• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

The people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

MooseNSquirrel

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2009
2,583
314
126
How is that any different than liberals?

They believe you should be allowed to pop out bastard children, divorce because you are "unhappy", do drugs, drop out of school, etc, etc and have the government bail you out.

Social compact implies obligations in both directions.
Ah..the reasoning...it is excellent and circular!

Women get divorced because....wait for it...they want handouts!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,342
14,563
136
Hmm ok so the left's lie about the GOP wanting to cut welfare and other similar benefits really is a lie.

Cool.
Past Repub administrations have used the welfare state, tax cuts & deficit spending as cover for the economic changes wrought by their own policies- an enormous transfer of wealth & income to the tippy-top, the true Bush constituency. Not the top 1%, but rather the top .1%, & even more so, the top .01%.

Now that they've largely accomplished that, it's time to put the squeeze to the chumps, invoke the economic order they've been creating all along-

"I got mine! Screw you! All of you!"
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
Past Repub administrations have used the welfare state, tax cuts & deficit spending as cover for the economic changes wrought by their own policies- an enormous transfer of wealth & income to the tippy-top, the true Bush constituency. Not the top 1%, but rather the top .1%, & even more so, the top .01%.

Now that they've largely accomplished that, it's time to put the squeeze to the chumps, invoke the economic order they've been creating all along-

"I got mine! Screw you! All of you!"
People keeping more of what they earn is not a transfer. The top earners are paying an ever increasing percentage of the total tax taken in, while the middle and lower are paying an ever increasing lower percentage, but Obama wants to kick it up for the sake of fairness.
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
People keeping more of what they earn is not a transfer. The top earners are paying an ever increasing percentage of the total tax taken in, while the middle and lower are paying an ever increasing lower percentage, but Obama wants to kick it up for the sake of fairness.
We have a progressive tax system where those than benefit most by our society pay more. Except they dont actually pay more as a percentage and thats a problem.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
People keeping more of what they earn is not a transfer. The top earners are paying an ever increasing percentage of the total tax taken in, while the middle and lower are paying an ever increasing lower percentage, but Obama wants to kick it up for the sake of fairness.
But i'm sure am grateful for paying a mid 20's effective federal tax rate while Romney pays 13% (or even lower in some years).

YOU ARE THE PROBLEM
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
But i'm sure am grateful for paying a mid 20's effective federal tax rate while Romney pays 13% (or even lower in some years).

YOU ARE THE PROBLEM
You should vote for Romney then. He will cut a lot of the loophole the rich take advantge of.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,342
14,563
136
Social compact implies obligations in both directions.
Indeed it does. We used to have a deal. It was called the New Deal. American capitalists hired American workers, paid decent wages due in part to unions & govt competition for workers. Mild Socialist underpinnings cemented the whole thing, creating a mixed economy where everybody shared for mutual benefit. Progressive taxes. SS. Medicare. Financial regulations. Insured deposits. Unemployment compensation. So forth & so on.

It wasn't workers who broke that deal, it was capitalists, the financial elite. The truth of it all is revealed in the explosive inequality created over the last 30 years.

Righties always sidestep & head straight for denial in the face of the most pertinent questions of all- If low taxes at the top create jobs, where the fuck are the jobs? If the so-called "Job Creators" aren't living up to their end of the bargain, why should they be pampered for not doing so? If the rest of America is called upon to sacrifice, why should they escape some of their own? Merely because they're Rich?
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
We have a progressive tax system where those than benefit most by our society pay more. Except they dont actually pay more as a percentage and thats a problem.
So as long as it's a higher percentage of their income, not a higher percentage of total taxes paid?
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
Indeed it does. We used to have a deal. It was called the New Deal. American capitalists hired American workers, paid decent wages due in part to unions & govt competition for workers. Mild Socialist underpinnings cemented the whole thing, creating a mixed economy where everybody shared for mutual benefit. Progressive taxes. SS. Medicare. Financial regulations. Insured deposits. Unemployment compensation. So forth & so on.

It wasn't workers who broke that deal, it was capitalists, the financial elite. The truth of it all is revealed in the explosive inequality created over the last 30 years.

Righties always sidestep & head straight for denial in the face of the most pertinent questions of all- If low taxes at the top create jobs, where the fuck are the jobs? If the so-called "Job Creators" aren't living up to their end of the bargain, why should they be pampered for not doing so? If the rest of America is called upon to sacrifice, why should they escape some of their own? Merely because they're Rich?
THIS!!! :cool:
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
So as long as it's a higher percentage of their income, not a higher percentage of total taxes paid?
Yes when the progressive tax system was created/implemted that was the goal, those that benefited the most from society payed a higher percentage of their income in tax.

as one of those people who has been fortunate enough to benefit from our society I pay a ton of tax, both in real dollars and as a percentage.

And I am totally fine with it. Had I made about 500k more this year or made more of my income from long term capital gains, I would pay way less as a percentage than say soemone making 40k a year, thats where things go south
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,990
853
126
Past Repub administrations have used the welfare state, tax cuts & deficit spending as cover for the economic changes wrought by their own policies- an enormous transfer of wealth & income to the tippy-top, the true Bush constituency. Not the top 1%, but rather the top .1%, & even more so, the top .01%.

Now that they've largely accomplished that, it's time to put the squeeze to the chumps, invoke the economic order they've been creating all along-

"I got mine! Screw you! All of you!"
No wealth was transferred anywhere. That implies it was taken from the middle and lower class and given to the .01%. Which is unequivocally false.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
0
0
WHO THE FUCK CARES WHAT DAVID BROOKS SAYS?
Please reply to every Phokus post in huge font
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
No wealth was transferred anywhere. That implies it was taken from the middle and lower class and given to the .01%. Which is unequivocally false.

Its not false its indesputible fact. How it was taken can be debated a bit, incrementally via tax law, and lobby and Supply side shenaigans.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
Yes when the progressive tax system was created/implemted that was the goal, those that benefited the most from society payed a higher percentage of their income in tax.

as one of those people who has been fortunate enough to benefit from our society I pay a ton of tax, both in real dollars and as a percentage.

And I am totally fine with it. Had I made about 500k more this year or made more of my income from long term capital gains, I would pay way less as a percentage than say soemone making 40k a year, thats where things go south
A lot of those people who do pay a lower rate do so because capital gains taxes are lower. The two times it was lowered recently revenue from capital gains increased. If you are happier with a higher percentage, but less revenue, that will mean the middle class will have to make up the difference.
 

emperus

Diamond Member
Apr 6, 2012
7,418
862
126
So they are republicans just because he says they are? He links to no proof whatsoever.

If you Liberals want to circle jerk around another opinion piece, knock yourselves out.
Fyi Matt. David Brooks is not a liberal.

You should really do some research before delving into your talking points.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY