It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Republican Governor learns his tax cuts for the rich didn't work

page: 6
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: neo96
The 'rich haters' entire platform is just to rob from the rich so the poor can go out, and buy MORE stuff.


Which stimulates the economy.... unlike the rich hoarding it and the interest gets spread only among themselves.


Sometimes I think people's understanding of economic principles comes from reading "Scrooge McDuck" comic books. The "rich" or highest wage earners,


I got my degree in economics...And that first sentence is pure comedy.

The "rich" are not the "highest wage earners"...they do not "earn a wage". They collect "unearned" or "passive" income...money given them, not in wages or in return for Labor or Services...but money for the virtue of already having money.

Again..I don't begrudge people collecting interest, but when that "unearned income" ...through the political influence it affords...is taxed less than actual earned income, income earned by inventors, laborers and service providers...working for their money...then we have a rigged system...the same reason the Casino will eventually take all your money the longer you play. With regards to our economy, more and more money is parked amongst fewer and fewer wealthy elite. And why wouldn't they park that money? Through buying policy they have devised a system that greatly rewards and incentivizes just that.

What did the "Banks" do with the massive bailout money they demanded and got from taxpayers? The failed reasoning was that they would pass it on to businesses in loans, pass it off to investors and spur economic growth. Economists and researchers have now looked back and figured out where that "Stimulas" for the bankers went that disappeared en route to the taxpayers it originated with...They invested in food and energy options and futures..thus driving up the cost of food and electricity during the economic crisis..They didn't pass it off to businesses in loans...They made the bet they were incentivized to make...Everyone needs heat and food! Ironic isn't it? Your money went toward jacking up food and energy prices on yourself in the midst of an economic crisis. That is the wonder of "trickle down" economics!

Unearned Income
Passive Income
Economic Rent

Research a little before pretending to understand Macro-economics.

In every way...from basic tax codes to thousands of pages of GOP inspired loop-holes...the wealthiest are rewarded for already being wealthy and in a way that incentivizes them to take that money out of the economy rather than re-invest.

How the wealthy, bankers and corporations convinced conservatives to treat them like Royalty of old I will never understand. Conservatives used to stand for fairness and the working man.

A level playing field is all the middle class or any American needs or deserves and the marbles are collecting more in the corner of the room with each passing year...and at an accelerating pace.


I've taken economics too. I also can read. This discussion is about the INCOME TAX--so yes, we are discussing wage earners. Utter fail on your part.


I'll stick to reality basics for your benefit..

Income taxes concern income

Income includes both "wages" and "unearned income" "interest income" "rental income" and dozens of others...

The wealthy, as it is most commonly defined, do not earn their "wealth" through wages like you claimed...this is a statistical, economic reality and fact you can confirm for yourself.


You are incorrect. Income taxes concern earned income. Capital gains taxes refer to unearned income. I'd think that an "economics major" would understand that. As you said: google it. Here is the first hit on google that explains capital gains vs income taxes. apiexchange.com... I'm surprised an "economics major" does not understand this rather basic and simple fact. Where did you earn this degree?

However, by definition, "Income taxes" refer to earned income and when people want to raise the income tax on the "evil one percent" or the "evil rich" they are talking about earned income which is wages and the entire discussion of this thread is about the "rich" as defined by their earned income.

Capital gains tax concern capital gains.




posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: roth1

Trickle down is a flat out lie.........LIE. The rich can only buy so many cars and houses and the rest of the money sits around collecting dust. The game is coming to an end.



If you make under 15 dollars an hour or have a household income under 40,000 you are screwed because of inflation. Your ability to buy food and shelter and all the things you need to survive will be harder and harder to support. Grocery bills are going up monthly and new car prices are 30,000. This can not continue for very long. The lower wage earners are about to be rendered right out of this economic model due to inflationary boundaries.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Indigo5




I got my degree in economics...And that first sentence is pure comedy.


That comment is pure comedy.

Doesn't take a GD college 'degree' to know when it costs more to keep a business doors open than it takes in

They do WHAT ?

Close or move where it's cheaper.


OR they get further bailouts by the gov't. AIG anyone? So when corporations fail THEY get welfare. Uh huh.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Dunno why people cry about 'bailout's. Since ALL social programs are BAILOUTS.

For the people that use them.

For the corporations that are GUARANTEED income.

But,but,but bailouts are 'bad'.

Just some of the time.

And the government has been bailing out the people since 1935,



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: intrepid

Dunno why people cry about 'bailout's. Since ALL social programs are BAILOUTS.

For the people that use them.

For the corporations that are GUARANTEED income.

But,but,but bailouts are 'bad'.

Just some of the time.

And the government has been bailing out the people since 1935,


Yep. And the government shouldn't be bailing out anyone, from big corporations to foreign countries to ne'er-do-wells on the streetcorner. We are going bankrupt playing Santa Claus.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:34 PM
link   
a reply to: SubTruth

If that was 'true' then why demagogue the rich ?

Why demagogue business ?

Shouldn't the obvious solution be to fix the money ?

Instead of BULLSNIP demagoguery?

The obvious solution is obvious.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Indigo5

The rich earn their wealth simply because they are better with their money.



Well...Forbes listed it's 400 Richest people in America in 2014...and 1/3rd of them derived their wealth from inheritance.

Of the other 2/3rds, "Self Made"...Bill Gates and Warren Buffet hold the #1 and #2 spots and largely agree with me that the Wealthy in the united states have an unfair and corrupt advantage, both pledging to give away the bulk of their fortunes before they die and not pass significant sums on to their children.

The remainder of the specific "self Made" portion of the list is largely tech companies, Google, FB, Amazon et al.....aka...LIBERAL DEMOCRATS..That actually invent things and employ people with their money..

So as I see it, that leaves the GOP defending largely inherited (non-working) lazy, uninspired wealth...People who got their money from their parents..The Kochs, the Waltons et al.

And a measly 5% return on 3 Billion dollars is 150 Million dollars annually...it doesn't take a genius to "earn" money from parking money.

www.forbes.com...
edit on 5-1-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

From your complaining about social programs for the populous I would have assumed that included corporate welfare. Obviously I was in error. Welfare is only for the rich. Got it.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: neo96
The 'rich haters' entire platform is just to rob from the rich so the poor can go out, and buy MORE stuff.


Which stimulates the economy.... unlike the rich hoarding it and the interest gets spread only among themselves.


Sometimes I think people's understanding of economic principles comes from reading "Scrooge McDuck" comic books. The "rich" or highest wage earners,


I got my degree in economics...And that first sentence is pure comedy.

The "rich" are not the "highest wage earners"...they do not "earn a wage". They collect "unearned" or "passive" income...money given them, not in wages or in return for Labor or Services...but money for the virtue of already having money.

Again..I don't begrudge people collecting interest, but when that "unearned income" ...through the political influence it affords...is taxed less than actual earned income, income earned by inventors, laborers and service providers...working for their money...then we have a rigged system...the same reason the Casino will eventually take all your money the longer you play. With regards to our economy, more and more money is parked amongst fewer and fewer wealthy elite. And why wouldn't they park that money? Through buying policy they have devised a system that greatly rewards and incentivizes just that.

What did the "Banks" do with the massive bailout money they demanded and got from taxpayers? The failed reasoning was that they would pass it on to businesses in loans, pass it off to investors and spur economic growth. Economists and researchers have now looked back and figured out where that "Stimulas" for the bankers went that disappeared en route to the taxpayers it originated with...They invested in food and energy options and futures..thus driving up the cost of food and electricity during the economic crisis..They didn't pass it off to businesses in loans...They made the bet they were incentivized to make...Everyone needs heat and food! Ironic isn't it? Your money went toward jacking up food and energy prices on yourself in the midst of an economic crisis. That is the wonder of "trickle down" economics!

Unearned Income
Passive Income
Economic Rent

Research a little before pretending to understand Macro-economics.

In every way...from basic tax codes to thousands of pages of GOP inspired loop-holes...the wealthiest are rewarded for already being wealthy and in a way that incentivizes them to take that money out of the economy rather than re-invest.

How the wealthy, bankers and corporations convinced conservatives to treat them like Royalty of old I will never understand. Conservatives used to stand for fairness and the working man.

A level playing field is all the middle class or any American needs or deserves and the marbles are collecting more in the corner of the room with each passing year...and at an accelerating pace.


I've taken economics too. I also can read. This discussion is about the INCOME TAX--so yes, we are discussing wage earners. Utter fail on your part.


I'll stick to reality basics for your benefit..

Income taxes concern income

Income includes both "wages" and "unearned income" "interest income" "rental income" and dozens of others...

The wealthy, as it is most commonly defined, do not earn their "wealth" through wages like you claimed...this is a statistical, economic reality and fact you can confirm for yourself.


You are incorrect. Income taxes concern earned income. Capital gains taxes refer to unearned income. I'd think that an "economics major" would understand that.



Oh...thanks for clarifying...I will make note not to declare my capital gains on this years Federal Income Tax filing!

I will explain to my accountant that he has been doing it all wrong!

Now ...more to your original claim...can you explain how capital gains are considered "wages" like you claimed?

this is very educational!



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5




Well...Forbes listed it's 400 Richest people in America in 2014...and 1/3rd of them derived their wealth from inheritance.


So what ?

Hell the government could give everyone a million dollars, and within 1 week or 1 month 90+ percent would be broke again.

edit on 5-1-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: neo96

From your complaining about social programs for the populous I would have assumed that included corporate welfare. Obviously I was in error. Welfare is only for the rich. Got it.



What do you think social programs ARE ?

CORPORATE WELFARE!.

SO it was included.

But what difference does it MAKE to someone who doesn't even live in this country?



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:44 PM
link   
The A.I.G. "bailout" yielded a profit for the government.

It was a loan, not a grant.




posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
The A.I.G. "bailout" yielded a profit for the government.

It was a loan, not a grant.



And Tarp was paid back.

And what do we have for the GM union ballouts ?

An automaker with the most RECALLS in history.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
The A.I.G. "bailout" yielded a profit for the government.

It was a loan, not a grant.



We gave AIG 205 Billion of our money (Taxpayer) and with AIG the gov took the unusual step of demanding an equity stake in AIG as a condition of the money. AIG paid back the 205 Billion plus 22 Billion in interest...

AIG was not typical of the way bailout money was dispersed.

Now AIG is suing the government for 40 Billion...which would put the taxpayer at a loss of 20 Billion plus interest.

Bernanke grilled over rate of AIG bailout loan
www.usatoday.com...

The federal government gets sued for saving AIG
www.washingtonpost.com...

I don't think you want to cite that as an example of the bailout's success...



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

And I think the GM stock ended up being a slight loss for the Treasury as well.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Never said it was a success or failure did I ?

But so far it's a gain.

Right?




posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   

a reply to: Indigo5

We gave AIG 205 Billion of our money (Taxpayer) and with AIG the gov took the unusual step of demanding an equity stake in AIG as a condition of the money. AIG paid back the 205 Billion plus 22 Billion in interest...



Hmmm.


Treasury said that it and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York provided a total $182.3 billion to AIG, which paid back a total $205 billion, for a total positive return, or profit, to the government of $22.7 billion. In addition, AIG sold off a number of its own assets to raise money to pay back the government.

A.I.G.





posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Indigo5




I got my degree in economics...And that first sentence is pure comedy.


That comment is pure comedy.

Doesn't take a GD college 'degree' to know when it costs more to keep a business doors open than it takes in

They do WHAT ?

Close or move where it's cheaper.


OR they get further bailouts by the gov't. AIG anyone? So when corporations fail THEY get welfare. Uh huh.


Just a note on semantics...the "gov" doesn't have money of it's own. That is OUR money. The gov doesn't earn money, we do. The Gov. is just a shell by which we elect leaders to spend our money for the country as a whole.

Like it or not...WE bailed out AIG with OUR money...even if we were not given the choice.

Corporate welfare, bailouts, tax breaks, oil industry subsidies et al. That is OUR money being distributed...but hell...some 80 year old gets help paying for a doctors appointment and THAT is welfare. Hell of a propaganda theme they have sold this country on.
edit on 5-1-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

What are you missing? What you provided is not in contradiction to what I provided with links?



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Jamie1
By the way, the title of this thread is false and misleading.

Sorry but the truth isn't false and misleading.
Kansas’ Ruinous Tax Cuts


“Our new pro-growth tax policy will be like a shot of adrenaline into the heart of the Kansas economy,” he wrote in 2012. “It will pave the way to the creation of tens of thousands of new jobs, bring tens of thousands of people to Kansas, and help make our state the best place in America to start and grow a small business.”

But the growth didn’t show up. Kansas, in fact, was one of only five states to lose employment over the last six months, while the rest of the country was improving. It has been below the national average in job gains for the three and half years Mr. Brownback has been in office. Average earnings in the state are down since 2012, and so is net growth in the number of registered businesses.

With less money to spend, Kansas is forced to chop away at its only hope for real economic expansion: investment in public schools and colleges. While most states began restoring education funding after the recession, Kansas has cut K-12 spending by 2 percent over the last two school years, and higher education by 3 percent since 2012.

The evidence of failure is piling up around Mr. Brownback, whose re-election campaign is faltering because of his mistake. Yet he continues to cling to his magical ideology, pleading for more time. “It’s like going through surgery,” he told The Wall Street Journal last month. “It takes a while to heal and get growing afterwards.”

When you have to start cutting money from schools to cover tax cuts then the plan was a failure.


Pure BS. Kansas has thrown money at the schools and it has done nothing but raised the educator’s pocket money while not improving education. Kansas problem is that it is mainly a rural farm state that wants to act like a industrial centered state. Which it is not. The largest city is Wichita with about 400,000 people. When Wichita had the Westar energy by their balls due to new contracts talks for energy the city rolled over and let Westar dictate the terms even though Wichita consumes more energy than any other city in Kansas. It is the goose who lays the golden eggs. It's main problem is that it studies every improvement or change to death by throwing money at economical impacts studies and when it is time to make a decision it to damn late. A good example was when OK city and other towns were rebuilding their riverfronts and developing business in those areas Wichita studied it to death and when they made their move it was too little too late.



new topics




 
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join