Patriotic Millionaires decend on Washington demanding to pay more taxes

[Zebo]

They are right. Biggest thing the right misses is Capitalism moves wealth from the labor that creates it to the owners who accumulate it. Simple as that. Any millionaire will tell you the first million was the hardest after which it's easier due to what you control not how hard you work. Over time control of capital enables them to control politics, banking, and job creation and pay nothing to workers because there's more workers than capital. Owners have succeeded in getting it all many many times and spawned a revolution because all of a society's productive assets and policies are controlled by a small elite.

You can control this natural shift w/o bloodshed with mechanisms to move wealth from the top back to the bottom. And we did so for many years e.g. labor unions...SBA loans..SBA grants....progressive taxation etc... This capitalism with socialist undertones is why America was just amazingly prosperous from 1945-1975 almost to the bottom of society. But we're into the "low tax" or "no tax" minimalist government off-shoring mindset. I expect Wall Street is training Indians as we speak to take over banking and accounting too. Americans cost too much in a 100% capitalist mindset.

I'm sure when Eisenhower was taxing 92% on millionaires to build HWYS they were furious - then they figured out how to make trillions in tourism, cars, auto shops, agriculture gas stations etc those roads provided.

I'm sure when Bill Gates dad who owned 3 banks was taxed high he was furious. But then Billy III fiqured out how to use 100,000 college educated and build the largest software company world had ever seen he was pretty happy. Go try and open a Microsoft in haiti I dare ya.

Not zero sum game to have high taxes.

 

[Zebo]

How about they take the money and open up a factory or something else instead of wanting more taxes? More taxes by employment is much better than more taxes because of higher rates. Quit shipping the jobs offshore and this wouldn't be as much of a problem. *sigh*

How are you going to compete with $2 an hour with no environmental regs and a captive police force who will bust heads if workers get uppity? You can't. That's why American trucks are made in Mexico these days and everything else in China. I was so pissed looking for a new truck since I only buy American to find the Dodge 4500 Chassis cab was Mexican. So Was the Ford. I didn't buy them but I'm running out of options.

My dad was a lighting manufacturer out of Anaheim California. Exit signs, Tritium signs/lighting used in military vechiles, etc, Employed Americans at a good rate but couldn't compete with China knockoffs coming in by the 1990's and was just getting by. He sold it to a China firm. They still use the name and are cheaper 15 years later. All off shore except sales reps.

 

[umbrella39]

It's funny how conservatives can't spot the terrible logic with these statements. Not only are they too stupid to spot the terrible logic, they get all uppity thinking they are pointing out hypocrisy. No better combination than arrogant ignorance.

When I read some of his posts I get concerned that somewhere a monovillage is missing their idiot.

 

[umbrella39]

Except polls have showed that the majority of millionaires want taxes increased for people making over $1,000,000.

This... I'm certain some of the MDs/DOs I work with are millionaires especially the older specialists that have long since paid back their education debts. Not a one of them has ever expressed any semblance of a notion that they are taxed too much nor have I ever heard any cries or concerns about a possible degradation of their quality of lives were their taxes to be increased. It would not affect them one bit save 1 or 2 less very expensive dinners out with other doctors and their spouses every year.

Millionaires are not the fragile class the GOP and their fan club claim them to be. They don't want or need our protection.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

How are you going to compete with $2 an hour with no environmental regs and a captive police force who will bust heads if workers get uppity? You can't. That's why American trucks are made in Mexico these days and everything else in China. I was so pissed looking for a new truck since I only buy American to find the Dodge 4500 Chassis cab was Mexican. So Was the Ford. I didn't buy them but I'm running out of options.

My dad was a lighting manufacturer out of Anaheim California. Exit signs, Tritium signs/lighting used in military vechiles, etc, Employed Americans at a good rate but couldn't compete with China knockoffs coming in by the 1990's and was just getting by. He sold it to a China firm. They still use the name and are cheaper 15 years later. All off shore except sales reps.

Maybe you should complain to government who signed those free trade agreements?

Laura Tyson FTW!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=SZTzPmn-87w#t=238s

 

[Zebo]

This... I'm certain some of the MDs/DOs I work with are millionaires especially the older specialists that have long since paid back their education debts. Not a one of them has ever expressed any semblance of a notion that they are taxed too much nor have I ever heard any cries or concerns about a possible degradation of their quality of lives were their taxes to be increased. It would not affect them one bit save 1 or 2 less very expensive dinners out with other doctors and their spouses every year.

Millionaires are not the fragile class the GOP and their fan club claim them to be. They don't want or need our protection.

They shouldnt bitch. Half their money comes from taxes. More seriously I don't think marginal rates are the issue, they are pretty high, but rather investor class like hedge fund managers paying only capital gains rate.

I've never understood that division anyway, capital gains vs regular income, further complicated by passive income which is exempt from employment taxes such as SS, etc. Why should a working person pay so much more than an investor? They both take risks and income is income. Those with the gold make the rules...

 

[hal2kilo]

When I read some of his posts I get concerned that somewhere a monovillage is missing their idiot.

Hillary?

 

[shira]

It's my money. I'm just getting it back.

Winning.

Using your so-called "reasoning" (that the wealthy who advocate tax increases for the affluent should voluntarily pay more in taxes), since YOU advocate significant cuts in government spending, your wife should offer to take a pay cut for her government job to reduce government spending.

So explain to us why your wife hasn't offered to reduce her salary?

 

[michal1980]

What's ironic is that we exalt these people as smart, intelligent and the heart of the job creators, entrepreneurs, and what makes America, America but dismiss them out of hand simply because the minority (32%) thinks they are entitled to ever more.

At least we know who the plutocrats are.

So if you take a poll and a majority of americans want a min salary of 1 milion dollars. then thats good policy? Because a majority belive they should get something?

 

[Jhhnn]

So if you take a poll and a majority of americans want a min salary of 1 milion dollars. then thats good policy? Because a majority belive they should get something?

When reality gets tough, resort to absurdity.

 

[Macamus Prime]

How many AT Millionaires were at this event?

Millionaires?? My friend, they are BILLIONAIRES. Get it right.

Millions are for plebeians. These cats lose millions between the couch cushions.

 

[michal1980]

When reality gets tough, resort to absurdity.

Just using your logic.

majority of millionaires polled said they want higher taxes.

Jhhnn "Give them higher taxes"

Majority of people polled want higher pay

Jhhnn "Abusrdity"

-----------------

Consistency - Lost art for some.

 

[matt0611]

"Demand to pay more taxes" LMAO

They can write a check to the government anytime, no reason to wait, lead by example and give now!

http://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/moretopics_gifts.html

 

[Ninjahedge]

Matt, that is a stupid assertion. Until there is a mandate given and a level playing field where all involved would be sharing the burden, you will get FEW who volunteer to pout themselves at a disadvantage.

The swimsuit example is perfect. Many can object to their use, but all will use them until they are no longer allowed. By voluntarily giving more, you put yourself at a competitive disadvantage and, ironically, earn less. You are volunteering to make your contributions an inefficient self depreciating act.

As for the moronic "millions" comment by mike... We all know that is BS.

When one asks "what would you like to earn?" you get a different answer than "what do you think your profession should be paid?" or "What would you pay someone to do your job?". Everyone wants to be a millionaire, but few will say they are willing to pay a garbage man $100/hr....

 

[actuarial]

If they want to pay more, they are free to donate. Put your money where your mouth is guys, not force others to give more of their money because you want them to.

This is the prime difference between conservatives and liberals

conservative = ok, pay more if you want, but the individual is what's most important as is the fruits of their labor
liberal = we will take by rule of law because we said so and know what's best for you

You seem to be in favour of reducing government spending. Are you going to refuse SS payments when the time comes? Are you going to refuse medicare when the time comes? Are you going to refuse your wife's government salary? Are you going to stop driving on public roads to reduce maintenance costs?

No one is stopping you from personally reducing government spending, so why aren't you?

 

[shira]

"Demand to pay more taxes" LMAO

They can write a check to the government anytime, no reason to wait, lead by example and give now!

http://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/moretopics_gifts.html

So by this "logic:"

Anyone advocating smaller government who happens to be employed - directly or indirectly - by the government, should volunteer to take a pay cut.

Anyone advocating smaller government who happens to be receiving Social Security or Medicare should send back a proportion of the payments made to them or on their behalf.

Anyone advocating smaller government who receives government-backed student loans should voluntarily reduce the size of their future disbursements and pay more of their educational expenses out of their own pocket.

More generally, ANYONE who advocates smaller government who receives ANY government benefit should voluntarily refuse to accept the benefit in proportion to the advocated reduction.

Do all of the above statements reflect your opinion?

 

[Engineer]

How are you going to compete with $2 an hour with no environmental regs and a captive police force who will bust heads if workers get uppity? You can't. That's why American trucks are made in Mexico these days and everything else in China. I was so pissed looking for a new truck since I only buy American to find the Dodge 4500 Chassis cab was Mexican. So Was the Ford. I didn't buy them but I'm running out of options.

My dad was a lighting manufacturer out of Anaheim California. Exit signs, Tritium signs/lighting used in military vechiles, etc, Employed Americans at a good rate but couldn't compete with China knockoffs coming in by the 1990's and was just getting by. He sold it to a China firm. They still use the name and are cheaper 15 years later. All off shore except sales reps.

I understand what you are saying but is taxing them more really going to help the people either? I guess it would shore up the welfare fund but other than that......

Interesting that we had a customer come in yesterday and stated that Japan has started moving business to the US because the Yen is so high that it's more economical to make the stuff in the US. I wonder if out little "printing money spree" will eventually kick China in the nuts the same way?

 

[matt0611]

You seem to be in favour of reducing government spending. Are you going to refuse SS payments when the time comes? Are you going to refuse medicare when the time comes? Are you going to refuse your wife's government salary? Are you going to stop driving on public roads to reduce maintenance costs?

No one is stopping you from personally reducing government spending, so why aren't you?

Why should I reduce my use of goverment services?
I'm a net taxpayer, I give much more to the government than I use in their services or welfare. The government has created a monopoly on roads, you expect me to get around without using them?

And if I ever see a penny of my SS I would have payed MUCH more in than I will get out of whatever paltry SS check I get, so you better believe I'll be taking that too.

People who are net tax receivers and/or living off the government should be reducing their use of government services, not me.

I'm all for reducing spending on things that transfer wealth from some people to others, its theft.

These billoinaires are not using the same argument, they are complaining that they are not being taxed enough.
As Warren Buffet should, they should put their money where their mouth is and pay up.

 

[rudder]

I'm convinced some right-wingers here, if prisoners in German concentration camps, would criticize the liberators who came to free them, worshiping their captors.

If they were slaves during the civil war, they'd volunteer to fight for the confederacy.

During our revolutionary war, the country was split between those for revolution and those for remaining under England. They'd be the latter.

This by far is the most idiotic comparison I have seen here in P&N.

This is about spending. These people somehow think that taking money out of the economy and giving it to an organization that will spend that money on studying the rate of nipple infections of pole dancers who let customers suck on their nipples in bumfuck, Guatemala is a good thing. Shrink the spending, let the money stay in the economy.. government spending for jobs is not efficient. hell for the price the Feds pay per job, these millionaires could hire 3-4 people each at $50,000/year with benefits.

At any rate, show use the 1040s! I bet each of the people descending on Washington hires a CPA to minimize the tax bill. You know if you overpay on taxes, the IRS won't hunt you down and cut you a check. They will keep the money until you come asking for it.

 

[matt0611]

This by far is the most idiotic comparison I have seen here in P&N.

This is about spending. These people somehow think that taking money out of the economy and giving it to an organization that will spend that money on studying the rate of nipple infections of pole dancers who let customers suck on their nipples in bumfuck, Guatemala is a good thing. Shrink the spending, let the money stay in the economy.. government spending for jobs is not efficient. hell for the price the Feds pay per job, these millionaires could hire 3-4 people each at $50,000/year with benefits.

At any rate, show use the 1040s! I bet each of the people descending on Washington hires a CPA to minimize the tax bill. You know if you overpay on taxes, the IRS won't hunt you down and cut you a check. They will keep the money until you come asking for it.

This exactly. Do you think taking money from people the likes of Steve Jobs and give it to the likes of Nancy Pelosi to spend it for us is going to benefit us?
LMAO.

 

[matt0611]

So by this "logic:"

Anyone advocating smaller government who happens to be employed - directly or indirectly - by the government, should volunteer to take a pay cut.

Anyone advocating smaller government who happens to be receiving Social Security or Medicare should send back a proportion of the payments made to them or on their behalf.

Anyone advocating smaller government who receives government-backed student loans should voluntarily reduce the size of their future disbursements and pay more of their educational expenses out of their own pocket.

More generally, ANYONE who advocates smaller government who receives ANY government benefit should voluntarily refuse to accept the benefit in proportion to the advocated reduction.

Do all of the above statements reflect your opinion?

See my above post.

 

[shira]

See my above post.

Well, even by your absurd amended argument, you agree that anyone who is a federal employee who advocates smaller government should voluntarily send back a portion of their pay (into which must be factored all fringe benefits, including government pensions and medical benefits), to the extent their receipt from the government exceeds the income tax they pay. This "principle" obviously applies to most Republican members of Congress, who draw a substantial government paycheck and receive generous government benefits.

And you agree that most people on Social Security and Medicare who advocate smaller government are receiving more than they pay, so they too - according to you - should be voluntarily sending back a portion of the excess benefits that they receive.

Is this your position? And if so, why aren't you railing against Republican members of Congress for this supposed hypocrisy?

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

It's funny how conservatives can't spot the terrible logic with these statements. Not only are they too stupid to spot the terrible logic, they get all uppity thinking they are pointing out hypocrisy. No better combination than arrogant ignorance.

Sure. Why don't these "millionaires" post their tax records so we can see how many deductions they are taking. If they want to pay more, they need to stop taking deductions, and doing whatever they can to lower their tax liability.

I forget which article it was where they interviewed someone saying he should pay more taxes, but then said he took as many deductions as he could to limit his tax liability.
All this is, is a group of people trying to bamboozle the libtard crowd into giving more, while the "rich" keep their money.
As proven time and time again, the amount of money we take in in taxes isn't the problem. It's the amount of money we spend that is the problem. Cut entitlement programs or scale them waaay back. There should not be any programs that provide a way of life. There should be a finite time limit and dollar amount that can be spent per person. These programs were designed as a safety net for those that lost a job and tried to look for a new one. Now people live years on welfare because there is no incentive to get off of it.
Not one single person should be forced to pay more to support those that will not work. IF you want to help them, fine, give to charity, but don't force others at gun point to pay for the lazy.

There seems to be a false notion with the left in this nation that they are owed something or gauranteed a good happy life. The Constitution nor Declaration of Independence mentions such things. It says Life, Liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness. That means YOU have to PERSUE and achieve happiness on your own. It can't be given to you.

 

[matt0611]

Well, even by your absurd amended argument, you agree that anyone who is a federal employee who advocates smaller government should voluntarily send back a portion of their pay (into which must be factored all fringe benefits, including government pensions and medical benefits), to the extent their receipt from the government exceeds the income tax they pay. This "principle" obviously applies to most Republican members of Congress, who draw a substantial government paycheck and receive generous government benefits.

And you agree that most people on Social Security and Medicare who advocate smaller government are receiving more than they pay, so they too - according to you - should be voluntarily sending back a portion of the excess benefits that they receive.

Is this your position? And if so, why aren't you railing against Republican members of Congress for this supposed hypocrisy?

If over your lifetime you are getting more money from the government than you have payed in, than by my philosophy you absolutely should not take this money. That is my position.

If you're an employee of the government, it gets a bit trickier because you are not simply just receiving benefits from the government but you are also giving them a service in exchange for your salary.

For instance, if I was a soldier in the military then I am performing a service to the people of the country in exchange for a salary. If you think you're being being payed fairly for your service then I don't see anything wrong with that. If you think you're being vastly over payed for your services then yeah, I think you should give some of your paycheck back.

And I've always said our congressmen get ridiculous salaries and benefits and they should all get a huge cut in these.

 

[jackstar7]

So despite evidence that targeted taxation spurs actual job creators to invest more heavily in their businesses to minimize finances being lost to the government... we should not increase taxes on those who could most improve overall market liquidity.

Embrace economic stagnation. It's all we're going to get from these vocal opposers.