Bush Tax Cuts

[Chief2ndzOnly!]

Sometime ago, Warren Buffet issued a challenge to the top 200 richest people in America. He made an agreement that if any of them could prove they paid more % of their income in taxes than their secretaries, he would give them a cool $1,000,000. So far, nobody has taken him up on his deal and those that have tried have fallen short.

Nobody is calling for a communist regime change, but inequalities exist in America. Pretending that it's ok that the last time the distribution of wealth in America was this bad was the great depression is borderline insane. I don't expect some witch hunt against the rich, nor would I encourage it, but pretending things are hunky-dory is how things will crash.

I know you're 1/2 troll 1/2 idiot (my ratio slightly off), but there are some people who wish to either learn or engage in a discussion above the fucking ******ed level you and the other crop of ******s casually engage in on a daily basis. Inform yourself or learn to post legitimately, because one day you'll actually realize you wasted your youth being a fucking idiot.

Impressive post. The bolded is some of the truest **** ever said in the Lounge.

[vercingetorix3]

It's easy to bash the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and rightfully so, due to the cost) and tax breaks to those with enormous amounts of adjusted gross income, but let's be clear:

-Social Security, Medicare (including part D, which Sanders mentioned), and Medicaid are the biggest guilty parties in terms of national debt and deficits. If he's truly serious about not passing on the debt to our children (which seems to be the populist response these days from both sides), then we should seriously discuss the future of those programs as the former Comptroller General of the United States David Walker wants to do.

-Bernie sold out on the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, so I'm not so sure if he's the populist that he appears to be. I would love to hear his reasoning....searching on YouTube....

[Bastian Loc]

What does it matter what percentage someone pays?

You have 3 people. One makes a billion a year, one makes 50K a year and one makes 10K a year. All three have the same vote as to how whatever they make in taxes is spent. Let's say the first guy only pays 15%, using tax loopholes to avoid getting bent over by our progressive income tax. The second (let's call her a secretary) pays about 25% and the third doesn't pay any taxes at all.

So we have three people, that all have the same vote, paying 150 million, 12.5K and zero, respectively. Your argument is that the first guy isn't paying his fair share. I disagree.



What I posted is infinitely more educational than your rehashed garbage. Son. But by all means, remain ignorant.

The billionaire should pay 35-40% like the guy making 100k does.

He owes it to the people and the system. If you think him paying 15% is a good thing, then **** if I know what to tell you.

[Jim Jeffries]

The billionaire should pay 35-40% like the guy making 100k does.

He owes it to the people and the system. If you think him paying 15% is a good thing, then **** if I know what to tell you.

If we were strictly talking about salary, I might agree with you, but no one makes a billion a year in salary alone. Under the current system (which is set to expire at the end of the year,) a guy making 100K a year (salary) pays 22,372 or just over 22%. Hypothetically a guy getting a salary of a billion a year would pays 349,977,644 or 35%.

But the way a guy makes a billion a year is through risk. Risk in buying property, which would mean he'd be under water right now. And more which I don't have time to explain right now. If he's lucky enough not to lose most or all, he pays a 15% capital gains tax. Since the rate was lowered to 15%, total revenues from capital gains have gone up, so raising that would be stupid.

Personally I'd rather see a flat consumer based tax, but that will never happen. Because when that was raised, everyone would get angry. The way things are right now, we get to play this divisive class warfare bullcrap to buy votes. By penalizing success.

The economy is not strong enough right now to raise taxes, on anyone. Period. End of story. This 700 billion dollar figure (on taxes for the rich, over 10 years,) that they keep throwing around, is inaccurate. But it's still only a tiny portion of the 4 trillion (over 10 years) in total Bush tax cuts. If this administration was interested in creating jobs and cutting down on the deficit, the upper income bracket cuts (who create most of the new jobs) is by far the better bang for the buck.

[Chief2ndzOnly!]

If we were strictly talking about salary, I might agree with you, but no one makes a billion a year in salary alone. Under the current system (which is set to expire at the end of the year,) a guy making 100K a year (salary) pays 22,372 or just over 22%. Hypothetically a guy getting a salary of a billion a year would pays 349,977,644 or 35%.

But the way a guy makes a billion a year is through risk. Risk in buying property, which would mean he'd be under water right now. And more which I don't have time to explain right now. If he's lucky enough not to lose most or all, he pays a 15% capital gains tax. Since the rate was lowered to 15%, total revenues from capital gains have gone up, so raising that would be stupid.

Personally I'd rather see a flat consumer based tax, but that will never happen. Because when that was raised, everyone would get angry. The way things are right now, we get to play this divisive class warfare bullcrap to buy votes. By penalizing success.

The economy is not strong enough right now to raise taxes, on anyone. Period. End of story. This 700 billion dollar figure (on taxes for the rich, over 10 years,) that they keep throwing around, is inaccurate. But it's still only a tiny portion of the 4 trillion (over 10 years) in total Bush tax cuts. If this administration was interested in creating jobs and cutting down on the deficit, the upper income bracket cuts (who create most of the new jobs) is by far the better bang for the buck.

While you make a very interesting point Jim. You did not mention the intangible of the interest that the Billionaire collects off of the the immence sum of money that he has. The interest for one month alone(without compounding)would be enough for a family of five to live off of comfortably for a year.

[- v e t -]

no tax FTW

flat tax if any income tax

VAT over income tax

[Bastian Loc]

If we were strictly talking about salary, I might agree with you, but no one makes a billion a year in salary alone. Under the current system (which is set to expire at the end of the year,) a guy making 100K a year (salary) pays 22,372 or just over 22%. Hypothetically a guy getting a salary of a billion a year would pays 349,977,644 or 35%.

But the way a guy makes a billion a year is through risk. Risk in buying property, which would mean he'd be under water right now. And more which I don't have time to explain right now. If he's lucky enough not to lose most or all, he pays a 15% capital gains tax. Since the rate was lowered to 15%, total revenues from capital gains have gone up, so raising that would be stupid.

Personally I'd rather see a flat consumer based tax, but that will never happen. Because when that was raised, everyone would get angry. The way things are right now, we get to play this divisive class warfare bullcrap to buy votes. By penalizing success.

The economy is not strong enough right now to raise taxes, on anyone. Period. End of story. This 700 billion dollar figure (on taxes for the rich, over 10 years,) that they keep throwing around, is inaccurate. But it's still only a tiny portion of the 4 trillion (over 10 years) in total Bush tax cuts. If this administration was interested in creating jobs and cutting down on the deficit, the upper income bracket cuts (who create most of the new jobs) is by far the better bang for the buck.

I agree, taxes in general are ****, but they should not be raised or imposed on anyone right now.

I would like to see someone finally step up and take the constitutional position of abolishing the income tax which is basically outright theft of private property.

I do however want to see the Wall st. zombie bankers pay at least a 1% tobin tax on all their trades and speculation.

That alone would raise enough money to get the U.S out of the depression.

[Dan...]

While you make a very interesting point Jim. You did not mention the intangible of the interest that the Billionaire collects off of the the immence sum of money that he has. The interest for one month alone(without compounding)would be enough for a family of five to live off of comfortably for a year.

That is capitalism though. That is how it works. There are inequalities. Its part of what drives efficiency and productivity in the economy and leads to overall improvements in economic welfare.

[ILLuminato]

Sometime ago, Warren Buffet issued a challenge to the top 200 richest people in America. He made an agreement that if any of them could prove they paid more % of their income in taxes than their secretaries, he would give them a cool $1,000,000. So far, nobody has taken him up on his deal and those that have tried have fallen short.

I know you're 1/2 troll 1/2 idiot (my ratio slightly off), but there are some people who wish to either learn or engage in a discussion above the fucking ******ed level you and the other crop of ******s casually engage in on a daily basis. Inform yourself or learn to post legitimately, because one day you'll actually realize you wasted your youth being a fucking idiot.

If you're looking to stimulate an economy, what do you feel is a better way?
1. Government redistribtuion of wealth and government spending
2. Banks loaning to small businesses

THAT'S WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO! Even if the top 200 richest in America put the money in the bank, isn't that money which will go to be loaned to small businesses and made a profit off of BETTER THAN GOVERNMENT WASTE AND MISMANAGEMENT?


Who's the ****ing idiot now?

[jose_palooka]

Originally Posted by Dirt E Gomez View Post
Sometime ago, Warren Buffet issued a challenge to the top 200 richest people in America. He made an agreement that if any of them could prove they paid more % of their income in taxes than their secretaries, he would give them a cool $1,000,000. So far, nobody has taken him up on his deal and those that have tried have fallen short.

I worked in the tax field for 20 years and laugh at those unknowing types who believe the wealthy are being bled to death by taxes and that the USA is and has been heading politically towards socialism. Yeah, the right wingers would have you believe it but the reality is the precise opposite. For the truth is (contrary to the commonly believed right wing mythology) that the rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/28...-children-big/

quote: ''the rich are still getting richer, and the poor are falling further behind them. The income gap between the richest and poorest Americans grew last year to its largest margin ever, a stark divide as Democrats and Republicans spar over whether to extend Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy.''

Note that this comes from the CONSERVATIVE Fox network. Even these conservatives are forced to admit that current policies favor the wealthy, not anybody else.