62 percent of Americans want to raise taxes on the wealthy and businesses

#27
#27
poll is useless as it was done during the day while the "rich" were working
 
#29
#29
VolunteerHillbilly said:
How do you define "rich"? Where's the line? If they put a dollar figure in this poll it would change the results. If you take one party's approach then the answer seems to be that you find a line where 50% +1 of the voters agree on what "rich" means and you raise taxes on everyone above that line. That's pure tyranny of the majority any way you slice it.

Another problem is factoring liabilities and a person's situation in life. For example: Is a 45 year old single wager earner for a family of four who makes $100K a year while paying a mortgage, two student loans and a couple of car payments rich? What about a 23 year old who makes $100k a year, has no debt and lives alone in a home that's paid for?

One thing that I don't hear anyone talking about is figuring out a way to tax wealth. In recent years, we've seen state after state authorize the creation of dynasty trusts that last hundreds of years, erosion of estate taxes and seemingly perpetually renewable intellectual property rights. Those actions probably cannot be undone but the tax code certainly could be used to discourage the hoarding of wealth without putting it to any socially beneficial use.
Click to expand...

Why exactly do you think that wealth should be put to a socially beneficial use? Shouldn't the rightful owner be the one to decide what constitutes a beneficial use?

Here is a simple test of fairness, granted, its not foolproof but it gets you in the ballpark:

Any time a proposition is stated about any given group, change the name of the group and decide if it is still an acceptable idea. Example:

the rich should pay more taxes because they are rich
becomes
blacks should pay more taxes because they are blacks
becomes
democrats should pay more taxes because they are democrats
becomes
gays should pay more taxes because they are gay

Do you think it is fair to pick on some groups but not others?
 
#30
#30
democratmantra.jpg


177628.jpg


TruthinAdvertising_Econojustice.png


We have the second highest corporate tax rate in
the world following Japan which is lowering their
corporate taxes after decades of stagflation they
realize lowering corporate rates boosts the economy.

The Eastern European countries formerly under the
thumb of the USSR all have lower income tax rates
than the US, anywhere from 1/2 to 1/4 our current
rates. They too leaned their lesson that the more
money you can put in the hands of the citizens, the
more vibrant and productive the society becomes.

trainwn.jpg


uniah.jpg
 
#34
#34
nbakerld said:
Of course people oppose tax increases on themselves.
Click to expand...

We could always attempt to forgo the fact we live in a society and try your world view of every man for himself.

The thing is Im all for looking at federal funding reform and eliminating waste, but the argument always turns into youre a big giant socialist or something of the sort.

The businesses in the top 1% or similar wage earners are over 350k per year. Businesses that are well over that have been making American workers do more work with less employees or ship their jobs overseas where they work for sand grains. Cutting their taxes even more is a big giant facade. Hell, many dont pay anything now.
 
Last edited:
#35
#35
theutvolunteers said:
We could always attempt to forgo the fact we live in a society and try your world view of every man for himself.

The thing is Im all for looking at federal funding reform and eliminating waste, but the argument always turns into youre a big giant socialist or something of the sort.

The businesses in the top 1% or similar wage earners are over 350k per year. Businesses that are well over that have been making American workers do more work with less employees or ship their jobs overseas where they work for sand grains. Cutting their taxes even more is a big giant facade. Hell, many dont pay anything now.
Click to expand...

Maybe we could have this argument without it turning into "you're a big old social Darwinist". You act as if the only alternative to welfare is every man for himself. Communities historically have taken care of each other. That's why the Elk's Lodge was founded. There were a lot more organizations like them before the emergence of welfare.

I trust in the goodness of my fellow man. We can focus on the few bad seeds...the guys who fly airplanes into buildings...or we can focus on the hundreds of people who rushed into the wreckage, risking their lives to save strangers. I don't trust government to take care of me. I trust strangers more than elected officials with bad incentive systems.
 
#36
#36
nbakerld said:
Maybe we could have this argument without it turning into "you're a big old social Darwinist". You act as if the only alternative to welfare is every man for himself. Communities historically have taken care of each other. That's why the Elk's Lodge was founded. There were a lot more organizations like them before the emergence of welfare.

I trust in the goodness of my fellow man. We can focus on the few bad seeds...the guys who fly airplanes into buildings...or we can focus on the hundreds of people who rushed into the wreckage, risking their lives to save strangers. I don't trust government to take care of me. I trust strangers more than elected officials with bad incentive systems.
Click to expand...

Those people were paid by the government.

please explain this to me. if wealthy people, aka the jobs' creators, are not creating jobs because they are waiting until the economy improves, how does the economy ever improve? please explain how you solve that paradox without government stimulation. i agree that the excesses of government, a process by which every politician is guilty of, are bad. wasteful and irresponsible government is bad. but you have drank the kool-aid that all government is bad. government is necessary to balance out the inevitable excesses of the market and investing in the country's future in ways that the market never will.
 
#37
#37
lawgator1 said:
New CNN Poll: Majority want tax increase for wealthy and deep spending cuts – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs


Poll also shows that folks are not buying into the notion of keeping taxes on the rich low in hopes they will use the money to hire.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, another supermajority on the side of utgibbs.

Does anyone see a pattern?

They are right not to buy into the trickle down schtick. In southern vernacular, it's hogwash. Taxes go to jobs, and often much better jobs than they could get in the private sector.
 
#39
#39
theutvolunteers said:
Those people were paid by the government.

please explain this to me. if wealthy people, aka the jobs' creators, are not creating jobs because they are waiting until the economy improves, how does the economy ever improve? please explain how you solve that paradox without government stimulation. i agree that the excesses of government, a process by which every politician is guilty of, are bad. wasteful and irresponsible government is bad. but you have drank the kool-aid that all government is bad. government is necessary to balance out the inevitable excesses of the market and investing in the country's future in ways that the market never will.
Click to expand...

The economy will improve when an outspoken critic of the American system is no longer in the White House. How do you explain the fact that the economy has gotten much worse under Obama? The resources are there but there is an "attitude problem" in the world of business. What could cause that?
 
#40
#40
nbakerld said:
And all this goes to show that American education is failing miserably.
Click to expand...

Why?

It shows that a supermajority of Americans have learned their history from the Reagan years.

And moreover, it shows that a supermajority are well aware of what is happening in the real world outside their back door right now. Because, hoarding is exactly what is happening right now.

In addition, taxes often create better jobs than folks could get in the private sector.

Get entwined in the real world, nbakerld. Get entwined, and you will go far. I was a lot like you at your age.
 
#41
#41
utgibbs said:
Hmmm, another supermajority on the side of utgibbs.

Does anyone see a pattern?

They are right not to buy into the trickle down schtick. In southern vernacular, it's hogwash. Taxes go to jobs, and often much better jobs than they could get in the private sector.
Click to expand...
Whoa. The majority wants more money from the minority? Who on earth knew that? You're a certifiable genius.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#42
#42
utgibbs said:
Get entwined in the real world, nbakerld. Get entwined, and you will go far. I was a lot like you at your age.
Click to expand...

Gibbs: Were you this condescending when you were my age? If you're gonna be condescending don't veil it as concern for my future.

theutvolunteer: Job creators aren't waiting for a "good economy" they are waiting for an environment friendly to their investment. You think the economies are strong in southeast Asia? Not nearly as strong as us, but in the Philippines (where a lot of American jobs are going) a business doesn't pay income tax for first 5 years. That's a climate asking for more businesses.
 
#43
#43
gasguy98 said:
The economy will improve when an outspoken critic of the American system is no longer in the White House. How do you explain the fact that the economy has gotten much worse under Obama? The resources are there but there is an "attitude problem" in the world of business. What could cause that?
Click to expand...
Instilling fear in the business world has caused most to take their ball and go home, only to return when these communist are out of office.
 
#44
#44
RespectTradition said:
Why exactly do you think that wealth should be put to a socially beneficial use? Shouldn't the rightful owner be the one to decide what constitutes a beneficial use?

Here is a simple test of fairness, granted, its not foolproof but it gets you in the ballpark:

Any time a proposition is stated about any given group, change the name of the group and decide if it is still an acceptable idea. Example:

the rich should pay more taxes because they are rich
becomes
blacks should pay more taxes because they are blacks
becomes
democrats should pay more taxes because they are democrats
becomes
gays should pay more taxes because they are gay

Do you think it is fair to pick on some groups but not others?
Click to expand...
The goverment owns every note that the treasury prints. People are allowed to possess those notes as a medium of exchange. I see nothing wrong with the government penalizing people who slow down the velocity of money by parking a large amount of dollars on the sidelines for an extended period of time. This idea is not about picking on a group (i.e. the wealthy). It is about stimulating commerce by encouraging people to use dollars for what they are intended for, buying stuff.
 
#45
#45
I offer it only to demonstrate the potential politics involved with the committee. Those supporting tax increases on the top have the easier slog.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#46
#46
gasguy98 said:
The economy will improve when an outspoken critic of the American system is no longer in the White House. How do you explain the fact that the economy has gotten much worse under Obama? The resources are there but there is an "attitude problem" in the world of business. What could cause that?
Click to expand...

I didn't realize that the economy was so insecure that it needed sweet nothings and pep talks constantly or it would take it's ball and go home.

If that's all it takes, the next stimulus should be funding for the economy to dial a phone sex hotline. Or watch more of this.....
 

Attachments

  • stuart-smalley-magnet-c12359389.jpg
    stuart-smalley-magnet-c12359389.jpg
    56.7 KB · Views: 1
#48
#48
lawgator1 said:
New CNN Poll: Majority want tax increase for wealthy and deep spending cuts – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs


Poll also shows that folks are not buying into the notion of keeping taxes on the rich low in hopes they will use the money to hire.
Click to expand...

So basically what you are saying is that 62% of Americans are voting not to get a raise, for their prices to go up, their benefits to get more expense, or some combination of all three?

Super. All you have proven is the effectiveness of left wing demagogury at dumbing down the debate.
 
#49
#49
RespectTradition said:
The crazy part is, people don't seem to realize that big companies don't pay taxes.

Yes, they file and they send money in, but not like you or me.

Example,
If taxes go up on WalMart, they do not say, 'oh well, i guess our profits will go down, we will just eat this and help everyone.' Taxes are just another business expense. When expenses go up, they find a way to cut costs (lower wages, benefits, less hires, layoffs, less service, etc) and they raise prices where they can. The net results, the company makes a similar after tax profit, employees suffer, customers suffer. But we all feel better because we made 'those greedy corporations pay their fair share.'
Click to expand...

This is absolutely true and what liberals like LG seldom realize is that businesses in mature industries aren't out there making grotesque profits anyway. MOST operate at or close to the point where higher taxes can literally put them out of business.

It would also be interesting to see who those people categorized as "rich". Wonder if they would consider their dentist "rich"? How about their lawyer? How about the guy who owns the grocerty store or gas station they frequent?

The two most disappointing things I glean from that poll is that liberal politicians are dishonest enough to suggest to people that the rich can be taxed in real terms without impacting everyone else... and that so many people are stupid enough to believe it.

FTR, when the left says "tax the rich"... they aren't talking about themselves... or anyone who contributes to them. They'll get some kind of exemption or exception.
 
#50
#50
All "taxing the rich" does is screw small business owners.

It goes after the guy who makes a couple hundred thousand per year and doesnt touch the Bill Gates.

You will never touch guys who own 100 billion dollar compnaies are are living off income that is taxed at a capital gains rate and can bury all their money inside their business.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top