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.

 

Tax the rich? Statistics show Alexandria Cortez May be right

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 03:36 PM
link   
History and statistics of tax rates and business growth show that all the doomsday predictions of low tax proponents are completely false.

www.counterpunch.org...

 


IMPORTANT: New (old) Standards Are Being Enforced (again) For New Threads
Starting a New Thread ?

AboveTopSecret.com takes pride in making every post count.
Please do not create minimal posts to start your new thread.
If you feel inclined to make the board aware of news, current events,
or important information from other sites;
*please post one or two paragraphs,
*a link to the entire story,
*AND your opinion, twist or take on the news item,
as a means to inspire discussion or collaborative research on your subject.


edit on Wed Jan 9 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Flat tax would solve the issue.

15% of 2 million is still more than 15%of 100k



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 03:45 PM
link   
What is the ACTUAL tax rate that the rich paid??? After they took all their deductions and had their CPA take advantage of all the loopholes in the law?

Look it up, I have a feeling the story changes substantially after you do that.


+2 more 
posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: pexx421
History and statistics of tax rates and business growth show that all the doomsday predictions of low tax proponents are completely false.

www.counterpunch.org...


So a leftist political science professor doesn't understand basic economics.

This is newsworthy how?

And from Counterpunch... a publication that is far left enough that they have published Pro-Hitler articles.

So no offense, but I will take his statistical musings as just another leftist article trying to support his Hegelian utopia.




posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Social Security on everything earned!
If you are an individual for political contributions you also need to pay Social Security on everything.

Rich people money that is sitting in bank accounts, stocks and bonds does little for the economy. Low income people who spend of necessity spend all or most of their income pay lots in sales taxes, usage taxes, gas taxes in comparison to their income compared to the rich. Middle and lower income people spending money drives the economy much more than the rich elites will admit.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal would cost more than the GDP of almost every country.

So let's play whit-if games and say she does tax the rich at 70%. Do you honestly think she can come up with $18 trillion+ per year just on that alone? Because that's a conservative (and I'm not talking ideology, I'm talking low-ball) estimate of what her plan would cost for one year in totality.

And that's after you tack it on to all the other spending!

So our normal budget which we cannot pay for + her $18trillion/year boondoggle which will kill the economy can all be paid for by soaking the rich? Do tell how that works and how the rich just happily keep getting soaked for 70% year after year without changing their behavior or moving to a new country.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

Sorry but I don't want a minimum wage bartender making my countries tax policy.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:00 PM
link   
The Bill of Rights says Cortez is WRONG.

Read it some time.

Rich people aren't three fifths of a person, and THEY ARE entitled to their GOD GIVEN 14th amendment right.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari
So who do you think does understand economics? The common Chicago school mainstream us economists who keep leading us to bubbles and busts? I assure you micheal Hudson understands economics far better than anyone you’ll see on tv and he’s as far leftist as they come.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko
Her plan may be ridiculous. This thread is just on economic effects of increasing tax rates for the wealthy. And let’s not move the goal post here. It’s how the economy did when taxes were higher, loopholes and all. With charts, historical statistics. If y’all want to make an opposing argument that’s not bs, talking points, and partisan hackery, it should take the form of either when taxes on the wealthy were raised and the economy went to crap, or examples of when taxes on the rich were lowered and the economy subsequently improved. Everything else is disengenuous obfuscation or hemming and hawing while sidestepping the argument, ie invalid.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: pexx421

Sorry but I don't want a minimum wage bartender making my countries tax policy.


She does have a degree in Economics. Not that that necessarily means much.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

It doesnt.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:14 PM
link   


She does have a degree in Economics.


If she did. She wouldn't be an avowed socialist.

Maybe she should get a refund.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal would cost more than the GDP of almost every country.

So let's play whit-if games and say she does tax the rich at 70%. Do you honestly think she can come up with $18 trillion+ per year just on that alone? Because that's a conservative (and I'm not talking ideology, I'm talking low-ball) estimate of what her plan would cost for one year in totality.

And that's after you tack it on to all the other spending!

So our normal budget which we cannot pay for + her $18trillion/year boondoggle which will kill the economy can all be paid for by soaking the rich? Do tell how that works and how the rich just happily keep getting soaked for 70% year after year without changing their behavior or moving to a new country.


From your link.


Correction: A previous version of this article quoted the $18.26 trillion overall cost as annual, when the Power the Future report did not specifically state it as an annual cost. That previous version also stated the $11 trillion figure from the McKinsey study incorrectly, attributing that figure to the annual cost to decarbonize U.S. industries, rather than the long-term cost to decarbonize global industries. Power the Future is working on addressing any flaws and confusion in their accounting.

Not an annual cost.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

Absent her plan, there is no compelling reason to raise the taxes.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

I read it this morning when it was before corrections.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: pexx421

Sorry but I don't want a minimum wage bartender making my countries tax policy.


She does have a degree in Economics. Not that that necessarily means much.


Which doesn't say much for the teaching at Boston University....



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: ScepticScot

It doesnt.


Yeah they give them out to anyone...

www.seattletimes.com...



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: ScepticScot

It doesnt.


Yeah they give them out to anyone...

www.seattletimes.com...



Exactly.

Now give her 30 years experience in something and get back to me.
So far all shes done is open beer bottles and shaken martinis..



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 04:21 PM
link   
Yeah, instead of just bashing the new green deal, let's focus on the thread. Does it make economic sense? Is it right?

Really hard to find any truth these days, everything has a spin, every news source has an agenda.

Most of you just parrot what your news source tells you to say. "If it's an idea from someone on the left it has to be wrong" "If trump said it, it has to be wrong."

We used to dig deeper for the actual truth and dare I say, deny ignorance.







 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join