Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes I absolutely do think it is to much. I think anyone, no matter how much they make, paying more than 25% of their money to the Fed is not only insane, its Criminal.
Look at what happened in NYC. They passed a millionaire tax, which they thought would give them a 100 Million dollar jump in Revenue. The Problem. The Rich can afford to move, and they did. NYC saw a significant Drop in Revenue.
You tax the Rich at 70% for 2 Generations, and there will be no rich left to tax.
Besides, and I can't believe I have to say this again because it has been proven on here many times over, But you could take 100% of Millionaires money and it would amount to a tiny Drop in the bucket compared to the Deficit and Debt Numbers were talking about.
Taxing the Rich is not the Answer, It's simple math it can't be.
You guys need to stop grasping at straws to find a way to Sustain this level of Spending, and pay for SS and Medicares future, and come to grips with the COLD HARD FACTS. We can not sustain it, Taking all the riches money will not sustain it. We must make hard Decisions and cuts, and find ways to sustain our Social Programs that will not destroy us.
PERIOD!!!
Fuck left and right, Fuck Dem and Rep. Just face the facts, It's just MATH!!!
Yes I absolutely do think it is to much. I think anyone, no matter how much they make, paying more than 25% of their money to the Fed is not only insane, its Criminal.
Look at what happened in NYC. They passed a millionaire tax, which they thought would give them a 100 Million dollar jump in Revenue. The Problem. The Rich can afford to move, and they did. NYC saw a significant Drop in Revenue.
You tax the Rich at 70% for 2 Generations, and there will be no rich left to tax.
Besides, and I can't believe I have to say this again because it has been proven on here many times over, But you could take 100% of Millionaires money and it would amount to a tiny Drop in the bucket compared to the Deficit and Debt Numbers were talking about.
Taxing the Rich is not the Answer, It's simple math it can't be.
You guys need to stop grasping at straws to find a way to Sustain this level of Spending, and pay for SS and Medicares future, and come to grips with the COLD HARD FACTS. We can not sustain it, Taking all the riches money will not sustain it. We must make hard Decisions and cuts, and find ways to sustain our Social Programs that will not destroy us.
PERIOD!!!
Fuck left and right, Fuck Dem and Rep. Just face the facts, It's just MATH!!!
Good let the fuckers move out of the country then... and take their citizenship with them. Most of them are nothing more than traitors anyway... Creating Jobs for a Communist and a bunch of Socialist Countries and leaving our own citizens to suffer the Consequences. Then when the shit hits the fan, they expect us taxpayers to pay for their ineptitude(Banking Industry).
Let's ask Robert Reich and Cato Institute Fellow Alan Reynolds what they think:Here's the trap Barking Moonbats such as yourself consistently fall into:
The top tax rates that you advocate to put in place apply to middle class families. They are not the ones exploiting the Big Government Cronyism which really is an issue in this country. It's too bad you'd rather play Class Warfare Games against people who actually work for a living instead of addressing the collusion between career politicians, the permanent regulator bureaucracy, the Big Entities which capture the regulators, and the community organizing shakedown artists who work together to extract money from taxpayers.
The 70% rate from 1979 you cite above applied to income levels over $670K in 2011 dollars. Is someone at that income level well off? Yes, but they are not Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Jeffrey Immelt, or the head of a Wall St. Investment Bank.
Lumping in upper middle class people with billionaires pins the bogometer, and you fall for it every time.
Who said ANYTHING about a 70% rate on Upper Middle Class Families? $670K was a lot more money in 1979 than it is today. That's the trap you Conservatives fall into. Just because we want the top rate higher, doesn't necessarily mean that we want it to be so widespread. I'd say somewhere in the range of maybe more along the lines of $3M/year+ In personal Income?
"Reynolds also distorts my proposal, implying that the bracket on which I call for a 70 percent tax is the same as in todays tax code. Wrong.
"My proposed 70 percent rate would apply only to incomes over $15 million...
"Under my proposal, incomes between $5 million and $15 million would be subjected to a 60 percent rate, and incomes between $500,000 and $5 million to a 50 percent rate.
"Importantly, my proposal calls for a substantial rate reduction for families with incomes under $100,000. (Conveniently, Reynolds fails to mention this.)
"Reynolds entirely ignores my central argument, which is that rather than depress economic growth, higher taxes on the rich correlate with higher growth.
"During almost three decades spanning 1951 to 1980, when the top rate was between 70 percent and 91 percent, average annual growth in the American economy was 3.7 percent."
Robert Reich
Anyone think 70% is too much for the $15 million/year poor to pay for a few generations?
It's just MATH.Anyone think 70% is too much for the $15 million/year poor to pay for a few generations?
Yes I absolutely do think it is to much. I think anyone, no matter how much they make, paying more than 25% of their money to the Fed is not only insane, its Criminal.
Look at what happened in NYC. They passed a millionaire tax, which they thought would give them a 100 Million dollar jump in Revenue. The Problem. The Rich can afford to move, and they did. NYC saw a significant Drop in Revenue.
You tax the Rich at 70% for 2 Generations, and there will be no rich left to tax.
Besides, and I can't believe I have to say this again because it has been proven on here many times over, But you could take 100% of Millionaires money and it would amount to a tiny Drop in the bucket compared to the Deficit and Debt Numbers were talking about.
Taxing the Rich is not the Answer, It's simple math it can't be.
You guys need to stop grasping at straws to find a way to Sustain this level of Spending, and pay for SS and Medicares future, and come to grips with the COLD HARD FACTS. We can not sustain it, Taking all the riches money will not sustain it. We must make hard Decisions and cuts, and find ways to sustain our Social Programs that will not destroy us.
PERIOD!!!
Fuck left and right, Fuck Dem and Rep. Just face the facts, It's just MATH!!!
kwc57:Since DC Democrats and Republicans are tone deaf to anything that doesn't ring of corporate cash, it falls on workers to demand a massive public works program which can be funded by taxing corporations and the richest Americans at pre-Reagan levels.
"And it makes complete sense because the growing inequalities in wealth over the past three decades has meant a spectacular concentration of wealth at the top.
"The rich have plenty of money to spare."
Spare me the brain-dead conservative vomit about how hard the rich have "worked" for all their money.
The rich have the money because Republicans AND Democrats threw money at Wall Street banks and hedge funds instead of prosecuting the executives responsible for the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression.
The rich have the money because their chief enabler, The Federal Reserve, has fueled a major commodity bubble "that may be in the midst of bursting, possibly triggering a double dip recession."
Throw in high unemployment which allows the rich to work remaining employees harder and thus increase profits and combine it with commodity speculation and you have the entire basis for a corporate recovery which both major parties tout as "proof" of economic "recovery."
It's another lie the rich tell.
When the Fed stops purchasing 60% of US Treasury bonds, a new creditor will have to step up. One that will probably demand significantly higher interest rates before loaning anymore money to the US Government.
Surprise, surprise - the rich win again!
They got all that free bail-out money which increased the deficit.
None of them went to prison for their crimes.
Their bottom lines are being enhanced by commodity speculation and high unemployment.
And now the rich want higher interest rates for investing in US Treasury Bonds.
"In (all) instances working people pay the bills."
The Rich Are Destroying the Economy | Common Dreams
Welllllll, aren't you awfully generous with other people's money. Tell you what, since you are so big hearted, I have a proposal for you to put up or shut up. When you leave work today, drive thru the part of town where the homeless hang out. Take one home with you. I'm sure you have that "junk" room that most people have. You know, the one that is never used excpet to accumulate all the extra crap we all own. Give that room to the homeless person. Set a place at your table for them. Ask what they like to eat and tell them you'll pick it up on the next run to the grocery store. Give him a key to the house and tell him to feel free to entertain his friends. You have more than you need, share it. Then you will be justified in expecting the rich who have more than they need to hand it over becuase you think it is only fair.
Sorry, I missed your post.
Thanks for the heads up.
I think you've confused me with a normal person.
Thanks again, hardly anyone I've ever met made that mistake.
I"m currently retired, and I haven't driven since 1995.
I've been in my 400 square foot apartment for 14 months now, and I've shared it with two homeless individuals, one for a period of five days.
Speaking as someone who has spent a fair amount of time living on the streets, I don't recommend giving the homeless a key to your house unless you have some first rate insurance. Many people who find themselves homeless have some very good reasons for being there.
Possibly, the richest 0.01% of Americans (approximately 10,000 earners) who "earn" an average of $50,000,000 per with assets of $350,000,000 per household might be interested in you challenge?
The next time you run into one, why don't you ask?
The pofane daveboy asked, "Do you really think you can build high speed rail and fiber optic networks with unskilled labor?" He latter adds, "You sir, are a goddamned motherfucking idiot".
The answer is yes. Unskilled does not mean unable. And to suggest either project would be planned, managed and supervised by unskilled labor is beyond hyperbole, it is dishonest.
Well, they certainly have set the bar high.Even if I was capable of earning that kind of money, wouldn't I be equally corrupt to do so?
So that's your excuse for being a lazy bastard?
Note the assumption that all rich people got their money by being corrupt. Liberals believe that because it's certainly true in the case of all Democrat politicians.
Even if I was capable of earning that kind of money, wouldn't I be equally corrupt to do so?
So that's your excuse for being a lazy bastard?
Note the assumption that all rich people got their money by being corrupt. Liberals believe that because it's certainly true in the case of all Democrat politicians.
You made money. And you didn't give it to people who didn't earn it, like georgephillip and the other envious drains on society.So that's your excuse for being a lazy bastard?
Note the assumption that all rich people got their money by being corrupt. Liberals believe that because it's certainly true in the case of all Democrat politicians.
I am curious...
Exactly how did I become corrupt by grabbing onto a dream of being my own boss....putting together a business plan....incorporating myself....struggling for the first year as I marketed my services without earning an income.....worked as many as 7 days a week for that year...acheived mild success in my second year....but still had to work 7 days a week....grew my company as the demand for my services required the continued hiring of employees AT SALARIES THEY WERE EAGER TO ACCEPT....still worked 7 days a week as I entered my 4th year...hired more employees....took my first week vacation after the end of my 5th year while offering all of my employees 2 weeks vacation during their first year....3 weeks at the end of 5 years....re-invested my profits into the growth of my company so that by the ned of my 6th year, I was able to cut back to 6 days a week working...and now I am working 5 days a week...my employees are earning a living at salaries THEY ARE EAGER TO EARN....and I am socking away money for my retirement...with the exception of last year where SOME OF MY EMPLOYEES MADE MORE MONEY THAN I DID as the profits were thin.
Exactly what did I do that was corrupt? Not make my employees work 7 days a week as I did?
Or maybe it was the fact that I should not make a profit after risking my future by starting on my own?
Exactly what made me corrupt?
You made money. And you didn't give it to people who didn't earn it, like georgephillip and the other envious drains on society.Note the assumption that all rich people got their money by being corrupt. Liberals believe that because it's certainly true in the case of all Democrat politicians.
I am curious...
Exactly how did I become corrupt by grabbing onto a dream of being my own boss....putting together a business plan....incorporating myself....struggling for the first year as I marketed my services without earning an income.....worked as many as 7 days a week for that year...acheived mild success in my second year....but still had to work 7 days a week....grew my company as the demand for my services required the continued hiring of employees AT SALARIES THEY WERE EAGER TO ACCEPT....still worked 7 days a week as I entered my 4th year...hired more employees....took my first week vacation after the end of my 5th year while offering all of my employees 2 weeks vacation during their first year....3 weeks at the end of 5 years....re-invested my profits into the growth of my company so that by the ned of my 6th year, I was able to cut back to 6 days a week working...and now I am working 5 days a week...my employees are earning a living at salaries THEY ARE EAGER TO EARN....and I am socking away money for my retirement...with the exception of last year where SOME OF MY EMPLOYEES MADE MORE MONEY THAN I DID as the profits were thin.
Exactly what did I do that was corrupt? Not make my employees work 7 days a week as I did?
Or maybe it was the fact that I should not make a profit after risking my future by starting on my own?
Exactly what made me corrupt?
No, really, that's it.
That's what I gather from reading this thread.You made money. And you didn't give it to people who didn't earn it, like georgephillip and the other envious drains on society.I am curious...
Exactly how did I become corrupt by grabbing onto a dream of being my own boss....putting together a business plan....incorporating myself....struggling for the first year as I marketed my services without earning an income.....worked as many as 7 days a week for that year...acheived mild success in my second year....but still had to work 7 days a week....grew my company as the demand for my services required the continued hiring of employees AT SALARIES THEY WERE EAGER TO ACCEPT....still worked 7 days a week as I entered my 4th year...hired more employees....took my first week vacation after the end of my 5th year while offering all of my employees 2 weeks vacation during their first year....3 weeks at the end of 5 years....re-invested my profits into the growth of my company so that by the ned of my 6th year, I was able to cut back to 6 days a week working...and now I am working 5 days a week...my employees are earning a living at salaries THEY ARE EAGER TO EARN....and I am socking away money for my retirement...with the exception of last year where SOME OF MY EMPLOYEES MADE MORE MONEY THAN I DID as the profits were thin.
Exactly what did I do that was corrupt? Not make my employees work 7 days a week as I did?
Or maybe it was the fact that I should not make a profit after risking my future by starting on my own?
Exactly what made me corrupt?
No, really, that's it.
Yep! Obviously the greedy bastard has FAR more than he needs and should live in a refrigerator box while turning over his excess income to people who deserve to have wealth handed to them for doing no more than existing and breathing. It's only fair.
You made money. And you didn't give it to people who didn't earn it, like georgephillip and the other envious drains on society.I am curious...
Exactly how did I become corrupt by grabbing onto a dream of being my own boss....putting together a business plan....incorporating myself....struggling for the first year as I marketed my services without earning an income.....worked as many as 7 days a week for that year...acheived mild success in my second year....but still had to work 7 days a week....grew my company as the demand for my services required the continued hiring of employees AT SALARIES THEY WERE EAGER TO ACCEPT....still worked 7 days a week as I entered my 4th year...hired more employees....took my first week vacation after the end of my 5th year while offering all of my employees 2 weeks vacation during their first year....3 weeks at the end of 5 years....re-invested my profits into the growth of my company so that by the ned of my 6th year, I was able to cut back to 6 days a week working...and now I am working 5 days a week...my employees are earning a living at salaries THEY ARE EAGER TO EARN....and I am socking away money for my retirement...with the exception of last year where SOME OF MY EMPLOYEES MADE MORE MONEY THAN I DID as the profits were thin.
Exactly what did I do that was corrupt? Not make my employees work 7 days a week as I did?
Or maybe it was the fact that I should not make a profit after risking my future by starting on my own?
Exactly what made me corrupt?
No, really, that's it.
Yep! Obviously the greedy bastard has FAR more than he needs and should live in a refrigerator box while turning over his excess income to people who deserve to have wealth handed to them for doing no more than existing and breathing. It's only fair.
You made money. And you didn't give it to people who didn't earn it, like georgephillip and the other envious drains on society.
No, really, that's it.
Yep! Obviously the greedy bastard has FAR more than he needs and should live in a refrigerator box while turning over his excess income to people who deserve to have wealth handed to them for doing no more than existing and breathing. It's only fair.
Last year, when I had to dig into my savings to keep my company afloat, I dont recall any of my employees saying "I will take a pay cut to help you out seeing as I am making more than YOU are"
Come to think of it, I dont recall ANYONE saying "here, you could use this."
Let's ask Robert Reich and Cato Institute Fellow Alan Reynolds what they think:Who said ANYTHING about a 70% rate on Upper Middle Class Families? $670K was a lot more money in 1979 than it is today. That's the trap you Conservatives fall into. Just because we want the top rate higher, doesn't necessarily mean that we want it to be so widespread. I'd say somewhere in the range of maybe more along the lines of $3M/year+ In personal Income?
"Reynolds also distorts my proposal, implying that the bracket on which I call for a 70 percent tax is the same as in todays tax code. Wrong.
"My proposed 70 percent rate would apply only to incomes over $15 million...
"Under my proposal, incomes between $5 million and $15 million would be subjected to a 60 percent rate, and incomes between $500,000 and $5 million to a 50 percent rate.
"Importantly, my proposal calls for a substantial rate reduction for families with incomes under $100,000. (Conveniently, Reynolds fails to mention this.)
"Reynolds entirely ignores my central argument, which is that rather than depress economic growth, higher taxes on the rich correlate with higher growth.
"During almost three decades spanning 1951 to 1980, when the top rate was between 70 percent and 91 percent, average annual growth in the American economy was 3.7 percent."
Robert Reich
Anyone think 70% is too much for the $15 million/year poor to pay for a few generations?
Is anyone else stupid enough to think that anyone actually paid 70% of their income in taxes?
Yep! Obviously the greedy bastard has FAR more than he needs and should live in a refrigerator box while turning over his excess income to people who deserve to have wealth handed to them for doing no more than existing and breathing. It's only fair.
Last year, when I had to dig into my savings to keep my company afloat, I dont recall any of my employees saying "I will take a pay cut to help you out seeing as I am making more than YOU are"
Come to think of it, I dont recall ANYONE saying "here, you could use this."
So your situation isn't applicable to the topic of the thread but thanks for sharing, glad to see you made it through the tough times.
Increase revenue and cut spending, it only makes sense to do both.
I agree.Yep! Obviously the greedy bastard has FAR more than he needs and should live in a refrigerator box while turning over his excess income to people who deserve to have wealth handed to them for doing no more than existing and breathing. It's only fair.
Last year, when I had to dig into my savings to keep my company afloat, I dont recall any of my employees saying "I will take a pay cut to help you out seeing as I am making more than YOU are"
Come to think of it, I dont recall ANYONE saying "here, you could use this."
So your situation isn't applicable to the topic of the thread but thanks for sharing, glad to see you made it through the tough times.
Increase revenue and cut spending, it only makes sense to do both.
Last year, when I had to dig into my savings to keep my company afloat, I dont recall any of my employees saying "I will take a pay cut to help you out seeing as I am making more than YOU are"
Come to think of it, I dont recall ANYONE saying "here, you could use this."
So your situation isn't applicable to the topic of the thread but thanks for sharing, glad to see you made it through the tough times.
Increase revenue and cut spending, it only makes sense to do both.
Of course it's applicable. He's one of those dirty bastard rich business owners wh ohas more than he needs and is out to screw the little guy. Get with the program. Power to the people!
It is not applicable to the topic for only two reasons.Yep! Obviously the greedy bastard has FAR more than he needs and should live in a refrigerator box while turning over his excess income to people who deserve to have wealth handed to them for doing no more than existing and breathing. It's only fair.
Last year, when I had to dig into my savings to keep my company afloat, I dont recall any of my employees saying "I will take a pay cut to help you out seeing as I am making more than YOU are"
Come to think of it, I dont recall ANYONE saying "here, you could use this."
So your situation isn't applicable to the topic of the thread but thanks for sharing, glad to see you made it through the tough times.
Increase revenue and cut spending, it only makes sense to do both.
