Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Skullsessions]

wwittman wrote on Tue, 25 August 2009 01:14

People pay taxes for all sorts of public works and services. And when people paid them on a far more progressive scale (up until Reagan, really) things worked a lot better. SINCE then the highest income group has seen its wealth go up something like 7 fold while the middle has grown an equivalent 20% or so. During Bush (the lesser) the middle class saw its relative wealth grow not at all. the simple answer is that the richest amongst us SHOULD pay more. it used to be the American way to care about others in the community, not to shrug them off with some misguided Ayn Rand like contempt for their "failure" to make themselves super rich.

Uh huh.

You'll have to pardon me if I see a HUGE difference between helping others in my community and giving money to politicians expecting them to do so.

In that same episode....Maher also said that he'd be one of those who would be taxed more, and that he'd be "happy to give more."

I hate to get all technical on ya, but taxes, by definition, aren't GIVEN FREELY.  They're not a charitable donation.

I can only assume that he and the rest of you who feel you're not taxed enough are giving all of your "disposable income" to the federal government so that they can distribute it for you.

I mean...waiting for the government to tell you to give it up is sort of a hypocritical.  We don't need the rich getting richer...no sir.

[seedyunderbelly.com]

wwittman wrote on Tue, 25 August 2009 01:14

JDNelson wrote on Sat, 22 August 2009 16:34 .  Not to sound harsh, but IIRC you are originally from the UK, right?  This kind of stuff is not engrained in the American psyche,... it USED to be. People pay taxes for all sorts of public works and services. And when people paid them on a far more progressive scale (up until Reagan, really) things worked a lot better. SINCE then the highest income group has seen its wealth go up something like 7 fold while the middle has grown an equivalent 20% or so. During Bush (the lesser) the middle class saw its relative wealth grow not at all. the simple answer is that the richest amongst us SHOULD pay more. it used to be the American way to care about others in the community, not to shrug them off with some misguided Ayn Rand like contempt for their "failure" to make themselves super rich.

People Regularly Pigeonhole Ayn Rand-

This is a bit over the top though..

You are projecting an oversimplified misinterpretation of her work and position here.

Contempt?Failure to be rich?



She deserves more respect-  Her non fiction work is Loaded with value as her fiction is.  I have not met anyone who has read all of her non fiction that would dismiss her so easily.  She is looked upon as a butcher but was a very generous person.  


j

[Jon Hodgson]

One of the ironies in this for me is that I suspect many of the people who are griping the most about the government taking their money to help others would probably benefit financially from a change in the system.

How do I work that out? Well you guys already have a certain amount of government medical care (paid for by taxes), so you're already paying for that, whether you like it or not, now most taxes in the US are paid by the wealthier people (that doesn't necessarily mean the super rich, but as I recall for example the 50% of households with the most income pay 90% of the taxes or something like that)... so they're the ones paying for the government medical care to cover the uninsured right now, and guess who has insurance? Those same people.

So those of you who have medical insurance and think that you shouldn't have to pay for others medical care are ALREADY paying for the whole thing, and you're paying more than any other industrialized nation and getting less for your money.

[danickstr]

Jon, they just want to see more money in the hands of the wealthy.  Don't you understand trickle-down economics?

It's where the rich only pay 17%-20% capital gains tax on 100 million earned through investment vehicles, do whatever they like, and the things they do will trickle down onto us.

[the greek]

Skullsessions wrote on Tue, 25 August 2009 09:33

wwittman wrote on Tue, 25 August 2009 01:14 People pay taxes for all sorts of public works and services. And when people paid them on a far more progressive scale (up until Reagan, really) things worked a lot better. SINCE then the highest income group has seen its wealth go up something like 7 fold while the middle has grown an equivalent 20% or so. During Bush (the lesser) the middle class saw its relative wealth grow not at all. the simple answer is that the richest amongst us SHOULD pay more. it used to be the American way to care about others in the community, not to shrug them off with some misguided Ayn Rand like contempt for their "failure" to make themselves super rich. Uh huh. You'll have to pardon me if I see a HUGE difference between helping others in my community and giving money to politicians expecting them to do so. In that same episode....Maher also said that he'd be one of those who would be taxed more, and that he'd be "happy to give more." I hate to get all technical on ya, but taxes, by definition, aren't GIVEN FREELY.  They're not a charitable donation. I can only assume that he and the rest of you who feel you're not taxed enough are giving all of your "disposable income" to the federal government so that they can distribute it for you. I mean...waiting for the government to tell you to give it up is sort of a hypocritical.  We don't need the rich getting richer...no sir.

RIGHT ON!

Don't get the idea why people think that the Federal Govt acts as a charity. Its a business, and its purpose is to help increase revenue to its stock holders. We like to call em 'special interest groups' or 'captains of industry' that 'contribute' to these same a-holes taking a left vs right approach but they all play the same game, on the same team.

Its a hell of a lot easier to hold a charity accountable vs. the Federal Government.

Pete

[wwittman]

it's NOT a business, and the most ridiculous thing ever is when people suggest it SHOULD be "run like a business"

"charity" is nice but clearly doesn't take care of everyone who needs help.


we acknowledge (or at least all but the most stubbornly 'libertarian' do) that we all contribute, via taxes, to certain things that we all need and benefit from, at least at one time or another. Police, fire, the FDA, the EPA, highways, dams, defense, the FDIC, Medicare. to name but some.

the only issue is whether universal health care should be part of the list of things we ALL pay for so that we ALL can share in it.

[MDM,]

local taxes are fine, but income tax does not go to pay police, firemen, roads etc.. it goes directly into bankers pockets because of the interest which citizens pay on the creation of money and debt.  we are talking about interest for money lent out over 100 years ago to this day.

NONE of the income tax revenue really goes into the community.

..this is why the constitution did not want bankers setting up their own money-system (fed).

[Jon Hodgson]

MDM, wrote on Sat, 29 August 2009 12:09

local taxes are fine, but income tax does not go to pay police, firemen, roads etc.. it goes directly into bankers pockets because of the interest which citizens pay on the creation of money and debt.  we are talking about interest for money lent out over 100 years ago to this day. NONE of the income tax revenue really goes into the community. ..this is why the constitution did not want bankers setting up their own money-system (fed).

Simply untrue, income tax revenue is in the trillions, interest on the national debt in the hundreds of billions.

Not that I expect you to break habit and let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory of course.

[MDM,]

uh uh..jon...

and I suppose that the incredible debt which the US enjoys (which is the REAL government source for spending) will all be paid up by the end of the year?



what you do NOT seem to understand is that there are under-the-table agreements between very powerful men.. or living legacies..

in small business the same things happen between companies

in local mafia the same things happen

in government it happens

in the political world it happens.

you need to study history, to get a better idea of how aristocracy, bankers, mafia (in the functional sense of the word) and wars are tied.

Governments come and go.  

[danickstr]

Jon, don't you know about the secret 7?

It's a mafia lord, a few rich euro-trash family bankers, a stupid Americun thrown in to keep us from nuking them, and a couple aliens from district 9.  They determine all world fiscal policy at an annual secret meeting that takes place in a Swiss spa, hidden from all prying eyes by trained butterflies that flit overhead so no one can tape or record over the din of butterfly wing noise, and the plethora of butterfly bodies hiding the summit from nosy Chinese spy planes...

[Jon Hodgson]

MDM, wrote on Sat, 29 August 2009 21:25

uh uh..jon... and I suppose that the incredible debt which the US enjoys (which is the REAL government source for spending) will all be paid up by the end of the year?

No, I didn't say that, I didn't even imply it, that's one of the weakest straw man arguments I've ever seen.

What I said was that your claim that NONE of the Federal Income Tax went on services, but that it ALL went on paying interest on the debt (specifically to the central bank) was wrong (by an order of magnitude as it happens).

This is triply true since not only is the interest on National Debt far less than the Federal Income Tax revenue (Treasury's figures), but the Central Bank (the Fed) only holds a small percentage of that debt (and thus only receives a small percentage of the interest), but all profits of the Fed belong to the treasury anyway, so interest paid to the Fed is the last thing anyone needs to worry about (it's the interest paid to all the other holders of US securities that's the problem).

Before you lecture me on research and study, you need to learn to do some yourself.

[MDM,]

Jon, are you saying that the money collected by the IRS goes to build roads, bridges, hospitals etc?

can you trace the money?

are you sure that the interest declared in your sources is the only interest being collected worldwide on US revenue?

are you sure all of the money collected in the USA stays in the USA?

Because if you want to get into details you would have to prove it.

[Jon Hodgson]

MDM, wrote on Sun, 30 August 2009 11:07

Jon, are you saying that the money collected by the IRS goes to build roads, bridges, hospitals etc?

I am not making any specific statements on what the money IS being used on, only on what it IS NOT being used on.

Quote:

can you trace the money?

Trace it? What has tracing it got to do with my statement.

The treasury gives figures on tax revenues, current national debt, and current interest rates on securities (as well as specific numbers for payments.

From these one thing is clear and unequivocal, the interest payments on the National Debt are an order of magnitude smaller than incomed tax revenues, therefore whatever it is being spent on, the majority of income tax revenue (and all of corporate tax revenue and other federal taxes) is not being used to pay interest.

Quote:

are you sure that the interest declared in your sources is the only interest being collected worldwide on US revenue?

I'm not sure what your question here is, since you seem to be mixing up terminology.

However if you mean am I sure that the interest declared in my sources is the only interest being collected on US National Debt, then the answer is that I am as sure as I reasonably can be. The figures come DIRECTLY FROM THE US TREASURY, so if they're not real, then the US Government is supplying false figures to its people (including congress).

Quote:

are you sure all of the money collected in the USA stays in the USA?

What's that got to do with anything?

Quote:

Because if you want to get into details you would have to prove it.

I'm the only one here who actually supplied any verifiable figures normally.

[seedyunderbelly.com]

I would hope that JH  is right

My intuition-(no figures)  

 



depopulation

reorganization



Sorry for the dark thoughts

I hope JH is right and I am paranoid  - that would be Wonderful

-j

[MDM,]

I hope so too.

and as far as straw-man arguments go..

the biggest ones come from the government and the fed..

all the way from mass genocide in baghdad because somebody  said hussein had something which never existed to the various financial crimes which only exist because of straw-man arguments.

so I say that the straw-man is king these days..

now we only need a lion and a tin man and we can all be off to see the wizard of OZ