Taxing the wealthy more will have little to no impact on your life or anyone around you

[Ray From Cleveland]

Are you stupid??
The more the wealthy businesses are taxed, they just pass expense onto their service/products.

Are you saying we haven't had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more? Because we have, it is a fact.

The federal government can never assess the "strength" of an economy, their assessment is always politically conditional.

Ok well we have had stronger economies with more taxation.

The government always have and will be a drag on an economy.

Their inefficiency, corruption and political nature always negates any good.

And we had a better economy under Clinton with higher taxes.

Yes, because when you have higher taxes, that makes people want to spend more.

 

[Brain357]

We didn't spend anywhere near as much on the military then.

What we spend on military/defence is chicken feed compared to what is spent and wasted on social programs.

Embrace the suck

Ok well then you need to get the job creators to start doing that and paying well. Then there will be no need for social programs.

Well, stop demonizing profit then.

It's what makes the world go around... Like it or not.

Our rich obviously need an incentive to create good paying jobs cause they aren't doing it.

Cut the corporate tax rate to 15% and they'll have some incentive.

Many companies already pay zero:
20 big profitable US companies paid $0 in taxes

Corporations just send jobs to China or bring foreigners here to work for less.

 

[Rustic]

Somehow we managed before 1916. There's a good argument that without the income tax we would have never gotten involved in WW I. It would have been financially impossible.

We didn't spend anywhere near as much on the military then.

What we spend on military/defence is chicken feed compared to what is spent and wasted on social programs.

Embrace the suck

Ok well then you need to get the job creators to start doing that and paying well. Then there will be no need for social programs.

Well, stop demonizing profit then.

It's what makes the world go around... Like it or not.

Our rich obviously need an incentive to create good paying jobs cause they aren't doing it.

You're not understanding, a business is created for a service/product so an profit can be obtained, no to just hire and help employees.

If an business is not in it for profit its failure, rightly so.

If a not for profit "business" is desired, don't call it a business. Call it what it is, handout.

 

[Brain357]

Are you saying we haven't had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more? Because we have, it is a fact.

The federal government can never assess the "strength" of an economy, their assessment is always politically conditional.

Ok well we have had stronger economies with more taxation.

The government always have and will be a drag on an economy.

Their inefficiency, corruption and political nature always negates any good.

And we had a better economy under Clinton with higher taxes.

Yes, because when you have higher taxes, that makes people want to spend more.

Well it is a fact we have had much stronger economies with higher taxes. We also had a much stronger middle class.

We have low taxes now, low interest rates, certainly the government is doing lots of spending. What is it you think slows our economy? To me it is clear we have too much inequality. Wages are stagnant and the middle class is shrinking.

 

[Brain357]

We didn't spend anywhere near as much on the military then.

What we spend on military/defence is chicken feed compared to what is spent and wasted on social programs.

Embrace the suck

Ok well then you need to get the job creators to start doing that and paying well. Then there will be no need for social programs.

Well, stop demonizing profit then.

It's what makes the world go around... Like it or not.

Our rich obviously need an incentive to create good paying jobs cause they aren't doing it.

You're not understanding, a business is created for a service/product so an profit can be obtained, no to just hire and help employees.

If an business is not in it for profit its failure, rightly so.

If a not for profit "business" is desired, don't call it a business. Call it what it is, handout.

And if you want small government you need those businesses to provide good paying jobs with benefits. Either corporations or the government provide for people. Has to be corporations if you want small government.

 

[Rustic]

Are you stupid??
The more the wealthy businesses are taxed, they just pass expense onto their service/products.

Are you saying we haven't had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more? Because we have, it is a fact.

The federal government can never assess the "strength" of an economy, their assessment is always politically conditional.

Ok well we have had stronger economies with more taxation.

The government always have and will be a drag on an economy.

Their inefficiency, corruption and political nature always negates any good.

And we had a better economy under Clinton with higher taxes.

By who's assessment? The governments?
To hell with the government, they all can burn in hell.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Taxing the wealthy more will have little to no impact on your life or anyone around you


Did you get your job from a poor person?

If you tax away enough of the wealthy's money, what do you think they will have to cut as a result?

Yet we have had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more.

Are you stupid??
The more the wealthy businesses are taxed, they just pass expense onto their service/products.

Are you saying we haven't had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more? Because we have, it is a fact.

Well, didn't YOUR President increase taxes on the wealthy; those making over 450K a year? Didn't he increase taxes on corporations to 39% a year?

He raised taxes, and look what we have because of it.

 

[Rustic]

Are you stupid??
The more the wealthy businesses are taxed, they just pass expense onto their service/products.

Are you saying we haven't had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more? Because we have, it is a fact.

The federal government can never assess the "strength" of an economy, their assessment is always politically conditional.

Ok well we have had stronger economies with more taxation.

That was a different world Brian, before Nafta and all the rest when China only had a 100,000 cars on the road... We are not going back to 1950 no matter how much the left thinks it's possible.

What does income tax rate have to do with all of those things? The rich got their breaks and it seems they have used them to grow the China economy.

No, cheap people grow China's economy. You know, people who shop at Amazon and Walmart.

 

[Brain357]

Are you saying we haven't had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more? Because we have, it is a fact.

The federal government can never assess the "strength" of an economy, their assessment is always politically conditional.

Ok well we have had stronger economies with more taxation.

The government always have and will be a drag on an economy.

Their inefficiency, corruption and political nature always negates any good.

And we had a better economy under Clinton with higher taxes.

By who's assessment? The governments?
To hell with the government, they all can burn in hell.

Ah yes so to hell with the military that protects us. Great plan.

 

[Rustic]

What we spend on military/defence is chicken feed compared to what is spent and wasted on social programs.

Embrace the suck

Ok well then you need to get the job creators to start doing that and paying well. Then there will be no need for social programs.

Well, stop demonizing profit then.

It's what makes the world go around... Like it or not.

Our rich obviously need an incentive to create good paying jobs cause they aren't doing it.

Cut the corporate tax rate to 15% and they'll have some incentive.

Many companies already pay zero:
20 big profitable US companies paid $0 in taxes

Corporations just send jobs to China or bring foreigners here to work for less.

There should not be a corporate tax, that is taxation without representation.

 

[Brain357]

Taxing the wealthy more will have little to no impact on your life or anyone around you


Did you get your job from a poor person?

If you tax away enough of the wealthy's money, what do you think they will have to cut as a result?

Yet we have had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more.

Are you stupid??
The more the wealthy businesses are taxed, they just pass expense onto their service/products.

Are you saying we haven't had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more? Because we have, it is a fact.

Well, didn't YOUR President increase taxes on the wealthy; those making over 450K a year? Didn't he increase taxes on corporations to 39% a year?

He raised taxes, and look what we have because of it.

It is our president. No more mine than yours. I am an independent. Taxes are at historical lows.

 

[Rustic]

The federal government can never assess the "strength" of an economy, their assessment is always politically conditional.

Ok well we have had stronger economies with more taxation.

The government always have and will be a drag on an economy.

Their inefficiency, corruption and political nature always negates any good.

And we had a better economy under Clinton with higher taxes.

Yes, because when you have higher taxes, that makes people want to spend more.

Well it is a fact we have had much stronger economies with higher taxes. We also had a much stronger middle class.

We have low taxes now, low interest rates, certainly the government is doing lots of spending. What is it you think slows our economy? To me it is clear we have too much inequality. Wages are stagnant and the middle class is shrinking.

Taxes only go to politicians, not citizens.

 

[Brain357]

Are you saying we haven't had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more? Because we have, it is a fact.

The federal government can never assess the "strength" of an economy, their assessment is always politically conditional.

Ok well we have had stronger economies with more taxation.

That was a different world Brian, before Nafta and all the rest when China only had a 100,000 cars on the road... We are not going back to 1950 no matter how much the left thinks it's possible.

What does income tax rate have to do with all of those things? The rich got their breaks and it seems they have used them to grow the China economy.

No, cheap people grow China's economy. You know, people who shop at Amazon and Walmart.

Yes because CEOs sent all the production to China.

 

[Brain357]

Ok well then you need to get the job creators to start doing that and paying well. Then there will be no need for social programs.

Well, stop demonizing profit then.

It's what makes the world go around... Like it or not.

Our rich obviously need an incentive to create good paying jobs cause they aren't doing it.

Cut the corporate tax rate to 15% and they'll have some incentive.

Many companies already pay zero:
20 big profitable US companies paid $0 in taxes

Corporations just send jobs to China or bring foreigners here to work for less.

There should not be a corporate tax, that is taxation without representation.

Yes I get it. You don't think there should be any taxes. Great plan. Pay for the military and infrastructure with no taxes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's called risk...
Taxing risk makes no sense...

Of course it does

If the risk does not pay off, you are not taxed
if the risk pays off, you are

...you just don't understand.

The federal government has no skin in the game, why should they be rewarded??

We the people are rewarded

It is your entry fee into the game

Being looted is being rewarded? When you say "we the people" you really mean "we the ticks on the ass of society."

If you want to consider 330 million people ticks on the ass of society, you are welcome

Investment should be taxed the same as labor

And then you have less people investing. Is that what you want?

 

[Rustic]

What we spend on military/defence is chicken feed compared to what is spent and wasted on social programs.

Embrace the suck

Ok well then you need to get the job creators to start doing that and paying well. Then there will be no need for social programs.

Well, stop demonizing profit then.

It's what makes the world go around... Like it or not.

Our rich obviously need an incentive to create good paying jobs cause they aren't doing it.

You're not understanding, a business is created for a service/product so an profit can be obtained, no to just hire and help employees.

If an business is not in it for profit its failure, rightly so.

If a not for profit "business" is desired, don't call it a business. Call it what it is, handout.

And if you want small government you need those businesses to provide good paying jobs with benefits. Either corporations or the government provide for people. Has to be corporations if you want small government.

If anyone starts a business just to employ, that makes no sense.

So it will fail...

 

[Wyatt earp]

The federal government can never assess the "strength" of an economy, their assessment is always politically conditional.

Ok well we have had stronger economies with more taxation.

That was a different world Brian, before Nafta and all the rest when China only had a 100,000 cars on the road... We are not going back to 1950 no matter how much the left thinks it's possible.

What does income tax rate have to do with all of those things? The rich got their breaks and it seems they have used them to grow the China economy.

No, cheap people grow China's economy. You know, people who shop at Amazon and Walmart.

Yes because CEOs sent all the production to China.

The American consumer is also to blame, they wanted cheap goods, why can't you liberals ever take some responsibility for your actions? Always trying to put the full blame on CEOs?

 

[Arianrhod]

Eisenhower taxed the wealthy at 91% and corporations at 50% and presided over the biggest economic boom time in America in the past 100 years.

 

[Rustic]

The federal government can never assess the "strength" of an economy, their assessment is always politically conditional.

Ok well we have had stronger economies with more taxation.

The government always have and will be a drag on an economy.

Their inefficiency, corruption and political nature always negates any good.

And we had a better economy under Clinton with higher taxes.

By who's assessment? The governments?
To hell with the government, they all can burn in hell.

Ah yes so to hell with the military that protects us. Great plan.

The military/police is a duty of government, big difference.

I think your confused...

 

[Rustic]

Taxing the wealthy more will have little to no impact on your life or anyone around you


Did you get your job from a poor person?

If you tax away enough of the wealthy's money, what do you think they will have to cut as a result?

Yet we have had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more.

Are you stupid??
The more the wealthy businesses are taxed, they just pass expense onto their service/products.

Are you saying we haven't had much stronger economies when the rich were being taxed more? Because we have, it is a fact.

Well, didn't YOUR President increase taxes on the wealthy; those making over 450K a year? Didn't he increase taxes on corporations to 39% a year?

He raised taxes, and look what we have because of it.

It is our president. No more mine than yours. I am an independent. Taxes are at historical lows.

Taxes only help politicians...