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: 9
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Indigo5

You are right, tax the ever loving s# out of the rich. It will always make a state more money.



Or...(A) balance a budget? Pay for education and infrastructure...things people care about when deciding where to live? Make your state a great place to live?..Safe, fun, nice roads, parks, great schools etc.

Once that is done

(B) Pay for it in a fair way that doesn't treat the wealthy and corporations as untouchable.

(C) Don't pay for it slashing education and infrastructure, things that make your state a sucky place to live for the 95% of people who can't afford private schools. Don't give tax breaks to corporations and the wealthiest at the expense of everyone else.

What I found particularly ugly was Rick Snyder's approach in MI. He slashed education so he could give corporations and Millionaires a lower rate than the average joe, plus GRANTS and INCENTIVES...then took Federal Stimulas Money to backfill the education budget. That Stimulas money is hard earned tax payer dollars from the rest of us..So he fixed nothing, just routed OUR tax dollars to corporations and the wealthy. Now that Federal Stimulas money is expiring and his budget is effed. All over the country that happens in a thousand different ways to funnel our money to Corporations and the wealthiest. I don't begrudge anyone their wealth when it is earned through work and innovation...but stealing it from hard working Americans through buying loop-holes, tax policy, corrupt politicians and accounting tricks is not OK.

A level playing field..a table that isn't rigged, is what everyone in this country deserves. That is not what we have.


edit on 7-1-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Except that what we have is a progressive income tax which is demonstrably NOT a level playing as field as it means that as you earn more, you also get taxed more. That is not level.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Where do corporations get the money that they pay in as tax? FROM US. Do you think there is a magical, mystical, piggy bank that companies have which is full of money that did not come from their customers??



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Hey...I am all for reforming the tax code..AND LOWERING the tax rate on anyone making over a Million Dollars annually!

Along with taking a match to the 70k plus pages of special exceptions and loop-holes that have been stuffed into the tax code that ensure that those Millionaires payer a lower effective rate than the other 95% of the country.

Ya know what is interesting? Tax reform like this is on the table right now...a dramatically less progressive tax rate proposal..hand in hand with simplifying the tax code and eliminating all the special breaks and loop-holes for millionaires...

SO...there are two ways you can LOWER tax rates WITHOUT ADDING to the deficit..

(A) Lower tax rates across the board, dropping the highest tax rates from 35 percent for corporations and 39.6 percent for individuals to 25% + Close all the special breaks and loop-holes that allow many of those Millionaires and Corporations to duck taxes altogether or pay a lower effective rate than everyone else.

SO...Lower rate for Millionaires...get rid of the loop-holes and thousands of pages of tax code!

or ..

(B) KEEP all the special breaks for Millionaires and select corporations PLUS lower their rate! But that would actually lose money and ADD to the deficit! But you can get around that inconvenient fact that it adds to the deficit by employing some WONKY MATH otherwise called "Dynamic Scoring"...But first you have to change the rules to allow for wonky math...aka.."wishful thinking" while doing the numbers.

Guess which route the new GOP in power have chosen?

1.6.15 (yesterday)
House Passes Contentious 'Dynamic Scoring' Method To Estimate Cost Of Legislation
www.huffingtonpost.com...

House of Representatives Dynamic Scoring Likely To Lead to Lower Taxes, Higher Deficits
www.mainstreet.com...

‘Dynamic Scoring’ Cooks the Books
It’s trickle-down economics by another name.
www.politico.com...


So buckle-up for LOWER TAX RATES on the Wealthy and Corporations + Them keeping all of their loop-holes and special breaks PLUS increased budget deficits!

The tax code will remain a 70k page MONSTER that only those who own accountants and lobbyists can exploit...and the deficit will GROW.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Indigo5

Where do corporations get the money that they pay in as tax? FROM US. Do you think there is a magical, mystical, piggy bank that companies have which is full of money that did not come from their customers??



Not sure where you are going with that logic? Let me know your specific point when you have thought it all the way through, because I don't think you are following the money through it's full circulation or lack there of.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: sirhumperdink

Yeah, except those that don't pay for the bill, get more of the food.

What a crock.

I guess that wealthy people use LE services more? Use welfare and EBT/SNAP more?? That is why they should pay more.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Fair Tax. That is where I am going.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Indigo5

Fair Tax. That is where I am going.




Great name for whatever the GOP Clowns will pass..."The Fair Tax Reform Bill"...Right up there with "Patriot Act"

Sorry...but you will need to explain to me what "fair" means with regards to Tax Reform.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

It starts off with you receiving your entire paycheck on payday...less state taxes anyway. No income tax withholding, no payroll taxes. And, it realizes that approximately 28% of every items/service you purchase is a tax.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 06:14 PM
link   
Oh I'm not against either a flat tax rate or a fair tax rate. I also think that there should be a law that only those who have actual income tax liability maintain the voting franchise. I would allow those at the very bottom opt out of paying taxes at the cost of their franchise, and they could opt back in only after paying tax for a full voting cycle of no less than four years.

No Representation Without Taxation

Because I am tired of people voting themselves into my pocket.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Yes it would be better if they did not take at all. But they do in attempts to make things better. Building up the economy is better for everyone, not just some..a reply to: NavyDoc



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 11:42 PM
link   
Kansas Is Totally Screwed




In 2012, when Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback first pitched his plan to drastically slash the state's income taxes, he promised "a shot of adrenaline into the heart of the Kansas economy." Brownback brought in Arthur Laffer, Ronald Reagan's trickle-down economics guru, to help sell the idea that the cuts—which zeroed out taxes for 200,000 businesses and slashed rates for top earners—were guaranteed to boost the state's fortunes, prop up the economy, and bring in countless new jobs as businesses and individuals flocked to Kansas to escape the tyrannies of higher-tax states. Sam Brownback Read more about how Sam Brownback created a Kochtopia in Kansas.

Two years later, those rosy predictions have turned to doom and gloom. Next week, when the state legislature kicks off its new session, lawmakers will face a daunting budget deficit that will require either overturning Brownback's tax cuts or shaving hundreds of millions from the state's budget. A recent string of court cases mandating increased funds for education will make that job trickier. Thanks to Brownback's efforts to transform the state into the Koch brothers' dreamland, Kansas is now mired in a fiscal disaster.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko I also think that there should be a law that only those who have actual income tax liability maintain the voting franchise. I would allow those at the very bottom opt out of paying taxes at the cost of their franchise, and they could opt back in only after paying tax for a full voting cycle of no less than four years.

No Representation Without Taxation



Well...That is an honest expression and I appreciate the honesty vs. the dishonest explanations the GOP have given for new voting laws preventing virtually non-existent voter fraud.

The issue with applying an income test to voting is that it allows those in power to pass laws that can literally disenfranchise who-ever they like. Pass a law giving huge subsidies and tax refunds to the wealthiest while massively taxing the middle class into poverty. The middle class doesn't like it? Doesn't matter..now they are poor and can't vote...cuz they have no money to pay the taxes! What you suggest is a literal disenfranchisement race to Old World England and other Monarchies that our founding father fought against.

People are financially mobile...and under your scenario if swaths of the population are victims of corrupt government policy and suffer economically because of it and become unable to pay the taxes the elite demand, they are unable to change it because they have also been stripped of their representation.

Your "disenfranchise" sentiment seems knee-jerk and ideologically extreme ..and a sentiment that would lead to tyrannical rule and exploitation IMO.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: roth1
Yes it would be better if they did not take at all. But they do in attempts to make things better. Building up the economy is better for everyone, not just some..a reply to: NavyDoc



No, they don't do it in attempt to make things better, they take to pander to their constituency under the name of "social justice." They take to divide us with class warfare. They take it to bribe the have-nots for their votes.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: roth1
Yes it would be better if they did not take at all. But they do in attempts to make things better. Building up the economy is better for everyone, not just some..a reply to: NavyDoc



They take it to bribe the have-nots for their votes.


I don't necessarily agree with this view, but it always makes me think...If that was in fact the case, wouldn't it be solved by economic policy that created less "have-nots"? As "have-nots" grow as a percentage of the US population, so does that voting block...and the opposite trend would true. So the root of the question is how to give politicians a smaller voting block of "have-nots" to appeal to? Or why their is a voting block of "have-nots" large enough to sway policy in the first place?

Right now we are on par with the Dominican Republic and Ecuador for the disparity in income distribution and the middle class is disappearing. Fix that and there would be a whole lot less "have nots" for politicians to pander to. AND you can fix it without "Give-Aways" as the right likes to term things.



edit on 8-1-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Maybe I'm just naive about how taxes work or maybe I just like simple solutions to complex problems... but...


Why can't the solution to the problem be as simple as:

1) If you earn annual wages higher than $400,000 as an individual, you are taxed at 40% and for every $100,000 you make over $400k, it increases 5%. When you exceed $1,000,000 annually as an individual, you are taxed at 70%. Anything over $10,000,000 annually is taxed at 75%.

2) Businesses that employ workers shall be taxed at a much lower rate than wealthy individuals. This will ensure that the business continues hiring, keeps wages at a normal level, and does not increase price of goods sold.

3) Individuals earning $400,000-$201,000 annually, pay a 10% tax. Individuals earning $200,000-$101,000 pay a 7% tax. Individuals earning $100,000 to $35,001 pay 2%. Individuals earning less than $35,000 pay no income tax.

4) Wealthy individuals who provide documentation proving that their wealth was used to improve their business will receive massive tax breaks.

5) Remove all loopholes that allow wealthy individuals to receive tax breaks for activities that do not contribute to the growth of their business or to the economy.


This would return us to a system more like that of the 40's, 50's, and 60's when wealthy individuals paid much higher taxes. The upper-middle class, middle class, and under would take on MUCH less of the tax burden. The very-wealthy in our country control a vast majority of the money but pay very little, relatively, in taxes. The system outlined above would distribute taxes more proportionately without damaging the growth of businesses or the rate of job creation.

The argument from the conservatives is that higher taxes on the wealthy hurt job growth. The reality is that higher taxes on corporate executives, hedge-fund managers, and other vastly overpaid individuals would have no effect on job growth and would help curb the wealth inequality in the US without being looked at by a rational person as a "socialist agenda."



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer
So, punitive taxes, still on a Progressive sliding scale.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Or how about this. Stop treating taxes as a wealth equalizer and have it fund the basic Govt everything was designed as. You know, how taxes are supposed to be?



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Indigo5

Or how about this. Stop treating taxes as a wealth equalizer and have it fund the basic Govt everything was designed as. You know, how taxes are supposed to be?


I believe that we're trying to kill two birds with one stone, frankly.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Indigo5

Or how about this. Stop treating taxes as a wealth equalizer and have it fund the basic Govt everything was designed as. You know, how taxes are supposed to be?


That didn't answer my question to you in the least. In a world without SS, Medicare, Unemployment Insurance etc. there is still hefty taxes. Defense spending alone is a monster. So imagine your conservative wish coming true...no safety nets...we still have an accelerating income disparity and disappearing middle class...which will lead to some politician (absent dictatorial regime change) to (A) suggest safety nets or reverse the trend which has moved us on par with the Dominican Republic and Ecuador for income distribution (Both Banana Republics)

Wouldn't it make more sense to fix the core issue? The increasing need for safety nets?

Here is a clue...Warren Buffet and Bill Gates are literally the two richest people on Planet Earth...and they both agree the US economic system is rigged to their advantage at the expense of the middle class and poor.

Do you think they are wrong?
edit on 8-1-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join