Bush tax policy sucks if you work to live.
- Thread starter Zebo
- Start date
No comment on whether this is true or not. I wouldn't be able to figure out the tax laws if my life depended on it.
But there is something else to look at here. Republicans complain about Democrats, and Democrats complain about Republicans. Yet, with either option we get the same thing: a rich old white guy. Maybe it is time for people to start looking at other options. We're in a rut, and doing the same things we always do isn't going to help. It's time to have someone shake up the dead end bureaucracy.
Unfortunately too many people have falled into the bureaucratic trap, and we will probably never see a worthwhile change.
But there is something else to look at here. Republicans complain about Democrats, and Democrats complain about Republicans. Yet, with either option we get the same thing: a rich old white guy. Maybe it is time for people to start looking at other options. We're in a rut, and doing the same things we always do isn't going to help. It's time to have someone shake up the dead end bureaucracy.
Unfortunately too many people have falled into the bureaucratic trap, and we will probably never see a worthwhile change.
Got any thoughts on this or just posting this because nobody else can figure out how to get to a site other than Anandtech?
This is stupid, the "rich" pay way more in taxes than the poor. The poor pay little to any taxes. Therefore, it seems logical that the rich would get the biggest benefit. Lowering taxes on higher income people don't mean that lower income people are paying more. He is not RAISING the taxes on poor people.. so the point of this article is just stupid. Poor people will pay the same or less than they have in the past under the Bush plan.. whats wrong with that?
Some fuzzy math. Goverment speeding increase, tax on rich people decrease, tax on poor people decrease, so that leaves the question who paid for the increase in speending.
The growth in the economy.. people making more money = people paying more taxes.. wonderful system.
Nice article, Zebo.
And there are the usual platitudes from the right-
"The growth in the economy.. people making more money = people paying more taxes.. wonderful system."
Which is utterly simplistic and misleading, along with the unsupportable notion that the wealthy pay more taxes. While that's true in total dollars, it's utterly false in terms of total taxes as a % of income, or any other honest metric. We also mis-identify who's truly wealthy, that being the top .01% of all tax filers, about 13K returns out of 130M.
Even examining federal income tax in a vacuum, separate from al others, the top 400 paid 22.2% in 2002, while the rest of the top 1% paid 27.5% or higher. That's on incomes averaging $174M vs incomes averaging ~$900K. Not to mention the SS cutoff at $88K, an instant 13% tax break on all income above that, or a multitude of ways that the ultra wealthy find to avoid taxation.
It's not rocket science to figure out what's happened during 20 years of false economic theory-- The income and wealth share of those at the very, very top has grown explosively, while the rest of us get left in the dust, actually subsidizing this transfer through the mechanism of enormous federal debt. It's the perfect illusion, the crack cocaine of American politics, and we're hooked, bad...
And there are the usual platitudes from the right-
"The growth in the economy.. people making more money = people paying more taxes.. wonderful system."
Which is utterly simplistic and misleading, along with the unsupportable notion that the wealthy pay more taxes. While that's true in total dollars, it's utterly false in terms of total taxes as a % of income, or any other honest metric. We also mis-identify who's truly wealthy, that being the top .01% of all tax filers, about 13K returns out of 130M.
Even examining federal income tax in a vacuum, separate from al others, the top 400 paid 22.2% in 2002, while the rest of the top 1% paid 27.5% or higher. That's on incomes averaging $174M vs incomes averaging ~$900K. Not to mention the SS cutoff at $88K, an instant 13% tax break on all income above that, or a multitude of ways that the ultra wealthy find to avoid taxation.
It's not rocket science to figure out what's happened during 20 years of false economic theory-- The income and wealth share of those at the very, very top has grown explosively, while the rest of us get left in the dust, actually subsidizing this transfer through the mechanism of enormous federal debt. It's the perfect illusion, the crack cocaine of American politics, and we're hooked, bad...
I suppose I should have said "20 years of the application of false supply-side economic theory"-
You know, the old trickle-down voodoo economics- cut taxes for the rich, borrow to cover the lost tax revenue, pray you get some of the splash from the trough method of financing the govt...
You know, the old trickle-down voodoo economics- cut taxes for the rich, borrow to cover the lost tax revenue, pray you get some of the splash from the trough method of financing the govt...
why isn't total $ amount an honest metric? Do the rich get more from the government than the poor? do the rich drive different highways or have different firefighters than the poor? Does a different military protect the rich?
"those who benefit most from our nation should pay more" this presumes the communist idea that the government is the nation, that doing well in the country means you owe something extra to the government, that the government has a right to anyone's life, liberty, or property irregardless of what the people of the nation want.
Their is a republican majority for a reason: The people of the united states don't want a government big enough to 'give' them everything they want, because they don't want a government big enough to take away everything that they have.
Low taxation on investment capital yields higher employment, better production, an overall lower cost of goods, and a beater quality of life for everyone, including those in poverty: almost all of whom have a place to live, have plenty of food, and own a car.
People below the poverty line in America live better and have more opportunities for advancement than the middle class of most other industrialized nations.
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
The capitalists do get more from the government than any poor or working people.
They get an educated work force paid for by the government to draw from. Don't belive me? try and open a semi conductor plant in Ziare and let me know how that works out for you.
They get "protection" in the form of law and order, patents, copyrights etc which places an artifical surplus charge to thier governemnt protected goods/services. Goverment agents enforce this profit motive.
They get free land and tax breaks to start businesses/open a business in a certain area which your small business/sole propietor does'nt get.
They get military protection abroad to continue commerce and open new markets.
They get satellite communications paid for by goverment.
They get a banking system which the goverment backs for them to reap profits...remember S&L's?
Just like an insurance policy asks you to pay more the more you have to protect and insure so should the capitalists should have to pay more. Certainly not get off owing nothing as many do now..for generations.
" why isn't total $ amount an honest metric? Do the rich get more from the government than the poor? do the rich drive different highways or have different firefighters than the poor? Does a different military protect the rich?"
1. By that line of reasoning, a guy who makes a million dollars and pays two in taxes does more than his fair share compared to a guy making ten grand and paying one in taxes.
2. Yes.
3. They fly in corporate jets, virtually for free, stay in company owned retreats, spend their vacations in Puerto Rico at the finest hotels under the guise of business. They generally don't drive, they're chauffeured at company expense...
4. The American Military is designed to project power around the globe in defense of "American Interests". What interest does a single mother in Brooklyn who works two menial jobs have in Iraqi freedom, a new class of attack submarines, new nukes, or B2 bombers?
We had the most potent military in the world when Osama's boys dropped their calling cards on the WTC, and it didn't do us a bit of good. Nobody in favor of such expenditures has pointed out exactly who or what we're defending ourselves from with this massive military buildup, anyway. I'm starting to think it's the conservatives' fiscal equivalent of "comfort food", just something to do when nervous, depressed or when reality bears down too harshly...
1. By that line of reasoning, a guy who makes a million dollars and pays two in taxes does more than his fair share compared to a guy making ten grand and paying one in taxes.
2. Yes.
3. They fly in corporate jets, virtually for free, stay in company owned retreats, spend their vacations in Puerto Rico at the finest hotels under the guise of business. They generally don't drive, they're chauffeured at company expense...
4. The American Military is designed to project power around the globe in defense of "American Interests". What interest does a single mother in Brooklyn who works two menial jobs have in Iraqi freedom, a new class of attack submarines, new nukes, or B2 bombers?
We had the most potent military in the world when Osama's boys dropped their calling cards on the WTC, and it didn't do us a bit of good. Nobody in favor of such expenditures has pointed out exactly who or what we're defending ourselves from with this massive military buildup, anyway. I'm starting to think it's the conservatives' fiscal equivalent of "comfort food", just something to do when nervous, depressed or when reality bears down too harshly...
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Conservatives crack me up with thier "I earned that money, it's mine" mantra. Sells really well that's why capitalists don't pay or pay little in tax. But thier money wasn't earned in a vacuum. The commercial enterprise where they work or that they own operates within a society that has a vast public infrastructure that someone has to pay for.
This vast public infrastructure also creates vast opportunities such that the taxes you pay reap you tremendous returns. The proof of that is the fact that the twenty wealthiest nations on earth all have an extensive public sector.
"Minimalist government" countries, with low taxes and little public investment in infrastructure and government services, are impoverished cesspools -- except for a handful of wealthy elites.
Or this that the true goal of conservatives?
This vast public infrastructure also creates vast opportunities such that the taxes you pay reap you tremendous returns. The proof of that is the fact that the twenty wealthiest nations on earth all have an extensive public sector.
"Minimalist government" countries, with low taxes and little public investment in infrastructure and government services, are impoverished cesspools -- except for a handful of wealthy elites.
Or this that the true goal of conservatives?
show me one millionaire American family that has paid no taxes for generations. I'll save you the search, their are none.
OK, i implore you to show me just ONE American after LBJ who made over 200,000 and paid no taxes that year.
Everyone is a capitalist, unless they are living in a kibbutz or some such. Everyone benefits from improved technology and information because of copyrights, patents, and of course law and order.
like America was in the 1950's? yea, right.
It's a matter of functionality. If reducing taxes on the corporation and opening up lower cost land to the cooperation leads to better employment or lower cost of goods, then we all have a higher standard of living.
I'm sure that if a soul proprietorship, or a group of them, was going to employ the same 200 people on the land the local governments would be more than happy to open up the land for such expansion; but the fact is that it's more functional to increase employment and production.
the old argument " the military is nothing but a shill for American imperialism" you give me three credible sources on this and I'll respond to the situation at hand. But as it is the only thing to back up this view is a simplistic world view that the anti-American progressives like to paint everything America does with.
I'm not a libertarian trying to say 'no taxes'; I'm just saying that no government has automatic right to anyone's live liberty or property.
Which also reduces costs for the end user.
it's the little guys who most benefits from government protection of the banking system.
how is being paid well via perks a matter of government? Or should you be taxed for the value of your medical benefits?
freedom from a nuclear attack from middle eastern terrorists who got it from Qaddafi, for one.
'fair share' is a matter of debate, but surely the government doesn't have a right to any of those three; by election and representation what is 'fair' for who to pay what will be established.
they also give good reason for people to get an education so they can work more productively and gain a better standard of living. Don't believe me? Try and get a job with a PhD in semiconductor design in Zaire, let me know how that works out for you.
Your solution would inhibit those who employ, reduce the need for higher education, keep the masses ignorant and dependent on the government; with just a few intellectual elites who run things.
or is that the true goal of progressives?
The problem for Republicans is that their policies are unsustainable. The only way they make them politically acceptable is by financing them with huge amounts of borrowed money, and once that gravy train comes to an end, someone will have to start paying. It's going to be the rich, because it's politically easier to raise taxes on a rich minority than on middle class majority.
Way too easy-
http://www.benefitscounsel.com/archives/000260.html
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/apr2001/tax-a11.shtml
You referenced education, perhaps it might benefit you to obtain some prior to making the statements we've all becomed accustomed to. No, listening to Rush isn't an education.
Oh, yeh, this guy doesn't pay taxes, or file withholding from his employees checks, brags about it on the 'net... and has been for years. Only recently have the feds attempted to take action against him, and that's just because he has to shoot his mouth off...
http://www.paynoincometax.com/
Oh look another thread to allow the unable, inept, jealous losers whine about what others have and they do not. If you are unable to compete then the rules must be changed or the government must step in to help you otherwise it just isn't fair. Waaaaaaaaa. But don't believe me, the world socialist website says so, too. It must be true.
That's right UQ, kill the messenger- they're only quoting the IRS... even the most rabid dittoheads can do that, too...
Typical conservatives are fiscally prudent with sustainable policies, its the neo-cons that real republicans have been strong-armed into supporting that are messing things up. They are trying to have their cake and eat it too, well wtf. Give me an intelligent REAL conservative like McCain or Bush senior any day. Hell, I'd take Clinton's economics over the current administrations plundering of our future.
On the topic of the wealthy paying their share of taxes, it's corporations not paying their share of taxes that has really contributed to the shift over the last few decades. In 1950, companies paid 50% of the tax bill in America, today that figure is just over 3% and guess who's picking up the tab? Compaines have too many loopholes available to them in the tax code (the wealthy do to, pretty much anyone with a good accountant but the wealthy still can't use a PO box in Aruba to get out of half their tax bill). Big corporations in America end up getting money from the government more often then they pay. Why it works this way is complicated of course. Globalization has contributed for sure. Not passing judgement here, just pointing something out.
sorry, of course, i was implying legally; your choice to ignore that is simply your own failing. I'm sure there are plenty who made under 200k who also didn't pay taxes.
oh and he pays property taxes, sales taxes, and many other taxes; so even if you insist on being anal, you are still wrong.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter