Printable View
Read this and find out!!
http://www.parade.com/news/backpage/...overnment.html
And the last time I looked, the "poor" get taxed at 10% and the "rich" get taxed at 35% yet the article cites only 47% of all households pay income tax. HTF does that work?
Oh for the good ole days!Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong
I remember paying about 10% of my wages in Federal Income Tax when I was a young man. Then, I made some money and it went up to over 30%. Now, I make even more and it's only about 18%.
That's what happened! It's a bad business plan and one that can't work. If we ALL pay about 10 to 15%, I think we could have a pretty good system. Tax cuts for guys like me NEVER made any sense. And low wage earners NOT paying taxes makes even less sense. This is all in my opinion of course and I don't expect you to agree.....LOL:)
I say lets just return the tax rates to what they were under Reagan. im sure we can all agree on that. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong
Or before Regan. I liked it when we all paid taxes. Regan was great at cutting taxes, he just didn't understand that we needed to cut spending also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
The article is brief and to the point folks. Please read and consider who is driving this country. It's very important.
Too big, and the real problem is that the federal government is acccountable to no one. Heck, they can spend money they don't have lol.
On the other hand.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/18/op...rugman.html?hp
Is that all you have? An Op Ed from a liberal Keynesian who believes the government does not need to issue an income statement or balance sheet - a government that is accountable to no one?
Did you even read the Parade article? Does any of it alarm you? How about this one, "The Economist estimates that the federal government now employs a quarter of a million people to write and enforce regulations." Write and enforce regulations? What does that produce? What does that add to the good of society? Nothing and nothing. It's waste. You and that author want to help those in need? Cut the 250,000 government jobs and give that money to those in need.
Hey, new news, the 10,000th road project from the stimulus package starts today in Colombus, OH. Building, rebuilding roads will cure what ails America lol.
Boy how i would love to see a debate between you and Krugman.
By the way Krugman doesnt believe half of what you said. "A govt accountable to no one".Please. i could simply say you believe in Banks, Oil companies and large corporations accountable to no one. Does that make it true?
What you should of said is Krugman is a liberal economist who recieved a
Nobel prize for his work on trade theory.:) Doesnt make him infallable but he is pretty damn smart about economics and deserves a little more respect then you showed him.
i wish the stimulus had been more directed to infrastructure projects and less toward tax cuts (that came and went quickly). From my reading of it the overwhelming majority of economists (conservatives and liberals) believe stimulus is more effective than tax cuts for a recession such as ours. As you would quess the Republicans steered more of the stimulus money toward tax cuts which didnt help very much.
I did read the Parade article, but its been a while. When i have another chance i will read it again and comment more specifically.
I was under the impression that Bush/Cheney eliminated many regulators
and regulations. If they didnt eliminate regulators then i wonder why? But either way its clear that there is a dearth of effective regulators where they are sorely needed (think oil companies, think Banks, mortgage companies, pharmaceutical industry, food industry etc.) So if you can figure out a way to lower the # of regulators and make them more effective i am TOTALLY all for it. I think maybe part of the problem is that Bush/Cheney were not particular strong supporters of regulating.
Most people agree that we went WAY too far in one direction and that is why we have ended up with the mess we are in. I believe thats a fairly widespread understanding of what went wrong. Would you agree that Paul Volcker is not a particularly radical individual? Well he is pushing for many of the new regulations of the banking industry.
I know you believe that govt (federal, state, and local) has very many important funtions in serving its citizens so maybe you are just SOUNDING
like you dont like Govt at all. You still SOUND a little too much like your spouting simplistic talking points. IF only it was as simple as you suggest.
Jack Krugman, the dude who played Oscar in the Odd Couple?? LOL. Look, obviously I can't challange such smart man, but you offer up an Op Ed piece to counter cold hard facts. C'mon, you're better than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
Banks, Oil companies and large companies are responsible to their stockholders for sure. And as good corporate citizens, they are responsible for their employees and environment.
Infrastructure? That is sooo parochial. Yes, I suppose we Americans need to fix some of our infrastructure, but if you've ever flown anywhere, you can see there is plenty of infrastructure. We've built all we needed to build, and I suppose that's part of the problem (nothing more to build).
I take that back. I would love to see low interest federal stimulus loans go to the sporting industry to build new rinks, courts, ballfields..... These types of projects are far more reaching throughout industry, and benefit people directly. That was my point about recycling.
I don't see "regulators" or the lack thereof as the issue. I recall you posting a link to an article where government officials were having sex with industry representatives .... oh, I know, those were republican officials ... silly me ... democratic regulators would never do that lol.
Gotta run, one of my solar customers just sent me a note.
I'll take Krugman you can take Greenspan. Yes that Greenspan, the guy who missed every bubble known to man, and who supported the Bush tax cuts for the rich which brought us record deficits. I mean you do not like deficits right? LOL.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_616996.html
I know you will scoff at the following comments, but at least have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that there are different economic philosophies and that you just might not know everything about economics.
"I am committed to the restoration of fiscal sustainability." Obama said, "but it is critical that the timing and pace of consolidation in each economy suit the needs of the global economy, the momentum of private sector demand, and national circumstances." The united States is setting budget goals for 2013, for example , but in the interim "will pursue measures to support the recovery in private demand and return the unemployed to work," he wrote.
This is not a time to take our foot off the accelerator here," said Vice President Biden, speaking to reporters at the White House."We still need to coniinue to create jobs and spur job growth.":
And Kucinich (sp) said the same thing - towing the line is what I think its called. Wasn't the Kucinich the one Democratic health care holdout who suddenly changed his mind after Obama bought him off (oops, did I say that - silly me............)Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
Hey, this just in, $10,000,000 of stimulus money for Beverly Hills, CA to fill potholes LOL. Kucinich just defended it. Oh that's productive.
I will tell you what will be very interesting. As you know by now, Obama is telling the EU that they ought to keep stimulating as they are "easing off the gas petal". I wonder if they will agree or disagree. I think Germany with their new conservative leadership will disagree. Can't wait to see this play out.
tax cuts for the rich is one of your talking points. The rich pay 35% income tax, the most of anyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
Greenspan learned on real time. Oscar is still talking theory and writing about other peoples mistakes. Kind of like you, sitting around in wait, looking to work your socialist (lol) talking points (tax the rich, corporate greed.....) when the opportunity presents. It's easy, but adds nothing to the solution.
So i guess you took Greenspan right? lol.
So compromise is a dirty word in your vocabulary? Thank god you arent running the govt because nothing would ever get done. Oh thats right i forgot you dont believe in govt. Goddamn i finally figured it out. You are secretly an anarchist!
WE should pay more than anyone else. You make more you pay more. A novel concept.Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong
Im not sure it qualifies as a talking point (tax cuts for the wealthy). It actually happened under Bush.
Greenspan supported it. He learned in REAL TIME alright to mess up BIG TIME.
The rich payed more under Reagan then they do now. Is he a Socialist? How about we go back to Reagan's numbers? Oh you dont like Reagan all of a sudden? lol. Warren Buffett and Bill Gates and others like them KNOW they are underpaying.
You always seem to leave out the fact that the rich hire expensive accountants to help them save money in all kinds of ways.
Dont tell me your turning to John's for dumbass lines? Im a Democrat not a Socialist. But thanks for letting me know you have no idea what the difference is. :)
Compomise isn't a dirty word at all. The sad fact is that there is little meaningful compromise in politics, and by extension, government.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
And for what it's worth, anarchy is what I fear most. I'm telling you, Obama is polarizing the $hit out of America. People like me still believe in the government designed by the founders. They intentionally set up in a way to limit government. We'll see.
It's the weekend. I just cracked open my first brew.
(lol) socialist was demarked to differentiate myself. C'mon dude.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
You can go backward all you want. Reagan is dead. All I have is my kids future, and if I'm reading you correctly, you are advising me that they should go into accounting - specifically tax accounting. Shouldn't be a problem; they're both pretty bright, but I was hoping for design engineering. That way they can make things people need and want. You know, produce.
Ok so im not a socialist. Whew. For a minute there....
Yes your kids should go into work that makes them happy. Design engineering? Sounds fascinating. i always advise people to follow their dreams and dont fixate on money and taxes. I know plenty of rich people that are awfully unhappy.
Did you ever hear the expression, "money cant buy happiness". :D
I dont thinking going to Reagan's tax rate is going backwards. Just think of it as going toward fairness as Warren Buffett and Biill Gates do (did i mention those 2 guys before?) LOL.