Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Trickle-down is a scam, extending the Bush tax cut is wrong:
- Thread starter Mr. dB
- Start date
mrplunkey
New member
That article based on horrifically flawed arguments. Here are a few favorites:
"If tax rates are high enough to discourage profit taking - forcing wealth created by a business to be recycled back into the business – then businesses are pushed toward longer-term planning, as they invest in new plant and equipment that will be used for many years. "
That is complete and utter crap. The author is trying to argue that if we just steal all the profits out of a company via taxes, we'd force the businesses to spend all their profits on assets they could depreciate. In the real world, it works completely the opposite: If you take cash out of a business, we cut capital spending first, then are forced to cut employees. If high taxes forcing companies to invest is such a great idea, let's change every tax depreciation schedule to 1-3 years instead of 5, 7, 10 or even 30 years. Think they'll do that? Nope.
"Low tax rates encourage taking wealth out of industrial companies; the wealth taken out must then be “put to work.” That means more money chasing “investment” opportunities, leading to price increases in financial capital or real estate or some other asset. In other words, an asset bubble. "
Great idea! Make sure no one has any extra wealth so they won't create bubbles by making other investments. At least the author is correct about one thing: If you strip-out all the cash from businesses there wouldn't be any bubbles -- simply because we would be in a perpetual state of recession. This is a great example of liberal ideology at work: They'd rather make everyone less wealthy simply so they can prevent the top 10% from getting rich. Newsflash: Poor employers hand-out really shitty paychecks.
"Tax cuts do nothing to help the real, industrial economy. The rich of America have proven that they are not very good at investing: they prefer credit default swaps over investing in sustainable energy start-ups."
This is the old "we can spend your money better than you can" argument. Yeah, government is so great at managing its finances.
My question would be: If tax cuts for the uber rich are so awesome at creating jobs, why did private employment under 8 years of Bush decline by 670,000?
Not to mention the fact that between 1979 and 2005, the mean after-tax income for the top 1% increased by 176%, compared to an increase of 69% for the top quintile overall, 20% for the fourth quintile, 21% for the middle quintile, 17% for the second quintile and 6% for the bottom quintile.
If we're not going to enact tax reform (or move to a flat tax), the upper rates should revert back to Clinton-era levels*, if not higher. A new tax rate for those making $1 million and above would be a good idea.
*And LOL @ people who say Obama wants to raise taxes. All he would do is let a part of a piece of legislature expire as it was written to do. If you have a problem with tax rates for millionaires going up at the end of the year, take it up with Bush. He's the one who came up with the idea.
Not to mention the fact that between 1979 and 2005, the mean after-tax income for the top 1% increased by 176%, compared to an increase of 69% for the top quintile overall, 20% for the fourth quintile, 21% for the middle quintile, 17% for the second quintile and 6% for the bottom quintile.
If we're not going to enact tax reform (or move to a flat tax), the upper rates should revert back to Clinton-era levels*, if not higher. A new tax rate for those making $1 million and above would be a good idea.
*And LOL @ people who say Obama wants to raise taxes. All he would do is let a part of a piece of legislature expire as it was written to do. If you have a problem with tax rates for millionaires going up at the end of the year, take it up with Bush. He's the one who came up with the idea.
b0und
New member
b0und
New member
First, that's a very good and important question.
Second, those observations about income increases show where the money is going now.
Third, new tax rate for income millionaires, what are you a socialist now?
Welcome to the club comrade!
b0und (
)
mrplunkey
New member
Oh that one is easy. You use the Obama Stimulus Scam defense. It would have been soooooo much worse if they hadn't provided those 8 years of Bush cuts. I'm sure we could round-up an economist somewhere who will tell you it saved 20,000,000 jobs -- we just can't measure it.
Ok.
Seriously though...
The fact of the matter is that Bush lost 670k private sector jobs during a pretty remarkable economic growth period. Ironically, Bush presided over a pretty strong public sector growth period.
I understand how theoretically tax cuts for the wealthy are supposed to work, but reality shows that it hasnt been doing anything close.
Einstein and the whole insanity definition kind of applies.
First, that's a very good and important question.
Second, those observations about income increases show where the money is going now.
Third, new tax rate for income millionaires, what are you a socialist now?
Welcome to the club comrade!
b0und (
Ideally closing all of the tax loopholes and moving to a more simplified plan would be ideal.
i'll let the big brains flesh this argument out while i read...but in the meantime i do have to admit
to having large belly lol's at the though of obama extending the racist/evil/bush's tax cuts.
lololol at how mad it's making the libtards*, they are overcome with hatred over this and i love it
*edit: not referring to DB nor do i conser him as such
to having large belly lol's at the though of obama extending the racist/evil/bush's tax cuts.
lololol at how mad it's making the libtards*, they are overcome with hatred over this and i love it
*edit: not referring to DB nor do i conser him as such
Similar threads
