually capable of thinking for ourselves ... not that one such as you could possibly understand.

Sorry, I forgot its not in the right wingers brain to actually have those that benefited the very most the past 40 years, as debt increased, actually be expected to pay for it. How socialists of me!

As continually noted (yet persistently ignored) it is and long has been America's largest earners who are paying for it while the weak earners get a free ride. I've repeatedly told you that the top 25% of American earners carry 86% of the total fed personal income tax load. So rather than ignore that fact again, do tell what would satisfy your little socialist heart? 96%? 106%?

 

[rightwinger]

Put a sales tax on every stock transaction

 

[Jantje_Smit]

As continually noted (yet persistently ignored) it is and long has been America's largest earners who are paying for it while the weak earners get a free ride. I've repeatedly told you that the top 25% of American earners carry 86% of the total fed personal income tax load. So rather than ignore that fact again, do tell what would satisfy your little socialist heart? 96%? 106%?

With all those tax cuts the "job creators" get, I think 300% is very reasonable.

 

[bedowin62]

gotta love left-wing nutjobs and their charts!!

 

[theHawk]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

Aside from the fact that they already do pay much more than everyone else, how do you know that "the majority" of them are selfish and don't care about anybody? How many millionaires do you know?