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

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes the old far left drone "Tax the rich more, that will solve all our problems"..

No it will not, America has a spending problem, not a revenue problem..

Taxing the rich 90% will not solve much of anything, it may run the federal government for about 18 more hours..

After that where do you go?

They taxing Wall street is the next step, Wall street is already taxed via Capital Gains tax. Even if that was raised to 90% we may get another 20 hours of running the government..

Now that you have taxed everyone and everything the far left wants taxed where do you go to make up the rest of the money?

Far left math is not good for anything!

Taxing the rich 90% would solve ALOT of problems.

Only if you think the problem is we have too many rich people in the US.

Right, tax them at 90% Then state, county and city or town taxes take the rest. Yeah, that will make me want to create wealth and jobs.

Why don't we just buy an airplane so we can fly all the wealthy people out of the country right now? After all, taxing them at 90% will produce the exact same results.

No one actually paid a 90% rate..

I've explained that over and over again.

By the way, when it was 90%? None of them left.

Where were they going to go?

Businesses up and move on a heartbeat today. Unlike years ago when travel was dangerous and moving businesses overseas was not profitable, people had no choice but to put up with taxation.

Because we outpaced ourselves in wages, people in other countries work for far less money. Businesses can operate using our internet and computer systems. Companies no longer have to fly VIP's across the country or world to have meetings. They have meetings over the internet on one of our dozens of services--some even for free.

So for me to move my widget business is a no brainer if the government here is going to take all my money anyway. What do I have to lose? I have everything to gain by leaving the US.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The fact that Republicans still bring up that $10,000 shrimp experiment shows how little they know about science

$10,000? Try four million dollars.

'Shrimp On A Treadmill': The Politics Of 'Silly' Studies

..Take the case of the "shrimp on a treadmill." Burnett says the senator's report linked that work to a half-million-dollar research grant. But that money actually went to a lot of different research that he and his colleagues did on this economically important seafood species.

The treadmills were just a small part of it, a way to measure how shrimp respond to changes in water quality. Burnett says the first treadmill was built by a colleague from scraps and was basically free, and the second was fancier and cost about $1,000. The senator's report was misleading, says Burnett, "and it suggests that much money was spent on seeing how long a shrimp can run on a treadmill, which was totally out of context."

'Shrimp On A Treadmill' And The Politics Of 'Silly' Science Studies

It amazes me that brain washed conservatives still bring this up as an example of taxpayer waste. Even if the story was debunked years ago

To Conservatives, it is scientists saying...Let's put shrimp on a treadmill and see what happens

To scientists, it was a low cost method to find out at what point water contamination begins to impact shrimp

Republicans and science....it totally baffles them

The only thing baffling is your complete ignorance when it comes to frivolous spending.

You dumbasses bitch CONSTANTLY about not having enough money to spend on everything from social services to education to foodstamps. Yet somehow you defend shit like this.
It just goes to show that no amount of taxation will ever be enough for you greedy scumbags.

It is your stupid thread and you showed the world how clueless you are with your shrimp on a treadmill whine

You don't think the effect of water pollution on shrimp is a valid expenditure?

No it's do not you stupid idiot.

 

[Rustic]

why claim you don't want deficit spending?

That shrimp project was no joke if you looked into it, and cost basically nothing. You hater dupes think it's all waste until you find out what actually happens...

The fact that Republicans still bring up that $10,000 shrimp experiment shows how little they know about science

$10,000? Try four million dollars.

'Shrimp On A Treadmill': The Politics Of 'Silly' Studies

..Take the case of the "shrimp on a treadmill." Burnett says the senator's report linked that work to a half-million-dollar research grant. But that money actually went to a lot of different research that he and his colleagues did on this economically important seafood species.

The treadmills were just a small part of it, a way to measure how shrimp respond to changes in water quality. Burnett says the first treadmill was built by a colleague from scraps and was basically free, and the second was fancier and cost about $1,000. The senator's report was misleading, says Burnett, "and it suggests that much money was spent on seeing how long a shrimp can run on a treadmill, which was totally out of context."

'Shrimp On A Treadmill' And The Politics Of 'Silly' Science Studies

It amazes me that brain washed conservatives still bring this up as an example of taxpayer waste. Even if the story was debunked years ago

To Conservatives, it is scientists saying...Let's put shrimp on a treadmill and see what happens

To scientists, it was a low cost method to find out at what point water contamination begins to impact shrimp

Republicans and science....it totally baffles them

Still typical government waste... The federal knows no other way.

Embrace the suck

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Look how stupid the liberals are. They think this thread is about shrimp when it is just an example of wasteful spending.

 

[rightwinger]

$10,000? Try four million dollars.

'Shrimp On A Treadmill': The Politics Of 'Silly' Studies

..Take the case of the "shrimp on a treadmill." Burnett says the senator's report linked that work to a half-million-dollar research grant. But that money actually went to a lot of different research that he and his colleagues did on this economically important seafood species.

The treadmills were just a small part of it, a way to measure how shrimp respond to changes in water quality. Burnett says the first treadmill was built by a colleague from scraps and was basically free, and the second was fancier and cost about $1,000. The senator's report was misleading, says Burnett, "and it suggests that much money was spent on seeing how long a shrimp can run on a treadmill, which was totally out of context."

'Shrimp On A Treadmill' And The Politics Of 'Silly' Science Studies

It amazes me that brain washed conservatives still bring this up as an example of taxpayer waste. Even if the story was debunked years ago

To Conservatives, it is scientists saying...Let's put shrimp on a treadmill and see what happens

To scientists, it was a low cost method to find out at what point water contamination begins to impact shrimp

Republicans and science....it totally baffles them

The only thing baffling is your complete ignorance when it comes to frivolous spending.

You dumbasses bitch CONSTANTLY about not having enough money to spend on everything from social services to education to foodstamps. Yet somehow you defend shit like this.
It just goes to show that no amount of taxation will ever be enough for you greedy scumbags.

It is your stupid thread and you showed the world how clueless you are with your shrimp on a treadmill whine

You don't think the effect of water pollution on shrimp is a valid expenditure?

No it's do not you stupid idiot.

Is that what you consider English?

 

[rightwinger]

Look how stupid the liberals are. They think this thread is about shrimp when it is just an example of wasteful spending.

Wasn't wasteful was it?

Kind of invalidates your thread

 

[danielpalos]

Greed is making lots of money while paying employees so little they are on welfare.

So the fact that you pay a wage to people who have no marketable skills means you are greedy?

dear, it is about socializing costs while claiming to hate socialism.

What costs are being socialized?

all of the social benefits being provided by the State. why not simply require capitalists to insure all of their labor, via a simple social law?

Those aren't corporate costs, numskull.

why not; skullnum?

why not simply require capitalists to insure all of their labor, via a simple social law.

there is no social need to distinguish between full time and part time labor for benefits purposes; it is a capital problem, not a social one.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Look how stupid the liberals are. They think this thread is about shrimp when it is just an example of wasteful spending.

Wasn't wasteful was it?

Kind of invalidates your thread

You never cease to prove your stupidity

 

[rightwinger]

Look how stupid the liberals are. They think this thread is about shrimp when it is just an example of wasteful spending.

Wasn't wasteful was it?

Kind of invalidates your thread

You never cease to prove your stupidity

Your thread based on a bogus premise kind of proved your stupidity

 

[Brain357]

Greed is making lots of money while paying employees so little they are on welfare.

Is that what greed is?

If you need your car repaired and you have two garages to take it to, which one would you choose? The one that's going to charge you $850.00 or the one that's going to charge you $625.00?

If you decide to have somebody else cut and take care of your lawn, do you choose the company that's going to charge you $45.00 per cut, or are you going to use the company that charges $70.00 per cut?

Why would you or anybody else for that matter pay people more money than the job they are doing is worth? That's a sure sign of failure. And if you are overpaying your workers, you too will be looking for a job real soon because your competition will wipe you out in no time at all.

Well this extreme underpaying is what grows government. As long as the rich pay so little the gov will grow.

"Underpaying" what? How does paying less grow government?

Creates government dependence, more need for welfare.

How can it create government dependence before anyone has become dependent on the government?

? Walmart for example pays so little that employees collect welfare. By paying so little walmart is creating government dependence and increasing the size of government. Meanwhile the waltons make billions each year not working. If they paid enough that employees were not on welfare it would decrease government dependence. Before you know it those people would probably want tax breaks.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

It will only enable the government to spend more money on stupid ass senseless projects like shrimp on treadmills.
You stupid liberals will vote for it and see NONE OF IT. It will be blown on wasteful spending just like the vast majority of your taxes

Tax bracket and taxesa ctually pair are very different things. Higher the tax bracket is, less taxes will be collected due to financial wizardry and concealing assets. Make the rate flat and reasonable and it'll be paid being more cost-efficient than paying some super accountant to find all the loopholes.

 

[SwimExpert]

It will only enable the government to spend more money on stupid ass senseless projects like shrimp on treadmills.
You stupid liberals will vote for it and see NONE OF IT. It will be blown on wasteful spending just like the vast majority of your taxes

I would like to point out that there is a terrible flaw in this logic. What if I, or people around me, are wealthy?

 

[Sallow]

Greed is making lots of money while paying employees so little they are on welfare.

So the fact that you pay a wage to people who have no marketable skills means you are greedy?

dear, it is about socializing costs while claiming to hate socialism.

What costs are being socialized?

See all the folks flying in first class on the plane?

Most of them are doing it on your dime.

I'm one of those folks, nimrod, and I'm not doing it on your dime.

Yeah?

No tax write off you little thief?

 

[bripat9643]

So the fact that you pay a wage to people who have no marketable skills means you are greedy?

dear, it is about socializing costs while claiming to hate socialism.

What costs are being socialized?

See all the folks flying in first class on the plane?

Most of them are doing it on your dime.

I'm one of those folks, nimrod, and I'm not doing it on your dime.

Yeah?

No tax write off you little thief?

What the fuck are you talking about?

It's a business expense paid for by my clients. I have enough frequent flyer miles to get an automatic upgrade almost every time I fly. That's how most people end up in business class. It's a reward for being a loyal customer.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Look how stupid the liberals are. They think this thread is about shrimp when it is just an example of wasteful spending.

Wasn't wasteful was it?

Kind of invalidates your thread

You never cease to prove your stupidity

Your thread based on a bogus premise kind of proved your stupidity

Just how stupid do you want to prove yourself to be? The shrimp example was just the needle in a haystack of wasteful spending that is the result of Congress having too much money and trying to find shit to spend it on as a result of the contributions to their campaigns.
Morons like you are the reason this type of nonsense continues. Increase taxes and you'll sit idly by as that increase in taxes results in NOTHING that benefits average Americans. Which is exactly what this thread is about. You're just too stupid to get it.
Also if this thread had no basis in reality it wouldn't have grown to 70 pages in one day, but your DESPERATE need to TRY to discredit it is noted

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It will only enable the government to spend more money on stupid ass senseless projects like shrimp on treadmills.
You stupid liberals will vote for it and see NONE OF IT. It will be blown on wasteful spending just like the vast majority of your taxes

I would like to point out that there is a terrible flaw in this logic. What if I, or people around me, are wealthy?

This thread isn't about you or people like you. It is about the ignorant & the leeches

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Is that what greed is?

If you need your car repaired and you have two garages to take it to, which one would you choose? The one that's going to charge you $850.00 or the one that's going to charge you $625.00?

If you decide to have somebody else cut and take care of your lawn, do you choose the company that's going to charge you $45.00 per cut, or are you going to use the company that charges $70.00 per cut?

Why would you or anybody else for that matter pay people more money than the job they are doing is worth? That's a sure sign of failure. And if you are overpaying your workers, you too will be looking for a job real soon because your competition will wipe you out in no time at all.

Well this extreme underpaying is what grows government. As long as the rich pay so little the gov will grow.

"Underpaying" what? How does paying less grow government?

Creates government dependence, more need for welfare.

How can it create government dependence before anyone has become dependent on the government?

? Walmart for example pays so little that employees collect welfare. By paying so little walmart is creating government dependence and increasing the size of government. Meanwhile the waltons make billions each year not working. If they paid enough that employees were not on welfare it would decrease government dependence. Before you know it those people would probably want tax breaks.

How long have you been on this planet anyway?

For your information, minimum wage has always been that--minimum. So why focus on Walmart? Because you were told to focus on Walmart.

Walmart is no different than K-Mart, than Target, than Home Depot, than True Value Hardware, than any other entry level job. They all pay minimum wage.

When the left wants to brainwash people, they show you or tell you about the lowly shelf stocker at Walmart. Well soooorrrry. I'm sorry you didn't get an education or secure a trade, but that's not Walmart's fault.

What the left doesn't tell you is how well Walmart pays their managers, their warehouse people, their truck drivers, their office staff, everybody else but that floor washer you are so obsessed with.

Minimum wage is nothing new either. When I first got out into the workforce, minimum wage was $3.25 per hour. Yes, that was some years ago, but you still couldn't afford to support yourself. So what did we do if we were stuck at a minimum wage job? We worked more hours. We'd work 10 hour days plus the weekend if need be. If your job didn't offer weekend work, you found another job for the weekends. We would try to advance ourselves at the job we had. But what we didn't do is go on some welfare program because we had too much pride and welfare programs back then didn't pay anything.

 

[SwimExpert]

See all the folks flying in first class on the plane?

Most of them are doing it on your dime.

Alright you stupid fuck, you really don't know what you are talking about, and now I'm going to school you...

What do you know about airline operations? What do you know about pricing strategies? Answer: You don't know shit. On the other hand, I know quite a damn bit. See, when it comes to rates and inventory management airlines operate in a nearly identical fashion as hotels. I happen to work in the hotel industry, and I know exactly what goes on in these scenarios and I can tell you that you are so far off the fucking mark it's downright shameful that you've even opened your mouth.

My credentials:
Eight years of extensive hotel experience with primary emphasis in rooms and operations; have traversed multiple properties among some of the top companies in the world, and internationally established brands; primary emphasis on full service Four Diamond properties, though also have participated in the select service markets as well; a documented history of progressive development while also taking on inter-divisional responsibility; inter-property departmental management; divisional supervisory experience; current position as Assistant General Manager with a medium sized hotel directly overseeing Front Office and Housekeeping departments while liaising with corporate revenue management.

A hotel's inventory is composed of room nights; a room night is one room for one night. If a person books one room over three nights, they are purchasing a total of three room nights. If a person books three rooms over two nights, they are purchasing six room nights.

A hotel's inventory is perishable. If a hotel has 10 rooms that go vacant on a given night, then the hotel has lost 10 room nights that it will never again have the opportunity to sell. The ultimate goal of the hotel is to sell out every single night. Of course, this is not likely to happen. So the next goal is to sell as many room nights as possible, and to sell each room night at the highest rate at which you can convince people to buy. The main challenge here is that different people will be willing to buy at different prices. This is where yield management comes into play. In determining the optimum rates at which to sell, a hotel must forecast market demand at specific times and attempt to capitalize on that demand for each room night.

Thus, rates for a given room night are always variant. If the rates for a given room night are set too high, fewer people will buy and it will become necessary for the hotel to lower rates to solicit additional customers in order to increase occupancy as the specified date approaches. If rates are too low, the hotel will leave revenue on the table. Successful yield management requires operations and revenue managers to employ accurate estimations on the likelihood that new reservations will continue to be made when rates are set at a certain point.

This is where room class comes in. John may be willing to pay $200 for a room night, but Bill may only be willing to pay $150 for the same room night. Meanwhile, Frank may be willing to pay $250 for a room on the same night, but only if he receives a higher level of product that than what John and Bill are looking for. Therefore, hotels offer a diversity of room types, some of which constitute higher and lower room classes. So John buys a $200 room night in a standard room, Frank buys a $250 room night in a suite. Bill doesn't buy a room night because he's not willing to pay the advertised rate. Eventually the hotel realizes that the chances of rooms going empty is increasing as the date of interest approaches, and they begin advertising lower rates. Bill eventually buys a room night at $175, because as time has elapsed he has become more willing to pay more instead of risking not finding anything at all and having to sleep in his car.

On the other hand, there are also times when there will not be enough market demand to fill room nights in room classes that are priced higher than standard rooms. This is where room class overbooking comes into play. If all standard rooms have been booked for a certain day, but there are still several upgraded rooms that are available, the hotel will typically play both sides of the fence by continuing to advertise both room categories as available, at their respective rates. There is still a chance that someone may be willing to buy the room night at the higher rate. But in case nobody is willing, the hotel will continue to offer room nights at the lower class rate as long as the overbooking can be balanced against whatever higher class rooms go unbought. The hotel will simply provide complimentary upgrades to a few lucky customers. Often times, the recipients of complimentary upgrades will be pre-selected based on multiple criteria, such as total duration of stay (it's easier to upgrade a one-nighter because tomorrow night the higher room class might be sold out already). But one of the key factors that is taken into account is their rate. The more money I'm making from you, the greater preference you receive when I hand out complimentary upgrades.

And that brings us to the issue of customer loyalty. Modern business practices have recognized that keeping customers is cheaper than finding new customers (at least, smart businesses have realized this; some industries such as cell phone service providers seem to have not figured this out very well). In a free market where there is ample competition, promotions that encourage loyalty generally produce a better return on investment than promotions that solicit new customers. Thus, loyalty rewards programs have become common place in our modern world. These programs encourage loyalty, and reward those who demonstrate the greatest degrees of loyalty. One of the easiest and cheapest ways to reward higher tier loyalty members is to give them first preference for upgrades. It's not just cheap, it's actually completely free because the hotel doesn't forgo any opportunities to sell higher rated rooms. If someone is willing to buy the room class that has a higher rate they will have the opportunity to do so. If not, we will give high loyalty customers a complimentary upgrade and in doing so reemphasize to them why they should remain loyal to us.

So your wild idea that people who are in lower class accommodations are somehow subsidizing those who are in higher class accommodations is absolute horseshit. It's born of your complete and total ignorance. The only thing that prevents your notion from being absolutely laughable, is just how pathetically sad it is.

 

[Arianrhod]

Typical USMB discussion:

On one side: Facts and reasoned argument therefrom
On the other: Trolling and flaming without substance

Which side understands the import of Citizens United? Hmm, tough one...

 

[rightwinger]

Look how stupid the liberals are. They think this thread is about shrimp when it is just an example of wasteful spending.

Wasn't wasteful was it?

Kind of invalidates your thread

You never cease to prove your stupidity

Your thread based on a bogus premise kind of proved your stupidity

Just how stupid do you want to prove yourself to be? The shrimp example was just the needle in a haystack of wasteful spending that is the result of Congress having too much money and trying to find shit to spend it on as a result of the contributions to their campaigns.
Morons like you are the reason this type of nonsense continues. Increase taxes and you'll sit idly by as that increase in taxes results in NOTHING that benefits average Americans. Which is exactly what this thread is about. You're just too stupid to get it.
Also if this thread had no basis in reality it wouldn't have grown to 70 pages in one day, but your DESPERATE need to TRY to discredit it is noted

I have always found taxpayers to be more comfortable in believing the government wastes their tax dollars. It fuels their resentment for having to pay taxes.
In reality, the government is as good as any in the world. It can be expected some is wasted. But to make folks like gramps happy, there are always the bogus stories about shrimp on a treadmill to keep him happy.

Want to hear about that $600 toilet seat and that hammer?