Trickle-down is a scam, extending the Bush tax cut is wrong:

[musclemom]

Here's what I don't get:

Why is this one of the FEW countries where the wealthy resent giving back? Seriously. They're wealthy, primarily, because of where they live. Why do wealthy Americans resent paying more than someone who isn't? This argument of "Well, you're not rich because you're lazy" doesn't cut it. Not everyone can be wealthy (or even comfortably middle class, we won't go there). If you aren't born rich then acquiring wealth is often about being dealt the right genetic hand so you have the intellect to be successful and the ambition to implement it. And even if you have the smarts and drive, if you were handed a total shit sandwich in terms of life start (which includes, though to a much lesser degree, GENDER and/or RACE) then you could have all the brains and ambition in the world, but you could still be spinning your wheels.

Why should the rich people pay more taxes than the poor? Simple: The closer you get to the poverty line, the more valuable nickles and dimes become. $5000 a year in extra taxes is an okay vacation for some people, for others it's an entire year's rent.

 

[musclemom]

They want to extend Unemployment benefits another fvckin year ??????????

There are no damned jobs, not even crap jobs. How the hell do you work if you can't get hired? Companies are cutting, and it's cut bait or row and if you can't double or triple your workload, I can find some desperate bastard who will and will be happy. Employment has become a "buyers market." Shit, retailers have already started letting their christmas help go, used to be they hung on to them until after the 1st of the year to get past the returns.

So the choice is, extend unemployment or strain the welfare system further and watch even MORE houses go into foreclosure.

 

[binö]

Here's what I don't get:

Why is this one of the FEW countries where the wealthy resent giving back? Seriously. They're wealthy, primarily, because of where they live. Why do wealthy Americans resent paying more than someone who isn't? This argument of "Well, you're not rich because you're lazy" doesn't cut it. Not everyone can be wealthy (or even comfortably middle class, we won't go there). If you aren't born rich then acquiring wealth is often about being dealt the right genetic hand so you have the intellect to be successful and the ambition to implement it. And even if you have the smarts and drive, if you were handed a total shit sandwich in terms of life start (which includes, though to a much lesser degree, GENDER and/or RACE) then you could have all the brains and ambition in the world, but you could still be spinning your wheels.

Why should the rich people pay more taxes than the poor? Simple: The closer you get to the poverty line, the more valuable nickles and dimes become. $5000 a year in extra taxes is an okay vacation for some people, for others it's an entire year's rent.

i'd love to hear what countries attract wealty people cause their taxes are high...lol at their being a nation of wealthy people who don't resent paying higher taxes

 

[EnderJE]

i'd love to hear what countries attract wealty people cause their taxes are high...lol at their being a nation of wealthy people who don't resent paying higher taxes

It depends on your definition of wealth, but I would look at Europe at showing people who don't resent giving back (to some degree), no?

 

[binö]

It depends on your definition of wealth, but I would look at Europe at showing people who don't resent giving back (to some degree), no?

and aren't we seeing this come to a head with the unrest and finaincial insecurity taking place in the EU?
look how happy high taxes have made the french population, as they riot and burn

 

[75th]

The whole real estate bubble is directly a result of Carter and Clinton, forcing banks to lend to people who could never in their wildest dreams pay back the loans.

If you look at the stats, a large portion of foreclosures came from upper middle class types. Anyway, I think 99% of economists would argue that it was the extended period of low interest rates (via Greenspan) and his announcements that everybody should go out and purchase real estate as the main cause. Even Greenspan himself agrees with this.

And on the "Bush tax cuts" being extended or not; why is it (and why was it ever) fair to punish someone for being successful, by charging them a higher tax rate?

My question to you is why do you see taxes as "punishment?" Taxes arent meant to be punitive. At the end of the day we need some form of taxation. Although many people look at this from a standpoint of whats "fair," I prefer to look at what is most efficient when it comes to creating a healthy capitalistic society that provides ample opportunity for the vast majority of the citizens.

The Bush tax cuts obviously dont fit the bill in that regard. There is no arguing with the results (as they are right there in black and white) so why should we continue with them?

To repeat a quote of mine above: 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.


That doesnt concern you at all?

If I make $10K a year, and pay $1K taxes, which is about what I'd pay, then why aren't the Dems happy if I make $1M, and pay $100K? The pre-Bush tax rate would have made the tax on $1M earned income appx $550,000!!!!! A flat tax is perfectly fair as far as I can see, and it would encourage me to make more & more; not watch out for a ceiling whereby if I make a penny over, I get raped. And "investment opportunities" are very often things like putting a new company together, or building an apartment building, or doing something that involves hiring people at all levels, and buying all kinds of materials. And letting a successful earner make good investments and not getting butt raped by Uncle Sam, leaves more cash to get pumped back into the economy by spending on fun stuff, spending on sports & travel, and buying durable goods.

As I mentioned to plunk above, I understand thats how it should work...but its been proven (regarding job creation) over the past 10 years thats not how it does work.

 

[EnderJE]

and aren't we seeing this come to a head with the unrest and finaincial insecurity taking place in the EU?
look how happy high taxes have made the french population, as they riot and burn

I can't say why the EU is taking a beating financially. Too be honest, other then Iceland, I really haven't read up into it.

I don't see that the French (or Europeans) are rioting for the high taxes. I see them rioting for a whole lot of other reasons. I'll look around.

However, the main point was the list of some countries where people are not completely adverse to paying higher taxes.

I still say flat tax FTW.

 

[digimon7068]

There are no damned jobs, not even crap jobs. How the hell do you work if you can't get hired? Companies are cutting, and it's cut bait or row and if you can't double or triple your workload, I can find some desperate bastard who will and will be happy. Employment has become a "buyers market." Shit, retailers have already started letting their christmas help go, used to be they hung on to them until after the 1st of the year to get past the returns.

So the choice is, extend unemployment or strain the welfare system further and watch even MORE houses go into foreclosure.

boy, there is here! and most of them are not bs, minimum wage jobs either...and the people that used to occupy these positions??? they don't wanna go back to work because they are making 75% of what they did before and they're sitting on their asses...or they're out in the woods hunting deer...but, they aren't taking their fucking jobs back, even though the hr person calls them once a week trying to drag them back to work...it's fucking horseshit.

 

[EnderJE]

As I mentioned to plunk above, I understand thats how it should work...but its been proven (regarding job creation) over the past 10 years thats not how it does work.

I've been reading Predictability Irrational.

It provides some suggestions on why it doesn't work and why logic doesn't always apply to market forces (ie M$, which can be argued as a poorer operating system in the early years, has a higher market share then others).

Or, you could wait for it to come out on the next version of Wikileaks.

 

[binö]

I can't say why the EU is taking a beating financially. Too be honest, other then Iceland, I really haven't read up into it.

I don't see that the French (or Europeans) are rioting for the high taxes. I see them rioting for a whole lot of other reasons. I'll look around.

However, the main point was the list of some countries where people are not completely adverse to paying higher taxes.

I still say flat tax FTW.

i'm not a finacial euro genious, but one could deduct that higher taxes in france led to:
-business owners getting the fug out.
-less tax base, forcing an increase to make up the loss
-further tax hikes scares away more business
all this equals less money for social programs, and forces an increasing in the retirement age, thus leading to the riots.
proly more to it than that but i'm sure that figures into it