Taxing the wealthy the most isn’t about what’s fair - it’s about what is realistic

[Billy000]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense. Republicans can whine about Medicare/Medicaid I guess (until they need it and don’t admit it), but man do they love our defense budget. Bigger the better! Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use! It makes us look tough! Okay, sure, but guess what? That shit still has to be paid for. That revenue has to be generated realistically to match the high price tag. That revenue out of sheer necessity must come from the abundant wealth that rich people are hoarding because it’s not like the shrinking middle class or poor has the income to pay their fair share. Forget about a flat tax because it’s “fair”. That isn’t the point. It’s about what makes economic sense.

 

[fncceo]

Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use!

You can always turn an aircraft carrier into a homeless shelter.

You can't very well hold back the North Korean Army with a battalion of crack addicts.

 

[Mac1958]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump is.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

 

[SweetSue92]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense. Republicans can whine about Medicare/Medicaid I guess (until they need it and don’t admit it), but man do they love our defense budget. Bigger the better! Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use! It makes us look tough! Okay, sure, but guess what? That shit still has to be paid for. That revenue has to be generated realistically to match the high price tag. That revenue out of sheer necessity must come from the abundant wealth that rich people are hoarding because it’s not like the shrinking middle class or poor has the income to pay their fair share. Forget about a flat tax because it’s “fair”. That isn’t the point. It’s about what makes economic sense.

Billy after he's been on some weird stuff late at night, cranking up about rich people, GOP, yadda yadda:

 

[Muhammed]

Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use!

You can always turn an aircraft carrier into a homeless shelter.

You can't very well hold back the North Korean Army with a battalion of crack addicts.

What if you offer a $10 rock for every nork scalp?

 

[Bleipriester]

Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use!

You can always turn an aircraft carrier into a homeless shelter.

You can't very well hold back the North Korean Army with a battalion of crack addicts.

Yeah, I heard they are just preparing an invasion!

 

[Billy000]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense. Republicans can whine about Medicare/Medicaid I guess (until they need it and don’t admit it), but man do they love our defense budget. Bigger the better! Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use! It makes us look tough! Okay, sure, but guess what? That shit still has to be paid for. That revenue has to be generated realistically to match the high price tag. That revenue out of sheer necessity must come from the abundant wealth that rich people are hoarding because it’s not like the shrinking middle class or poor has the income to pay their fair share. Forget about a flat tax because it’s “fair”. That isn’t the point. It’s about what makes economic sense.

Billy after he's been on some weird stuff late at night, cranking up about rich people, GOP, yadda yadda:

Nah, as usual, my logic is undeniable.

 

[Norman]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

 

[SweetSue92]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense. Republicans can whine about Medicare/Medicaid I guess (until they need it and don’t admit it), but man do they love our defense budget. Bigger the better! Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use! It makes us look tough! Okay, sure, but guess what? That shit still has to be paid for. That revenue has to be generated realistically to match the high price tag. That revenue out of sheer necessity must come from the abundant wealth that rich people are hoarding because it’s not like the shrinking middle class or poor has the income to pay their fair share. Forget about a flat tax because it’s “fair”. That isn’t the point. It’s about what makes economic sense.

Billy after he's been on some weird stuff late at night, cranking up about rich people, GOP, yadda yadda:

Nah, as usual, my logic is undeniable.

It doesn't make sense. The gov't has no right to MORE of people's money just because they have MORE of it, Billy.

Make your "logical" case for that, if you dare.

 

[Mac1958]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

 

[22lcidw]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

When Trump invited Prog leaders a few times to talk without cameras what do you think he got? Now he did bring Pelosi and Schumer in front of a camera and got them back. But what he got was the usual Prog does not give up a damn thing spiel. The budgets passed had the military stuff with the Progs getting their domestic free stuff. All the Progs got to do is give the peasants they care so much about a huge tax cut. They won't do it. Tell me why?

 

[Mac1958]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

When Trump invited Prog leaders a few times to talk without cameras what do you think he got? Now he did bring Pelosi and Schumer in front of a camera and got them back. But what he got was the usual Prog does not give up a damn thing spiel. The budgets passed had the military stuff with the Progs getting their domestic free stuff. All the Progs got to do is give the peasants they care so much about a huge tax cut. They won't do it. Tell me why?

It's always someone else's fault. He's President. It's his watch. He had the House, Senate and White House.

Funny, I remember right wingers in here blaming the Congress instead of Commander in Chief Bush, pretending that he had no choice but to invade Iraq because Congress approved it.

Clearly, the GOP is neither the Party of Personal Responsibility NOR the Party of Fiscal Responsibility.
.

 

[Billy000]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense. Republicans can whine about Medicare/Medicaid I guess (until they need it and don’t admit it), but man do they love our defense budget. Bigger the better! Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use! It makes us look tough! Okay, sure, but guess what? That shit still has to be paid for. That revenue has to be generated realistically to match the high price tag. That revenue out of sheer necessity must come from the abundant wealth that rich people are hoarding because it’s not like the shrinking middle class or poor has the income to pay their fair share. Forget about a flat tax because it’s “fair”. That isn’t the point. It’s about what makes economic sense.

Billy after he's been on some weird stuff late at night, cranking up about rich people, GOP, yadda yadda:

Nah, as usual, my logic is undeniable.

It doesn't make sense. The gov't has no right to MORE of people's money just because they have MORE of it, Billy.

Make your "logical" case for that, if you dare.

When you say “government”, who are you even referring to?

 

[mikegriffith1]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense. Republicans can whine about Medicare/Medicaid I guess (until they need it and don’t admit it), but man do they love our defense budget. Bigger the better! Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use! It makes us look tough! Okay, sure, but guess what? That shit still has to be paid for. That revenue has to be generated realistically to match the high price tag. That revenue out of sheer necessity must come from the abundant wealth that rich people are hoarding because it’s not like the shrinking middle class or poor has the income to pay their fair share. Forget about a flat tax because it’s “fair”. That isn’t the point. It’s about what makes economic sense.

Right, because imposing confiscatory taxes on the wealthy has worked so well in England, Cuba, Spain, Greece, Italy, Venezuela, the old Soviet Union, etc., etc.

I'll tell you what makes sense, what has worked for every family, business, state, and country that has ever tried it: you spend a little less than you take in and put aside the remainder as a reserve fund.

 

[Billy000]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense. Republicans can whine about Medicare/Medicaid I guess (until they need it and don’t admit it), but man do they love our defense budget. Bigger the better! Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use! It makes us look tough! Okay, sure, but guess what? That shit still has to be paid for. That revenue has to be generated realistically to match the high price tag. That revenue out of sheer necessity must come from the abundant wealth that rich people are hoarding because it’s not like the shrinking middle class or poor has the income to pay their fair share. Forget about a flat tax because it’s “fair”. That isn’t the point. It’s about what makes economic sense.

Right, because imposing confiscatory taxes on the wealthy has worked so well in England, Cuba, Spain, Greece, Italy, Venezuela, the old Soviet Union, etc., etc.

I'll tell you what makes sense, what has worked for every family, business, state, and country that has ever tried it: you spend a little less than you take in and put aside the remainder as a reserve fund.

Well we know it works well because...we already do it! In fact, in the 50’s, the tax rate was 90% for the wealthy and that was a time of great economic growth.

 

[Norman]

A progressive tax system isn’t “punishing the rich” or being a freeloader poor person in comparison. It’s about what makes goddamn sense. Republicans can whine about Medicare/Medicaid I guess (until they need it and don’t admit it), but man do they love our defense budget. Bigger the better! Who cares if we have a shit load of tanks and airpower we’ll never use! It makes us look tough! Okay, sure, but guess what? That shit still has to be paid for. That revenue has to be generated realistically to match the high price tag. That revenue out of sheer necessity must come from the abundant wealth that rich people are hoarding because it’s not like the shrinking middle class or poor has the income to pay their fair share. Forget about a flat tax because it’s “fair”. That isn’t the point. It’s about what makes economic sense.

Right, because imposing confiscatory taxes on the wealthy has worked so well in England, Cuba, Spain, Greece, Italy, Venezuela, the old Soviet Union, etc., etc.

I'll tell you what makes sense, what has worked for every family, business, state, and country that has ever tried it: you spend a little less than you take in and put aside the remainder as a reserve fund.

Well we know it works well because...we already do it! In fact, in the 50’s, the tax rate was 90% for the wealthy and that was a time of great economic growth.

The taxes used to be so, so bad! Average American paid 5 percent in taxes. Massive tax cuts obviously...

So I suppose I agree, go back to the lower taxed time. And instead of taking the rates, also take all the deductions that the above post fails to mention.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Well we know it works well because...we already do it! In fact, in the 50’s, the tax rate was 90% for the wealthy and that was a time of great economic growth.

Oh. My. Goodness. You're kidding, right? Really? How many times has this myth been debunked in print, on TV, etc.? Here's the Cliff Notes version: Yes, the top marginal rate was 90%, but it was loaded with loopholes--intentionally loaded with loopholes, not to mention the fact that it was graduated--so that the actual tax rate was around 20%. Plus, in the 50s, there was no FICA tax.

I might add that in the 1950s, Eisenhower held the growth in federal spending to just a few points above the rate of inflation, the smallest rate of increase for any presidency in the modern era.

 

[initforme]

If the uber wealthy own most all of the wealth how do we expect those working for the little bit left to pay the same amount and still find necessities such as our strong and great military? Some poor person making 60 grand a year should pay the same amount as some billionaire? Cmon.

 

[rightwinger]

Gotta go where the money is

 

[Norman]

First, the GOP, despite its shallow libertarian droning about small government, spends like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's Gold Card. At least the Democrats are fiscally responsible enough to tax for the proceeds to use. You spend your way out of a financial catastrophe, as Obama was forced to do. You don't explode budgets in a period of growth, as Trump did.

Second, in any given economic system, there will always be individuals who are naturally, organically equipped to prosper significantly more within that system, and individuals who are not. An intelligent, prosperous, civilized society knows that you don't extravagantly reward only that select few and leave the rest to struggle. All that will inevitably lead to is...

....third, to steal a line from another poster, a smart socio-economic policy is valuable insurance against social revolution. The masses are human, and will only put up with increasing wealth disparity and income disparity for so long. At some point they will react, and when they do, it's human nature to over-react. The people below the top 5% vote, and they are paying attention.

Libertarian theory is fun 'n stuff, it has value as a general guardrail, but it's not realistic in the long run.
.

Democrats tax for the receipts?

No they don't, they may talk about it, but then the balless republicans talk about cuts also. Democrats are the least responsible people I know.

When the Republican Party begins demonstrating REAL fiscal responsibility, you can try to make your case.

Until then, all you have is vague economic theory and platitudes.
.

Stop deflecting and straw-manning. I never said they were fiscally responsible, in fact the opposite.

And neither is the democrat party. You claimed that the democrats tax for their spending, that is factually incorrect. It's also laughable given their major attack campaigns against "austerians" during the Obama years. At least most non-democrats still value austerity, even if that's not what they are getting.