Why more Americans pay no income tax

[CycloWizard]

I also imagine that since your source attributes this quote to the year 1931, the year in which Adrian was born, your source is actually some chain email. I would much prefer it if you derived your logic and your facts from something other than the latest vitriol spread around effortlessly by idiots.

What difference does the attribution make? Whether or not one person or another said it has no bearing on its validity. Whether that person said other idiotic things similarly has no bearing on its validity. Maybe you can explain why the "quote" is incorrect.

 

[Hacp]

^ What about the money he won from the Nobel Peace Prize people?
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/index.html

Wait, so instead of handing 50% of the money over to the US government to fund his massive health care bill, he donates it and robs the taxpayer of money?

 

[Hacp]

This. Too many American companies not willing to pay market rates and not willing to train people they already have. So they claim no Americans can do the job and they need more visas to hire people from India and China. It is a scam to take good American jobs.

Market rate is set by the MARKET! If someone is willing to work cheaper in China, then THAT is the market rate, not some arbitrary number of someone who works here in the US makes. Taxes, regulations, rules, favoritism all make it hard for US companies to stay in the US, so they need to move to China and India to compete with the Chinese and Indians.

 

[Hacp]

Without EIC and other subsidies to working class people, they'd organize and demand higher wages. With EIC, the investor class wins twice- first by reaping larger profits, and again by financing govt deficits used to finance EIC, earning interest on money they'd have otherwise spent on wages.

It's really socialism for the rich, even though it's been made to appear otherwise.

If they organize and demand higher wages, then companies can move to China and India and get wages for cheaper. Then the people who organized will be hungry and homeless, then they will unorganize and work for the market rate.

 

[nobodyknows]

If they organize and demand higher wages, then companies can move to China and India and get wages for cheaper. Then the people who organized will be hungry and homeless, then they will unorganize and work for the market rate.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. 😛

 

[Red Dawn]

Market rate is set by the MARKET! If someone is willing to work cheaper in China, then THAT is the market rate, not some arbitrary number of someone who works here in the US makes. Taxes, regulations, rules, favoritism all make it hard for US companies to stay in the US, so they need to move to China and India to compete with the Chinese and Indians.

So the market rate is 65 cents an hour?

 

[nobodyknows]

Other countries where they have tax shelters.

What happens in Vegas should stay in Vegas.

 

[Patranus]

So the market rate is 65 cents an hour?

You are ignoring all other costs such as the transportation of goods.
You cannot only look at the hourly wages.

That being said, if someone in the USA is currently unemployed and someone is willing to pay them 65 cents per hour and the individual is willing to work, why shouldn't they be abel to make that money?

 

[Hacp]

So the market rate is 65 cents an hour?

Its whatever is cheaper. There's obviously going to be inefficiencies in China due to bribing fees/etc.You have two locations. It costs 12 million to do businesses in one location and 24 million to do businesses in the other. Any sane person will choose the 12 million location.

 

[daishi5]

This. Too many American companies not willing to pay market rates and not willing to train people they already have. So they claim no Americans can do the job and they need more visas to hire people from India and China. It is a scam to take good American jobs.

Those words do not mean what you think they mean.

 

[nobodyknows]

You are ignoring all other costs such as the transportation of goods.
You cannot only look at the hourly wages.

That being said, if someone in the USA is currently unemployed and someone is willing to pay them 65 cents per hour and the individual is willing to work, why shouldn't they be abel to make that money?

So since nobody can live on 65 cents per hour they will have to go on welfare. That wii cause the deficit to increase or your taxes to be raised. Either way you will piss and moan about the lazy people getting a "free ride".

See how you are?

 

[Red Dawn]

You are ignoring all other costs such as the transportation of goods.
You cannot only look at the hourly wages.

That being said, if someone in the USA is currently unemployed and someone is willing to pay them 65 cents per hour and the individual is willing to work, why shouldn't they be abel to make that money?

Because it's not a living wage and it's taking advantage of the worker.

 

[Hacp]

So since nobody can live on 65 cents per hour they will have to go on welfare. That wii cause the deficit to increase or your taxes to be raised. Either way you will piss and moan about the lazy people getting a "free ride".

See how you are?

Why do we have welfare at all? Eliminate welfare. If someone is facing tough circumstances, there are plenty of people willing to donate their own money towards helping them.

 

[Hacp]

Because it's not a living wage and it's taking advantage of the worker.

No one is taking advantage of anyone. The worker can walk out and do whatever he so pleases at any time. However, if the worker would like luxuries like meat and seasoning for his meat, and heat for the winter and even cold air(air conditioning) for the summer, he can choose to do work at the market rate.

 

[nobodyknows]

Why do we have welfare at all? Eliminate welfare. If someone is facing tough circumstances, there are plenty of people willing to donate their own money towards helping them.

Uh yeah, tell that to the thousands of homeless people, maybe they will believe you.

 

[Hacp]

Uh yeah, tell that to the thousands of homeless people, maybe they will believe you.

If they are homeless,they should find a job. However, tax polices and regulations are forcing jobs out of the US and into countries like India and China. Do I like to see jobs leaving the US? Hell no! I want all the jobs to stay here. But you need to lower wages to compete with wages offered in China and India or else it makes no sense to stay in the US.

 

[Red Dawn]

No one is taking advantage of anyone. The worker can walk out and do whatever he so pleases at any time. However, if the worker would like luxuries like meat and seasoning for his meat, and heat for the winter and even cold air(air conditioning) for the summer, he can choose to do work at the market rate.

Or they can be like you and live off of their parents.

 

[Sclamoz]

If they are homeless,they should find a job. However, tax polices and regulations are forcing jobs out of the US and into countries like India and China. Do I like to see jobs leaving the US? Hell no! I want all the jobs to stay here. But you need to lower wages to compete with wages offered in China and India or else it makes no sense to stay in the US.

So to sum up your points:

1 . Jobs are leaving the US because people need more money here than China or India.

2. Government regulations, taxes and welfare are more reasons companies aren't hiring here.

3. The unemployed are just lazy and need to go out and find a job.

 

[nobodyknows]

If they are homeless,they should find a job. However, tax polices and regulations are forcing jobs out of the US and into countries like India and China. Do I like to see jobs leaving the US? Hell no! I want all the jobs to stay here. But you need to lower wages to compete with wages offered in China and India or else it makes no sense to stay in the US.

I wonder how the Japanese and Germans manage to be competitive? Maybe it has something to do with management as well as labor??? You think??

When our wages/living standards sink to the level that we are competitive with the Chinese we won't be able to afford their junk.

Did you ever stop to ask yourself how our wages got so much higher in the first place?

 

[Hacp]

I wonder how the Japanese and Germans manage to be competitive? Maybe it has something to do with management as well as labor??? You think??

When our wages/living standards sink to the level that we are competitive with the Chinese we won't be able to afford their junk.

Did you ever stop to ask yourself how our wages got so much higher in the first place?

It costs 50% more to buy something in Germany as it does in the US.

 

[Red Dawn]

When our wages/living standards sink to the level that we are competitive with the Chinese we won't be able to afford their junk.

Let alone anything made here. Our economy would totally tank.

 

[nobodyknows]

It costs 50% more to buy something in Germany as it does in the US.

Well they better ship their jobs to China posthaste!!

 

[EagleKeeper]

You just completely contradicted yourself. Why are these foreigners not part of the market? If they are willing to do the job for less than an American, then good for them. If I refuse to do the same work for the same pay as someone else, why should a company hire me? They absolutely should not and they would be foolish to do so, regardless of my country of origin. Why is this sort of discrimination codified as part of the liberal viewpoint, when all other forms are railed against so fiercely?

A problem with this scenario is that the company will ensure that there is no American that can take the job. The "posted position" will include bogus/unneeded qualifications that can not be met.


These posted positions must be submitted to the state unemployment division as one of the paperwork filing requirements.

Example: in '96 I came across a programmer position posted that required 3 years of Window '95 experience and was paying $30K w/ a Masters or equivalent. Advertised starting position for a programmer w/ a BS for local government was $35-40K But no one called the company that submitted the req on bogus info:\

After the position is listed for 30 days; then the company can file for H1-B status.

At this point, they either have a foreign college student groomed for the position or they farm out the req to a hiring agency.

Now the position was filled by someone from India that had no Windows API experience who was placed on salary at 50 hrs/wk.

Neither the student nor whom ever the agency delivers will meet the qualifications - but at this point; it matter not.

 

[BigDH01]

What difference does the attribution make? Whether or not one person or another said it has no bearing on its validity. Whether that person said other idiotic things similarly has no bearing on its validity. Maybe you can explain why the "quote" is incorrect.

You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy
out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another
person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to
anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody
else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work
because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other
half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is
going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of
the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."*

Adrian Rogers, 1931*

Despite the fact that I nary mentioned the "correctness" of the statement, I'll reply.

Prosperity is never defined. Also, due to the nature of his second line we must conclude that he is talking of strictly distributive policies. The taxed do benefit from government services and support. Given his other quote, we'll assume his real problem is welfare.

Thus, his argument then becomes a strawman. Half of the eligible working population (those who can work but can refuse to do so) does not collect welfare. Further, he neglects to mention that the point of welfare is not to give prosperity to lazy parents, it's to provide opportunity for their children. I would find his position more convincing if he supplied a cogent argument that involved how to control reproduction and/or provide these children the means with which they might build their own "prosperity." You'll rarely find anyone, including myself, that wants to pay lazy people to do nothing. However, I would imagine any solution forwarded by Rogers would be rather simplistic in its reasoning and implementation.

 

[daishi5]

Because it's not a living wage and it's taking advantage of the worker.

You may have missed my replies in the linked thread, but just a short recap. around 700 million people used to make less than a dollar a day working all day in china. That would be somewhere around 0.0625 dollars an hour. The factory is now paying them 0.56 dollars an hour, and provides a small bunk in a barracks and crappy food. I know their living conditions suck compared to mine, but that company just gave them a raise of over 700% without the housing and food, as crappy as they are, being included in the pay. I find a 700% raise to be a very strange definition of the phrase "taking advantage of."