9 Out Of 10 Americans Are Completely Wrong About This Mind-Blowing Fact
- Thread starter cancel2 2022
- Start date
Taft2016
Verified User
You've got your finger on the pulse but you're missing the big picture. It's the liberals who are creating and spreading crony capitalism (fascism).
The class-action lawsuits that liberals drool uncontrollably over; "Big Pharma," "Big Oil," "Big Energy," and "Big Tobacco," with the multi-billion dollar payouts, those corporations are all on board with this. Why? Because the costs of adhering to all of this prevents new competitions from springing up.
Do you have any idea of how hard it is to start up a new pharmaceutical company? A new pharma company will not have a product on the shelf (at all, zero) for a minimum of 10 years. Minimum. Any new pharma company has to immediately form a partnership with one of the Big Pharmas to even get off the ground.
Tobacco? Forget it. As profitable as cigarettes are, when was the last time a new cigarette company hit the market?
Independent oil drillers? What with environmental regulations, drilling on land has dwindled to nearly nothing. It has to be done off-shore at prohibitive costs, which only Big Oil can afford.
This is crony capitalism courtesy of liberalism; big corporations working in cooperation with the government. Don't take my word for it. Ask Keith Olbermann why General Electric fired him from MSNBC.
Freddy Figbottom
Was it me?
Right. We need an actual party of opposition.
Taft2016
Verified User
You're getting warmer.
The dogma you proclaim about "wealthy corporations paying their fair share" doesn't really concern the big corporations all that much. There are reasons the major industrial corporations don't yammer so much about it; they can deal with it. They're situated globally to absorb tax increases, and whatever increased taxes they do suffer they can simply pass them along to consumers, who have limited choices.
The reason the corporations don't yammer so much, and grassroots conservatives do yammer for lower corporate taxes, is that the current system stifles start-up competition. The tax increases are passed along to consumers who suffer limited access to cheaper alternatives in the marketplace. Reforming the current corporate tax system will allow start-up competitions to challenge the existing corporate monsters.
It will benefit consumers with cheaper alternatives.
The irony is that the huge corporations would experience more problems with less regulation and taxation, which is why you see monsters like General Electric and General Motors hobnobbing with Obama.
It is the lower-tier businesses that are struggling in competitive economic fields that are in need in lower taxes and regulations. They're stuggling against the protections offered by the big government crony capitalists.
HI, Einstein. You've gone off since you've been dead!
What are you; a third grader on some playground?
Well, whatever I am, I am obviously superior to an hysterical, ill-mannered rightist thug.
Let me refresh yours; you started this off topic rant without a point. Now your point is progressive taxation as we know it today is good. All of which are incredibly stupid claims and arguments.
Then you make the inane claim since "its" inception; which could mean since the nations inception, since progressive taxes were conceived of or when taxes were first implemented in this country which would be at its inception.
Fact: Progressive taxation did not begin in 1912; they were instituted as far back as 1862 during Lincolns Presidency.
FACT: Your post was completely off topic and still lacking a coherent point.
FACT: I called you on your incredible stupidity and you failed to even get the taxation part right.
Here is my point to you; your bloviating had NOTHING to do with the topic, were factually incorrect and then you doubled down on it with the mistaken illogical conclusion that you actually knew what it is you are talking about.
No you still are clueless to what you are attempting to argue, it is way off the topic and your claim that the current 78,000 plus page tax code is a good thing makes you singularly the dumbest man in America because no one with even half a brain agrees with it. It is the constant topic of derision and yet here you are claiming it works.
FACT: you don’t know the difference between marginal tax rates, nominal tax rates or effective tax rates; Yes you really are THAT stupid.
You moronically believe that tax rates relate to economic output and that during the higher Marginal rate of 90% the economy was just fine. But that is a lie and ignores the fact that marginal tax rates are quite meaningless when you account for deductions, credits and the many other manipulations contained in the tax code at the time.
FACT: This nation does not have a REVENUE problem. It has a SPENDING problem. Revenue has ALWAYS increased regardless of what MARGINAL tax rates were in force at the time. The problem we have is that SPENDING has increased exponentially more during the same time periods.
FACT: No one is arguing we should not have Federal taxes. What we are arguing for is a less corrupt system that prevents politicians from using the tax code to benefit their campaigns and their corrupt cronies duping gullible dimwits like you into voting for them thinking you can get something for nothing.
It may not occur to you, because you are really that stupid, that the primary reason for lobbyists is the tax code. Billions have been spent trying to influence tax legislation. I think we can all agree that lobbying only serves those with the money and power to use it right? I think we all agree that we would like to see it end right? Then in order to end it, you have to eliminate the single greatest reason for it after subsidizing; the tax code.
Now you may think you are a genius because you are a simpleton of incredible ignorance, but I assure you that you have done nothing to remove any doubt that you really are THAT stupid.
Now run along; your dog is calling you. I think he wants to use your leg as a fire hydrant.
Moron.
Last edited:
Well, whatever I am, I am obviously superior to an hysterical, ill-mannered rightist thug.
Well you would be wrong; which is typical for you because you really are THAT stupid. Now did you have anything substantive to add to the thread or you merely came here to troll like the brain dead simpleton we know you to be?
Moron.
Because I don't spend every moment at my computer drooling like the dimwit you are with the mistaken belief that you have a point to make.
See above dimwit; you really are THAT stupid.
BRAVO...bumping this for the truth. But do not expect it to have an impact on the dullard class who engages in never ending circles of stupidity.
They are so much smarter than you dontchyaknow.
Taft2016
Verified User
BRAVO...bumping this for the truth. But do not expect it to have an impact on the dullard class who engages in never ending circles of stupidity.
They are so much smarter than you dontchyaknow.
It's all so transparent.
You take a huge conglomerate like RJ Reynolds, a tobacco company diversified up to the neck.
If some uppity businessmen come along and try to start up a new cigarette company, the RJR crony capitalists just make some nice campaign donations and whisper into the liberals' ears "Hey, we could use one of your patented special libtard class-action lawsuits against tobacco right about now."
RJR survives the lawsuit, the uppity upstarts get bankrupted. RJR has one bad year, and resumes their uncontested dominance the next.
Crony capitalism; the government picks the winners and losers. Precisely the fascist model of the 1930s.
A daffy Taffy.
maineman
Banned
FACT: the ability for the federal government to collect income taxes from the citizens was included in the constitution with the 16th Amendment.
FACT: The sentence "Income tax has been progressive since ITS inception" refers to the income tax and cannot refer to the country, unless you don't understand correct English composition.
FACT: We have a spending problem AND a revenue problem and most of America understands that we need to address both problems concurrently.
FACT: This thread is about income disparity. Discussing income tax rates in conjunction with that topic is perfectly legitimate.
FACT: I agree wholeheartedly that our tax code is far to complex and has far too many loopholes carved out for special interests but that does not change the FACT that, by increasing the marginal tax rate for the upper bracket, we could generate greater income for the government, which helps to solve one of the two concurrent problems, and a raise of three percentage points of the historically low top rate would NOT stifle entrepreneurial investment in the economy by those folks in that top rate... AND it would help to less the income disparity that the OP referred to.
FACT: you were wrong. I showed you where you were wrong. You couldn't understand basic English and made a fucking fool of yourself, and don't have the grace or the maturity to admit your error.
FACT: that makes you a petulant little moron.
FACT: The sentence "Income tax has been progressive since ITS inception" refers to the income tax and cannot refer to the country, unless you don't understand correct English composition.
FACT: We have a spending problem AND a revenue problem and most of America understands that we need to address both problems concurrently.
FACT: This thread is about income disparity. Discussing income tax rates in conjunction with that topic is perfectly legitimate.
FACT: I agree wholeheartedly that our tax code is far to complex and has far too many loopholes carved out for special interests but that does not change the FACT that, by increasing the marginal tax rate for the upper bracket, we could generate greater income for the government, which helps to solve one of the two concurrent problems, and a raise of three percentage points of the historically low top rate would NOT stifle entrepreneurial investment in the economy by those folks in that top rate... AND it would help to less the income disparity that the OP referred to.
FACT: you were wrong. I showed you where you were wrong. You couldn't understand basic English and made a fucking fool of yourself, and don't have the grace or the maturity to admit your error.
FACT: that makes you a petulant little moron.
Taft2016
Verified User
Lol. Epic!
Taft2016
Verified User
Presumably the 14th amendment was passed to prevent voting majorities from ganging up on voting minorities and passing laws that unequally impact voting minorities.
Explain please how the progressive income tax squares with the equal protection clause? Isn't 95% or so of the voting population passing tax laws that unequally impact 5% of the population the very thing the equal protection clause sought to prevent?
maineman
Banned
it would seem that the 16th answers that question.