Carl Pickens
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2006
- Messages
- 45,121
- Likes
- 61,506
Like I said, I'm thinking right now I'm at least 40 years your elder. Maybe more. My writing style is purposely adolescent so that you can comprehend. You only need to go back 4 years to understand the effects of trickle down. Raise business taxes and 2 things happen. Prices to the consumer go up and cash gets offshored or placed in some sort of reserve to reduce losses. ALL expenses in business get passed on to the consumer. To think otherwise is shortsighted and rather ignorant. Trump dropped corporate taxes and investment started, raises happened, incomes rose, and consumer spending increased. Your side found a way to frighten the sheep into economic disaster last year and I don't know when we will recover.You need to lose the middle school writing style that ends with insult. Seriously, it makes you look bad. You also need to have a thorough look at U.S. economic history over the last hundred years. Saying that trickle down works is not nearly as wrong as saying African slavery works. Both work well for the owners, up to a point.
This!!!!Since you asked, I’m 52 effing years old. The issue is the inherent unfairness of a graduated tax structure as well as the double and triple taxation people and businesses have to deal with.
Why are we taxing income in the first place? Warren Buffet is worth billions, yet takes only a $100K annual salary. His companies spend billions. Tax that consumption not the income it generates.
Puberty
Like I said, I'm thinking right now I'm at least 40 years your elder. Maybe more. My writing style is purposely adolescent so that you can comprehend. You only need to go back 4 years to understand the effects of trickle down. Raise business taxes and 2 things happen. Prices to the consumer go up and cash gets offshored or placed in some sort of reserve to reduce losses. ALL expenses in business get passed on to the consumer. To think otherwise is shortsighted and rather ignorant. Trump dropped corporate taxes and investment started, raises happened, incomes rose, and consumer spending increased. Your side found a way to frighten the sheep into economic disaster last year and I don't know when we will recover.
So per your first paragraph you are a dumbass? Hell, I just called you ignorant.I have a different take on the situation. Hypothetically speaking, if someone is a dumb@ass, he writes like a dumb@ss. If that is how someone writes, odds are that is how they are.
You are about 180 degrees wrong, all the way down the line. Also boring.
If I break Freak's rules in a reply to VM and VM doesn't see it, will I get in trouble???
My favorite: If a husband makes a decision when his wife isnt around, is he still wrong?Is that like the tree falling in the woods with nobody around to hear it kind of thing? My favorite on all those is the fly in the airplane and whether it adds weight to the airplane dependent on if it's sitting or flying around the plane. The anti-logic in at least half the answers is astounding.
If we break it down to what the federal governments role per the constitution our federal tax system should be simple. The individual or corporation pays nothing to the federal government.
The states pay a per head fee to the feds for defense and the other services the fed is constitutionally to provide. And it gets its tariff money and extra. It’s up to the states to collect taxes.
Also a reasonable position.
Money invested or in a simple bank account earning interest is still in circulation. It is available to others. I know you understand that concept. Just pointing it out for others.
Some people also give more support to charity. The only "harm" is removing the money from circulation.Are you implying that affluent people don't hoard their wealth in a mattress, but instead it actively circulates in order to appreciate and that means society actually benefits from finance being made available to us all at every level?!?
You hush your dirty mouth, Mister!
View attachment 365284
Reich is not known for his intelligence and wisdom. He is known for his anti capitalism religion. With that said, can you spot the canyon-sized void in his "logic" in his tweet?
Some people also give more support to charity. The only "harm" is removing the money from circulation.
Here's what I think is the error in his tweet:
If money surges out to offshore tax havens when taxes are cut, why wouldn't it happen or happen to a greater degree when taxes are raised?