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

#126
#126
rjd970 said:
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.
Click to expand...

but the divide isn't anywhere near that pushed in the media and what the hell difference does it make anyway?
 
#127
#127
BigPapaVol said:
but the divide isn't anywhere near that pushed in the media and what the hell difference does it make anyway?
Click to expand...

Just saying that it isn't entirely unlikely that the middle class is "dying". Your 25-75th percentile reference only works in a normal distribution, which obviously isn't reality.

And what divide are you saying is being pushed by the media?
 
#128
#128
with 14 million unemployed and 40 million drawing foodstamps, is it little wonder that the middle class is shrinking?
 
#129
#129
MG1968 said:
with 14 million unemployed and 40 million drawing foodstamps, is it little wonder that the middle class is shrinking?
Click to expand...

Not when the top 1% control 40% of the wealth...

...which there is nothing wrong with in a capitalistic society. But combined with your numbers, it does suggest a smaller middle class.

The problem is the lower class can vote themselves free checks, and the upper class and corporations can buy the lobbyiests.
 
#130
#130
rjd970 said:
Not when the top 1% control 40% of the wealth...

...which there is nothing wrong with in a capitalistic society. But combined with your numbers, it does suggest a smaller middle class.
Click to expand...

how many people do those top 1% employ, either directly or indirectly?

playing the class warfare card, whether you mean to or not, should be reserved for the gibbs of the world
 
#131
#131
MG1968 said:
how many people do those top 1% employ, either directly or indirectly?

playing the class warfare card, whether you mean to or not, should be reserved for the gibbs of the world
Click to expand...

Would love for you to tell me how I just played the class warfare card.
 
#132
#132
bok.jpg
 
#133
#133
rjd970 said:
Not when the top 1% control 40% of the wealth...

...which there is nothing wrong with in a capitalistic society. But combined with your numbers, it does suggest a smaller middle class.

The problem is the lower class can vote themselves free checks, and the upper class and corporations can buy the lobbyiests.
Click to expand...

how does the top 1% controling so much wealth indicate a smaller middle class? this assumes that wealth is a zero sum game which is ridiculous.
 
#134
#134
MG1968 said:
how many people do those top 1% employ, either directly or indirectly?
Click to expand...

...and when the free market produces this type of wealth curve, is there any surprise we are going to have a progressive tax system?

Personally, I think the tax system right now is too progressive, but I am not completely against the idea from a realistic standpoint.
 
#135
#135
rjd970 said:
Would love for you to tell me how I just played the class warfare card.
Click to expand...

your "1% control 40% of the wealth"

there's an implication that something nefarious is afoot

sorry if I read more into it than what you intended
 
#137
#137
droski said:
how does the top 1% controling so much wealth indicate a smaller middle class? this assumes that wealth is a zero sum game which is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

How does it indicate change? The vast majority have rarely had any wealth.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#141
#141
sjt18 said:
It is stupid to raise taxes on people who pay other people when you have a job creation problem.

Obama is either stupid or is trying to tank the economy more.
Click to expand...

I hear this a lot. Can someone point me to a study or two (not from gsvols type sources) that says this actually happens. I don't necessarily disagree with the statement but have never read anything myself. I do think a lot of people are in the same boat but take this as a universal truth with no backup. Also, since tax rate is currently so low, why is unemployment so high?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#142
#142
TruthIsOutThere said:
I hear this a lot. Can someone point me to a study or two (not from gsvols type sources) that says this actually happens. I don't necessarily disagree with the statement but have never read anything myself. I do think a lot of people are in the same boat but take this as a universal truth with no backup. Also, since tax rate is currently so low, why is unemployment so high?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

How are tax rates low? Corporations have piles of money sitting offshore that they are willing to bring back if Congress will grant them a Tax Holiday. The last time I checked the number was ~$1trillion.
 
#143
#143
lumberjack4 said:
How are tax rates low? Corporations have piles of money sitting offshore that they are willing to bring back if Congress will grant them a Tax Holiday. The last time I checked the number was ~$1trillion.
Click to expand...

I guess i$m thinking more of the Bush tax cuts than corporate taxation.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#145
#145
sjt18 said:
It is stupid to raise taxes on people who pay other people when you have a job creation problem.

Obama is either stupid or is trying to tank the economy more.
Click to expand...


Was Reagan, Bush 1 and Clinton all stupid ?

Even Reagan Raised Taxes - Forbes.com

Everyone remembers Reagan's 1981 tax cuts. His admirers are less likely to tout the tax hikes he accepted as the 1981 recession and his own tax cuts began to unravel his long-term fiscal picture--a large tax increase on business in 1982, higher payroll taxes enacted in 1983 and higher energy taxes in 1984. A decade later, when a serious recession and higher spending began to upend the fiscal outlook again, the first President Bush similarly raised taxes on higher-income people in 1991; Bill Clinton doubled down and raised them again in 1993.
 
#146
#146
BigPapaVol said:
depends upon the products. You can bet your ass that Obama is being choosy about the industries that he beats up about taxes.
Click to expand...

I'm not an expert but it seems the biggest taxes are on cigarettes, booze and gas. If you are poor and smoke, drink or drive you pay more taxes than you realize.
 
#147
#147
Gramps said:
Was Reagan, Bush 1 and Clinton all stupid ?

Even Reagan Raised Taxes - Forbes.com

Everyone remembers Reagan's 1981 tax cuts. His admirers are less likely to tout the tax hikes he accepted as the 1981 recession and his own tax cuts began to unravel his long-term fiscal picture--a large tax increase on business in 1982, higher payroll taxes enacted in 1983 and higher energy taxes in 1984. A decade later, when a serious recession and higher spending began to upend the fiscal outlook again, first President Bush similarly raised taxes on higher-income people in 1991; Bill Clinton doubled down and raised them again in 1993.
Click to expand...

rofl. :popcorn:
 
#148
#148
I'm not rich but if I were it seems to me that every time someone raised taxes for people at my income level I would have my accountants move things around so I didn't pay one cent more than I wanted. It seems that I would have some options and, being rich, I would probably have the means (brains, business savy, smart lawyers and accountants) to exercise those options.

So, if the taxes on luxury jets went up, I would probably dump my jet and just rent one when I needed it, or maybe even fly first class instead. So, if private individuals are renting time on luxury jets, those jets are probably being owned by small companies who specialize in that kind of service. Which kind of makes them a small businesss. . .meaning increasing taxes in this area once again affects small business owners.

But then again, I'm not rich or very smart so I'm probably off base here and rich people are lining up to give more of their money to the government.
 
#149
#149
Jet Industry Furious | Tax Increases | Manufacturing Jobs | The Daily Caller

Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPO) President
Craig Fuller told The Daily Caller that Obama’s comments
have cast a pall over the industry, causing many who
were considering buying a plane to back away from
making a purchase.
-----------------------------------

In response to Obama’s press conference, the General
Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) and
International Association of Machinists and Aerospace
Workers (IAM) issued a letter to the president. The two
organizations challenged the administration’s rhetoric
and recalled a similar instance in which 20,000 IAM
workers were laid off as a result of “ill-informed criticism
of corporate jets and business aviation” and the 2008
downturn.
--------------

The president himself saw a benefit in providing tax
breaks for corporate jets just in the past couple of
years, signing two pieces of legislation that contained
such provisions: the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act, and the Small Business Lending
Fund Act.

Indeed, one of of the greatest perks of being president
is flying in the most private jet of all, Air Force One.
According to Fuller, Obama has flown Air Force
One more than any other president in history.
Click to expand...

Foden20110702-BMI-Evil%20Jets20110702051052.jpg


James K. Coyne, the president and CEO of the National
Air Transportation Association (NATA), was also horrified
by the president’s comments. Speaking on behalf of his
group’s 2,000 member companies, Coyne lampooned the
president’s assertions and highlighted the fact that just
a day prior Obama visited an American aircraft
manufacturing plant to promote job growth.
--------------------------

General Aviation Manufacturers Association reports
the industry provides an estimated 1.2 million jobs
and pumps more than $150 billion into the U.S.
economy each year.
-------------------------

According to Fuller, Obama is only focused on private
jets for political reasons.

“There are only 15,000 private jets in America. Even
if they tax them all at $10 million a piece – of course
his proposal does not come close – it wouldn’t make
a dent in the deficit.

But he is on a political rant and we are just amazed
by it all.”
Click to expand...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top