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.
Originally posted by Undertough
Is it odd that Neo had no real backup in this thread until he suddenly decided to take a break and suddenly the cavalry seems to be showing up? Just something that seemed to stand out to me.edit on 31-7-2011 by Undertough because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by DarkSarcasm
Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by mustard seed
hardly we are talking federal and state income taxes here and people are paying 50% of their incomes towards those two.
plus every other stupid tax
Tax on lottery winnings is not an income tax, it is a type of gift tax. Income taxation is much lower than gift taxing.
Also, of you know anything about finances you'll know that taking a lump sum is your best bet. Over time, having more money in the bank that earns interest that is compounded continuously will grow exponentially, if you accept regular payouts your money will not make as much because your not in possession of it. If you allow the payout company to hold onto it for you they pretty much keep the interest and with as much as they'll get in interest they can pay you without ever losing a dime, even at current awful interest rates.
I also believe that the extremely wealthy should pay more to make up for the fact that they make money with money rather than making money through hard work. Laborers should be paid more appropriately but what we see these days is the executive management taking home more money than all of their lower level employees combined do.
I wonder if corporations understand well enough that if they do not pay their employees well enough then eventually there will not be any consumers with enough money to purchase the products created. Eventually their greed will run them into the ground. Quite realistically, if executives and government want to improve the economy, they would decrease executive pay, appropriately distribute )bonuses, and increase their laborers income all across the board.
If they understood this concept they would realize that when low level employees are paid appropriately by all businesses and corporation there would be more money moving, meaning higher sales of all goods, meaning higher revenue, meaning higher profits, meaning more jobs, meaning more money moving around, meaning a cycle that begins to legitimately heal the economy. These jobs and incomes would also bring in more taxes meaning the debt of the government could begin to heal. Technically, all that is necessary for improvements all around for everyone in a win win outcome is executive sacrifice and less emphasis on paying its company's shareholders.
Originally posted by fallow the light
regulated socialistic nation would only halt growth of the people and cause dependency.
Originally posted by nwdogg1982
No, it's not really odd at all, and a few pages back I was supporting his stance, so yes he did have real backup.
fallowthelight- You are 100% correct about government regulations. It's funny that this was supposed to be a free country, and yet our economy is anything but free. We should never be forced to pay for a specific product or service just because a couple people in government (who can be bought by the big companies) feel it is necessary for our safety. We should also not be limited to what we can buy, just because a couple people in government feel that certain products are "better" or "safer" for us. That needs to be OUR decision as free citizens.
Originally posted by mustard seed
Nobody is talking about small businesses but about billionaires like yourself who admit to no job creation with your money only that you leverage monetary positions. And this creates jobs and promotes the general welfare How? Is it wrong for you to pay handsomely for making money using only the change of hands to profit? Is it not a great idea to tax your selfish arse to death unless you put that money to work in the system?
A logging analogy is appropriate. You cant clear cut and not replant.In fact timber companies are taxed if they dont If you are not ¨replanting¨ you deserve taxing. That is how money stays active in an economy not selfish hording.
seed
Originally posted by nwdogg1982
reply to post by Undertough
Since when did arguing for the freedom of American citizens to make their own choices as free individuals become such a stigma? And why must all "free" societies be just like Somalia? I think I understand what you insinuated with the "I stand by the word 'real'" comment, so I'll just let that go.
Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
Originally posted by fallow the light
regulated socialistic nation would only halt growth of the people and cause dependency.
Can you provide some examples of 'regulated socialistic' nations that have halted growth?
Tax the rich, feed the poor. Till there are no rich no more. . I'd love to change the world. But I don't know what to do. So I'll leave it up to you.
I'd love to change to world