wow obama "should we comprimise safety so some corporate jet owner gets a tax break"

#104
#104
JayVols said:
As long as as everyone pays. I'm sick of groups not having to pay a penny.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I'm tired of my tax dollars paying people to simply exist i.e. the people that get a bigger refund check than what they paid in.
 
#106
#106
JayVols said:
As long as as everyone pays. I'm sick of groups not having to pay a penny.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...


I agree with you, actually. I think there is some citizenship value to filing a return and seeing (if not also then writing a check) that you have paid taxes.

If you will agree to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest, I'll agree with you that every person should pay at least some taxes, even if a modest amount.
 
#107
#107
lumberjack4 said:
I'm tired of my tax dollars paying people to simply exist i.e. the people that get a bigger refund check than what they paid in.
Click to expand...

this is where LG and co.'s claim that the poor "pay taxes" falls short, LG never takes into account things like the Earned Income Tax credit which can double or even triple the amount of a tax return, thus negating any other payroll tax that may have been paid.
 
#108
#108
lawgator1 said:
I agree with you, actually. I think there is some citizenship value to filing a return and seeing (if not also then writing a check) that you have paid taxes.

If you will agree to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest, I'll agree with you that every person should pay at least some taxes, even if a modest amount.
Click to expand...

You have me confused with a conservative. I'm not pro Bush tax cuts either
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#109
#109
the Bush tax cuts aren't what caused the economic downturn, they increased revenues to the treasury through 2007. Just like what happened during Reagan, the revenue increase was more than offset by profligate spending on the part of Congress.

The war efforts didn't help either, but even then Bush's last deficit was less than 500 billion. That isn't chump change, but it's a far cry from the two trillion in deficits (in less than 3 years) brought to us by Obama and company.
 
#110
#110
MG1968 said:
the Bush tax cuts aren't what caused the economic downturn, they increased revenues to the treasury through 2007. Just like what happened during Reagan, the revenue increase was more than offset by profligate spending on the part of Congress.

The war efforts didn't help either, but even then Bush's last deficit was less than 500 billion. That isn't chump change, but it's a far cry from the two trillion in deficits (in less than 3 years) brought to us by Obama and company.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it was you or Papa that I discussed this with before. I have an issue with an off the top tax cut. However, I am in strong support of giving massive tax cuts on money reinvested in businesses to grow and create jobs. I don't trust anyone to do the right thing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#111
#111
JayVols said:
I don't know if it was you or Papa that I discussed this with before. I have an issue with an off the top tax cut. However, I am in strong support of giving massive tax cuts on money reinvested in businesses to grow and create jobs. I don't trust anyone to do the right thing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

the tax code is something like 30 thousand pages and the cost of tax code compliance is staggering.

the GAO identified 200 billion/year in spending for redundant programs, I haven't heard a single member of either House of Congress discuss that report as a good starting point. Instead those idiots quibble over seating arrangements.
 
#112
#112
MG1968 said:
the tax code is something like 30 thousand pages and the cost of tax code compliance is staggering.

the GAO identified 200 billion/year in spending for redundant programs, I haven't heard a single member of either House of Congress discuss that report as a good starting point. Instead those idiots quibble over seating arrangements.
Click to expand...

I'm with you, my friend. Politicians talk a good game, but when it gets to nut cuttin time, all they seem to care about is themselves and furthering their career.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#114
#114
MG1968 said:
the Bush tax cuts aren't what caused the economic downturn, 1. they increased revenues to the treasury through 2007. Just like what happened during Reagan, the revenue increase was more than offset by profligate spending on the part of Congress.

2. The war efforts didn't help either, but even then Bush's last deficit was less than 500 billion. That isn't chump change, but it's a far cry from the two trillion in deficits (in less than 3 years) brought to us by Obama and company.
Click to expand...

1. I keep hearing this claim over and over again, yet when pressed for hard data showing this, I have yet to see it.

2. Does that $500 Billion include the cost of both war efforts shown on the books?
 
#115
#115
droski said:
please explain how the guy down the street being richer makes me poorer.
Click to expand...

The "squeezed out" comment is in reference to the political discussion. Everyone conveniently adds "and the middle class" to every proposal, but in reality the programs or ideas being discussed either will not apply to the middle class or won't have the level of impact advertised.

For example, in Pennsylvania they are proposing a school voucher program that is adverstised as giving the poor and middle class a choice of where to send their kids when their local school fails. But, in reality, when you study the details you find the income cut off is about 10% over the poverty line and only later on can anyone earning more than that apply for a voucher.

I'd be interested to know if anyone in this forum can name, say, 5 recent government programs or new proposals, be it tax related, health care, what ever, that had a direct positive effect on the middle class (and a bonus if that impact was greater for the middle class than any other economic class).

Historically, the demise of the middle class spells doom for the society.
 
#120
#120
BigPapaVol said:
how can they be? It's like saying the 25th - 75th percentile group no longer exists. Politics has never been about that group.
Click to expand...

Assuming a normal distribution, you're right.

If the distribution is multimodal, with greater numbers at the edges of the distribution, then the middle class could indeed be dying. There would be a massive difference from 25th to 75th percentile. I don't know how big that difference is right now, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was substantial.
 
#121
#121
It is substantial, but the popular method of measurement here is in quintiles.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#122
#122
I thought everyone paid for the taxes on business through higher product costs? Wouldn't that include the "poor?"
 
#123
#123
IPorange said:
I thought everyone paid for the taxes on business through higher product costs? Wouldn't that include the "poor?"
Click to expand...

depends upon the products. You can bet your ass that Obama is being choosy about the industries that he beats up about taxes.
 
#124
#124
rjd970 said:
Assuming a normal distribution, you're right.

If the distribution is multimodal, with greater numbers at the edges of the distribution, then the middle class could indeed be dying. There would be a massive difference from 25th to 75th percentile. I don't know how big that difference is right now, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was substantial.
Click to expand...

but the distribution is multimodal. If it is, then politics is correctly addressing the majority and the middle class should be ignored.

I think the distribution is skewed, but there is still a measurable middle half (or more).
 
#125
#125
BigPapaVol said:
but the distribution is multimodal. If it is, then politics is correctly addressing the majority and the middle class should be ignored.

I think the distribution is skewed, but there is still a measurable middle half (or more).
Click to expand...

It's a chicken/egg thing IMO. It is either politics don't address the middle class because it is small, or the middle class is small because politics doesn't address them.

Either way, I'm not sure how healthy it is to have such a big divide. I would think more of a pure single-modal bell curve with a big standard deviation would be ideal. Such an economic make-up would probably help address the inequity in the tax system as well (ie, too heavily progressive). I just can't see how this huge divide between the upper and lower parts of the population is a good thing.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top