Cuts for the Wealthy Have Resulted in Loss of a Million Jobs: It's Just Common Sense

Liberty said:
...go to a consumption tax for a short time
Click to expand...
What is it with people wanting a fucking national sales tax? Sales taxes (or whatever else you want to call them) are inherently regressive, hitting the poor and middle class who spend the majority of their income instead of being able to invest significant portions. And unless you want to destroy the entire concept of the stock market by taxing the sale of stocks, consumption taxes end up NOT taxing a large majority of the GNP.

And if the sales tax (or consumption tax) were to exempt the necessities on which the poor spend all, and the middle class spend most of their income so that it did NOT hit them hardest, all you have left is a bastardized form of luxury tax.
 
Good Luck said:
What is it with people wanting a fucking national sales tax? Sales taxes (or whatever else you want to call them) are inherently regressive, hitting the poor and middle class who spend the majority of their income instead of being able to invest significant portions. And unless you want to destroy the entire concept of the stock market by taxing the sale of stocks, consumption taxes end up NOT taxing a large majority of the GNP.

And if the sales tax (or consumption tax) were to exempt the necessities on which the poor spend all, and the middle class spend most of their income so that it did NOT hit them hardest, all you have left is a bastardized form of luxury tax.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this useful post.

Flat tax is infinitely better.
 
Good Luck said:
What is it with people wanting a fucking national sales tax? Sales taxes (or whatever else you want to call them) are inherently regressive, hitting the poor and middle class who spend the majority of their income instead of being able to invest significant portions. And unless you want to destroy the entire concept of the stock market by taxing the sale of stocks, consumption taxes end up NOT taxing a large majority of the GNP.

And if the sales tax (or consumption tax) were to exempt the necessities on which the poor spend all, and the middle class spend most of their income so that it did NOT hit them hardest, all you have left is a bastardized form of luxury tax.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with you, but most people scratch their heads and say, but how will we fund the government. They can't imagine life without all the departments and big government programs that we shouldn't have.

I'd like to just get rid of the income tax, and lay off a bunch of government workers myself.
 
Liberty said:
My employer hasn't shown a proffit sense 2008. Which means he hasn't made any money. Even after laying off half the people at my company he can't make any money. Also, Dune couldn't be more wrong. Get rid of the income tax, go to a consumption tax for a short time, get rid of the EPA, Department of Energy, and Obamacare, and jobs will come back. Just common sense stuff.
Click to expand...

Poor Liability.


Not only can't he spell, he's made claims that are unsubstantiated by any facts.


FACT: George Bush was president in 2008.


FACT: Since 2001, he'd promised jobs and prosperity.


FACT: Liability's employer got neither from tax cuts, yet Liability cries for more of the same and calls it common sense.


 
Liberty said:
A flat tax is still an income tax. Which is still marxism.

We need to get rid of the income tax all together.
Click to expand...
I've debated the issue with myself for a long time, and in this day and age a income tax is a necessity. Flat tax, with standard deductions (this is SFs plan) is the most fair and even way to accomplish this, in addition to spending cuts.
 
President Mittens said:
I've debated the issue with myself for a long time, and in this day and age a income tax is a necessity. Flat tax, with standard deductions (this is SFs plan) is the most fair and even way to accomplish this, in addition to spending cuts.
Click to expand...

I don't agree.

The income tax is a cancer to our republic.
 
When have tax cuts and spending cuts produced prosperity in America?


Give an example.
 
Bush tax cuts destroyed Liability's employer's profitablity and led to layoffs.

Now he wants more of the same.

Poor Liability.
 
Poor Liability.


Bush said tax cuts = prosperity and jobs.


Bush was wrong.


Now Liability thinks more tax cuts will = prosperity and jobs.
 
Liberty said:
I mostly agree with you, but most people scratch their heads and say, but how will we fund the government. They can't imagine life without all the departments and big government programs that we shouldn't have.

I'd like to just get rid of the income tax, and lay off a bunch of government workers myself.
Click to expand...
No doubt we should rid ourselves of much of the federal government - get it back to the levels intended for our constitutional federal government. I can easily imagine - and even use my votes in federal, state, and local elections to demand - a government without all the bureaucracies, departments, and programs that we should not have at the federal level. (state and local governments are another topic.)

But even if we were to pare it down to the basics, we would still have the need to fund the functions and expenses of the federal government. And funding it means taxation.

I don't know why you believe income taxes to be Marxist. That claim simply does not hold water. I assume you are speaking specifically of the Marxist ideal of redistribution of wealth? (I cannot think of any other way Marxism could possibly apply to income tax). If so, even with a deliberately progressive income tax, it would not be Marxist simply through the collection of taxes by ANY means. What constitutes (or does not) Marxism from government, in relation to taxes, comes about by how those taxes are used, not in how they are collected. When taxes are used to support entitlement programs for the poor, THAT is redistribution of wealth (Marxism), even if taxes are derived from consumption taxes. Conversely, how is using income taxes to build the infrastructure for which the federal government is constitutionally responsible, and paying for the components of national defense for which the federal government is constitutionally responsible, any more "Marxist" than using some type of consumption tax to achieve the same ends?
 
Last edited:
Heaven forbid that the Walton family should give up one penny of its $86-billion fortune. All of that lucre is necessary to ensure that unions be kept out of Wal-Mart, that women employees not be promoted and that politicians be kept on a short leash.


It was not always thus. It would have been hard to find an uneducated farmer during the depression of the 1890s who did not have a very accurate idea about exactly which economic interests were shafting him.


An unemployed worker in a breadline in 1932 would have felt little gratitude to the Rockefellers or the Mellons.


But that is not the case in the present economic crisis.


After a riot of unbridled greed such as the world has not seen since the conquistadors' looting expeditions and after an unprecedented broad and rapid transfer of wealth upward by Wall Street and its corporate satellites, where is the popular anger directed?


The popular rage is harmlessly diverted against pseudo-issues: death panels, birtherism, gay marriage, abortion, and so on, none of which stands to dent the corporate bottom line in the slightest.



http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779
 
Dune u ass licker. Obama pays poor idiots like u a 2 yrs to sit home and smoke crack. The economy will pick up as soon as he leaves.
 
Thanks to Republicans, Washington deregulated Wall Street while insuring it against major losses.


In so doing, it allowed finance — which until then had been the servant of American industry — to become its master, demanding short-term profits over long-term growth and raking in an ever larger portion of the nation’s profits.


By 2007, financial companies accounted for over 40 percent of American corporate profits and almost as great a percentage of pay, up from 10 percent during the 90s.


Germany has grown faster than the United States for the last 15 years, and the gains have been more widely spread.


While Americans’ average hourly pay has risen only 6 percent since 1985, adjusted for inflation, German workers’ pay has risen almost 30 percent.


At the same time, the top 1 percent of German households now take home about 11 percent of all income — about the same as in 1970. And although in the last months Germany has been hit by the debt crisis of its neighbors, its unemployment is still below where it was when the financial crisis started in 2007.


How has Germany done it?


Mainly by focusing like a laser on education (German math scores continue to extend their lead over American), and by maintaining strong labor unions.




http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/opinion/sunday/jobs-will-follow-a-strengthening-of-the-middle-class.html?pagewanted=2
 
It seems like a lot of what one would have expected from populist anger has simply been mis-directed into the Tea Party.

The very ones who gamed and profited the most have now enlisted those most bereft to aid in further upward movement of money.

Think of it!

Fully 48% of the population routinely and repeatedly voting against themselves. Seems akin to mass hysteria to me.
 
The Tea-orists are losing popularity, according to recent polls.


Who'd have thought that due to fear of the Tea-rorists, the Republican Party would use the debt limit vote, an otherwise routine legislative procedure that has been used 87 times since the end of World War II, in order to concoct an entirely artificial fiscal crisis.


Then, again threatened by Tea-rorists, they would use that fiscal crisis to get what they wanted, by literally holding the US and global economies as hostages.


The debt ceiling extension is not the only example of this sort of political terrorism.


At the behest of the Tea-rorists, Republicans were willing to lay off 4,000 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) employees, 70,000 private construction workers and let FAA safety inspectors work without pay, in fact, forcing them to pay for their own work-related travel.


How prudent is that? In order to strong arm some union-busting provisions into the FAA reauthorization.



http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top