The difference between Dems and Repubs on 'Bush tax cuts'

[Phokus]

Irony of ironies! All of the federal taxes they pay now or would pay under either of the proposed plans would be the same (within $2 a year anyway) and would go entirely towards FICA. See what you did there?

What are the details of this? I currently pay lower taxes under Obama than i did Bush and i'm middle class. In any case, the rich should be paying FAR more and any talk of lowering their taxes is fucking idiotic.

 

[charrison]

What are the details of this? I currently pay lower taxes under Obama than i did Bush and i'm middle class. In any case, the rich should be paying FAR more and any talk of lowering their taxes is fucking idiotic.

When you say far more, do you mean in real dollars that actually make it to the treasury or the rate they are taxed at?

 

[CycloWizard]

No, you're missing the message. Buffet has stated that he's giving away his money because he doesn't want his children to do nothing, the implication is that they have to earn their own money. It's part of the reason that he, gates, and other superwealthy are in favor of the estate tax, because they are against such egregious wealth accumulation amongst their peers. They started a new initiative to get their superwealthy peers to commit to giving at least 50% of their wealth to charity. Their other initiative is to keep or raise the estate tax and lobby against lowering tax rates for the wealthy.

You just don't get it.

Who is he giving his money to - private charity or government? This should be some indicator of where it can do the most good (at least in his opinion). You just don't see that, and I have to assume that it's voluntary at this point since I pointed it out explicitly in my previous post.

 

[CycloWizard]

What are the details of this? I currently pay lower taxes under Obama than i did Bush and i'm middle class. In any case, the rich should be paying FAR more and any talk of lowering their taxes is fucking idiotic.

I notice you neglect the facts, as posted by your fellow liberals in this thread, in favor of your anecdotal evidence. I also notice that you didn't address the fact thatyou ignored the fact that all of the taxes paid by the lower classes are due to your favorite social programs intended to help them. I take it you're not big on letting facts influence your opinion?

 

[Phokus]

I notice you neglect the facts, as posted by your fellow liberals in this thread, in favor of your anecdotal evidence. I also notice that you didn't address the fact thatyou ignored the fact that all of the taxes paid by the lower classes are due to your favorite social programs intended to help them. I take it you're not big on letting facts influence your opinion?

Anecdotal?!?! LOL, i *DO* pay less taxes under Obama than Bush and that applies to most people, that is a *FACT*.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/us/politics/19taxes.html

 

[Phokus]

Who is he giving his money to - private charity or government? This should be some indicator of where it can do the most good (at least in his opinion). You just don't see that, and I have to assume that it's voluntary at this point since I pointed it out explicitly in my previous post.

That's just him though. Not all his peers are going to be giving to charity like he is and he's against generational aristocracy. One way he's fighting that is giving away his own wealth, the other is fighting FOR the estate tax and higher tax rates on the rich (he currently pays less in taxes as a percentage of his income than he does his secretary, that is an abomination), that's his point. The estate tax will still affect him because he's giving like 12 million of his 40 or so billion to his heirs and a higher tax rate will affect him right NOW.

 

[CycloWizard]

Anecdotal?!?! LOL, i *DO* pay less taxes under Obama than Bush and that applies to most people, that is a *FACT*.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/us/politics/19taxes.html

Again you ignore all of the facts presented in this thread and focus on one random tangent that you brought up yourself instead of what we were discussing. The bottom line is pretty well summarized by two facts, which I will (for the sake of tradition) summarize here:
1. The R and D tax proposals make zero difference in the amount of federal tax the lower classes will pay.
2. All of the federal taxes paid by the lower classes are to pay for the social programs of which they are supposed to be the primary recipients.

 

[charrison]

That's just him though. Not all his peers are going to be giving to charity like he is and he's against generational aristocracy. One way he's fighting that is giving away his own wealth, the other is fighting FOR the estate tax and higher tax rates on the rich (he currently pays less in taxes as a percentage of his income than he does his secretary, that is an abomination), that's his point. The estate tax will still affect him because he's giving like 12 million of his 40 or so billion to his heirs and a higher tax rate will affect him right NOW.

Actually both gates and Buffet have challenged their peers to donate heavily.

 

[Phokus]

Actually both gates and Buffet have challenged their peers to donate heavily.

Yes, i mentioned that above, they're lobbying their peers to give at least 50%.

 

[CycloWizard]

That's just him though. Not all his peers are going to be giving to charity like he is and he's against generational aristocracy. One way he's fighting that is giving away his own wealth, the other is fighting FOR the estate tax and higher tax rates on the rich (he currently pays less in taxes as a percentage of his income than he does his secretary, that is an abomination), that's his point. The estate tax will still affect him because he's giving like 12 million of his 40 or so billion to his heirs and a higher tax rate will affect him right NOW.

Again you ignore where his money is going. You simply pick the few grains of sand in the universe which happen to coincide with your already-established viewpoint. Pathetic.

 

[charrison]

Yes, i mentioned that above, they're lobbying their peers to give at least 50%.

Do you think these people can do more good with that money that giving that money to government?

 

[Phokus]

Again you ignore all of the facts presented in this thread and focus on one random tangent that you brought up yourself instead of what we were discussing. The bottom line is pretty well summarized by two facts, which I will (for the sake of tradition) summarize here:
1. The R and D tax proposals make zero difference in the amount of federal tax the lower classes will pay.
2. All of the federal taxes paid by the lower classes are to pay for the social programs of which they are supposed to be the primary recipients.

That's why i asked for the details. I don't even see how point #2 matters. I pay less taxes under Obama than i do under Bush, that's a fact.

 

[Phokus]

Do you think these people can do more good with that money that giving that money to government?

Well, if the rich gave more of their money to government while at the same time the middle and working class had their taxes cut (or even had a negative income tax at the lower ends), i think that would do a TON of good for the country.

 

[charrison]

Well, if the rich gave more of their money to government while at the same time the middle and working class had their taxes cut (or even had a negative income tax at the lower ends), i think that would do a TON of good for the country.

So you are saying the govt knows best on how to spend the money of the wealthy.

 

[CycloWizard]

That's why i asked for the details. I don't even see how point #2 matters. I pay less taxes under Obama than i do under Bush, that's a fact.

The details have already been posted more than once in this thread. However, to prove that you're willfully ignoring them, I will post them yet again:

Of course you don't see how #2 matters because you're not really interested in helping the lower classes, only in soaking the rich. In short, you're an ideologue of the worst kind because you're perfectly willing to fly in the face of reality to support your idiotic agenda.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Well, if the rich gave more of their money to government while at the same time the middle and working class had their taxes cut (or even had a negative income tax at the lower ends), i think that would do a TON of good for the country.

So cut a check to the government - what is stopping you and others from putting your money where your mouth is?

 

[Phokus]

So you are saying the govt knows best on how to spend the money of the wealthy.

No, i'm saying supply side economics has been a complete catastrophe and the best way to boost the economy is for the lower and middle class to keep more of their money.

 

[Phokus]

So cut a check to the government - what is stopping you and others from putting your money where your mouth is?

How is your response in any way applicable to what i wrote:

Well, if the rich gave more of their money to government while at the same time the middle and working class had their taxes cut (or even had a negative income tax at the lower ends), i think that would do a TON of good for the country.

Psst, i'm middle class, not rich

 

[Phokus]

The details have already been posted more than once in this thread. However, to prove that you're willfully ignoring them, I will post them yet again:

Of course you don't see how #2 matters because you're not really interested in helping the lower classes, only in soaking the rich. In short, you're an ideologue of the worst kind because you're perfectly willing to fly in the face of reality to support your idiotic agenda.

That's not the full detail. All that matters is whether or not i'm paying lower taxes. Yes, the rich should get 'soaked' because their wealth has come at the expense of all the classes beneath them.

 

[CycloWizard]

That's not the full detail. All that matters is whether or not i'm paying lower taxes. Yes, the rich should get 'soaked' because their wealth has come at the expense of all the classes beneath them.

Is it the fault of Bill Gates that people wanted to use his product enough to pay him for it, or was the benefit they derived from using his products insufficient to warrant the price they paid for it? Should it be up to an individual to decide whether a price is worth paying, or is the government going to sort that out based on what it thinks is "fair?"

 

[Phokus]

Is it the fault of Bill Gates that people wanted to use his product enough to pay him for it, or was the benefit they derived from using his products insufficient to warrant the price they paid for it? Should it be up to an individual to decide whether a price is worth paying, or is the government going to sort that out based on what it thinks is "fair?"

What does this have anything to do with what i was talking about. I was talking about outsourcing and how the rich got wealthy at the expense of the rest of us.

 

[CycloWizard]

What does this have anything to do with what i was talking about. I was talking about outsourcing and how the rich got wealthy at the expense of the rest of us.

Is that how Bill Gates made his money? Buffett? If I buy a product from Walmart, is Walmart making bank due to outsourcing or due to my desire for a cheaper product? Why does outsourcing occur - because of the greed of corporations, or because the value of the labor of an American working class person isn't what it used to be? It is the latter, but government thinks it can keep this value high simply by setting a minimum wage. It's a lie that you believe because it agrees with your ideology. The bottom line is that labor is worth what someone is willing to pay for it, nothing more.

 

[Anarchist420]

Sometimes, a visual does especially well at showing information.

Watch the following Rachel Maddow clip from 5:30 to 7:00; be sure to watch to the end of that because the first version you see changes.

This is an especially clear picture of the difference between the two parties on this.

And this is in a time that the concentration of wealth has returned to the peaks not seen since just before the Great Depression, when the top has gotten all economic growth.

There has been a massive shift of wealth to the top from everyone else, and the Republicans want to shift more.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#40099652

Craig, THE FUCKING FEDERAL RESERVE IS THE REASON THERE IS SUCH A LARGE GAP BETWEEN THE RICH AND THE POOR, OKAY?

IT'S NOT FUCKING FISCAL POLICY.

 

[Phokus]

Is that how Bill Gates made his money? Buffett? If I buy a product from Walmart, is Walmart making bank due to outsourcing or due to my desire for a cheaper product? Why does outsourcing occur - because of the greed of corporations, or because the value of the labor of an American working class person isn't what it used to be? It is the latter, but government thinks it can keep this value high simply by setting a minimum wage. It's a lie that you believe because it agrees with your ideology. The bottom line is that labor is worth what someone is willing to pay for it, nothing more.

The fault isn't necessarily with the businesses but with our government for letting it happen and the political will in this country (too many stupid ass conservatives). You're acting like the average American worker got lazier/less skilled and that's the reason why we're in this mess when it has to do with bullshit like exchange rate manipulation and taking advantage of an impoverished workforce who will work at substandard wages to put food on their table.

 

[CycloWizard]

The fault isn't necessarily with the businesses but with our government for letting it happen and the political will in this country (too many stupid ass conservatives). You're acting like the average American worker got lazier/less skilled and that's the reason why we're in this mess when it has to do with bullshit like exchange rate manipulation and taking advantage of an impoverished workforce who will work at substandard wages to put food on their table.

I'm not acting like anything. The bottom line is that there is someone else out there willing to do the job for less. Do you dispute that? If American companies don't take advantage of the cheapest labor they can find (after accounting for transportation or other costs), then they will inevitably fail against global competitors who do make full use of cheap labor. I blame government for plenty, but they don't create reality.