Democratic Myth No. 2: Those who have done well should pay their fair share

reply to post by neo96


Regulations prevent monopolies - thus total control of an industry. They also can control profiteering, environmental abuses, fraudulent banking practices, worker abuses, etc.

They are necessary.

But the wealthy kept whining that regulations were holding them back. So Reagan lifted most of them. Now? Well trace any MSM source upwards, from your local paper and station, all the way to a major network - then count how many companies are at the top of the few pyramids standing. Three? Four?

The same applies with most products we buy. Buy some Kraft cheese, then begin Googling and figure out who is at the top of the pyramid there. Guess what? Same three our four companies that own your local paper.

All those failed "too big to fail" institutions? All got there because of deregulation, poor oversight of the few regulations they did still have, and a LOT of lobbying. They paid to prey. ( Like that play on words? I do! )

Reaganomics failed. And is still failing.

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide

Regulations prevent monopolies - thus total control of an industry. They also can control profiteering, environmental abuses, fraudulent banking practices, worker abuses, etc.

The Us federal goverment is one the largest monopoly in the country.

The Federal Reserve is one the largest monopoiy in the country.

Social Security is one of the largest monopoly in the country

Medicaid is one of the largest monopoly in the country

Medicare is one of the largest monoply in the country

Regulation all created those among the other monopolies.

I disagree.

reply to post by Hefficide


Regulations helped keep us from turning into China with their environmental and labor conditions. But that is what Capitalism wants- slave labor and carte blanche to rape the land and dump toxins all over it... so the Capitalists moved to China.

But, clearly it's our fault for wanting *gasp* quality lives... damn there I go showing my Socialism again. I mean how dare we tell a multi-billion dollar corporation that they need to have fair employment practices and wages... 4 billion in the US or 5 billion in China. Totally our fault for being so greedy.
/sarcasm

reply to post by neo96


neo96 my friend why do you keep ignoring that I've said the system is flawed and that it needs overhaul? But priorities are priorities and one stops the ship from sinking before one begins repairing the damage.

As for referring to social programs as monopolies? I fail to see the logic. Are you implying that one must have Medicaid to see a doctor or to get medical care in the United States?

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


IF the system is flawed why argue for the expansion of a flawed system?

Regulation is a part of the problem.

reply to post by campanionator

We do have a tax problem.

The budget was working until Bush gave unfunded tax cuts and started two new wars, without
accounting for both in the budget.

You are using it for political gain.

Give me a break.

It’s funny to me that the two groups who are crying loudest about our ALREADY UNFAIR tax system are 1) people who haven’t figured out how to make it within the system, and 2) those who wish to capitalize on the first groups misery.

What do you want; United States of France?

France's 75% millionaire tax – is it a viable option for the US?

How much do YOU think Americans should be allowed to earn before having to turn the rest over to YOU and the underachievers?

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by xuenchen

 

It’s been stated many times that even if the fed took 100% of the income of everyone earning over $1million per year it would only float the spending for a matter of days and would do nothing to solve the federal debt.

We don’t have a tax problem….we have a spending problem. This topic is simply being used (as it always has) for political gain.

S&F

Know what else we have?
A middle class problem along with the spending.

As much as you would like for the issue to be about top earners taxes balancing the budget, that is not what the issue is about at all. No one in their right mind would equate the super wealthy paying more taxes to balancing the budget.

The idea is that by getting rid of the tax cuts on the wealthy, the middle class will no longer have to make up the difference by paying more than double the percentage. The country is economically sick when the middle class and working Americans are paying the highest percentage. Fact

As an ignorant outsider, may I ask a few questions?

My own budgeting process involves figuring out how much money I can get, then figuring out how to allocate what I have. Why does the government do it in reverse?

I (along with at least a million other people) wonder what a "fair share" is. An earlier poster talked about the wealth an individual has. Is that it? You are allowed to have, say, four times the average American's wealth and the rest of what you own goes to the government?

"Fair share" of what? Are we talking about a person not be allowed to own more than certain amount? Maybe taking a percentage of their income? Or, as I'm afraid is the case, a "fair share" is however much the government has to take from you to do the things it wants to do. That includes, of course, the cell phone give-away.

I would fell better about this "fair share" business if some could show me how it is calculated and why it's set up that way. Otherwise, it sounds like politely phrased extortion at the end of a gun.

reply to post by xuenchen


Totally a myth, lie whatever you want to call it.

Everyone should pay their fair share.

Nobody in the Democratic party singles out "those who have done well."


Everyone's equal and what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

If Romney pays 11% we all should pay 11%.

The problem is that I've only got enough left to pay my bills and eat

Republicans don't want you to be able to eat, they just want you to give all your money to them.

By the way, under Bush the tax burden shifted away from the top earners toward the middle class and current republicans want to move it even more in the direction of screwing all of us normal humans.

reply to post by spinalremain

Would you do me the favor of explaining this, please:

The country is economically sick when the middle class and working Americans are paying the highest percentage. Fact

Are you talking about all taxes combined at every level? All federal taxes? Federal income tax?

And what do you mean by the highest percentage? Say, for example, you divide the country into five equal groups with group 1 having the highest income and group 5 having the lowest. Are you suggesting the 60% of the people in groups 2, 3, and 4 pay a greater total amount than the 20% in group 1?

Sorry for being so confused, but I am, after all, Mr. Confusion.

reply to post by newcovenant

Everyone's equal and what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

If Romney pays 11% we all should pay 11%.

Try to keep up!

Romney pays 14% and he pays that on capital gains….not payroll income. He’s paying taxes on investment gains made on money he invested after paying @ 50%.

Nobody should argue about things they know nothing about.

reply to post by CB328

Republicans don't want you to be able to eat, they just want you to give all your money to them.

BAHhahahaha!!



WHO wants our money?

By the way, under Bush the tax burden shifted away from the top earners toward the middle class and current republicans want to move it even more in the direction of screwing all of us normal humans.

What a load!

Obama extended the Bush tax cuts!!

Originally posted by CB328

The problem is that I've only got enough left to pay my bills and eat

Republicans don't want you to be able to eat, they just want you to give all your money to them.

By the way, under Bush the tax burden shifted away from the top earners toward the middle class and current republicans want to move it even more in the direction of screwing all of us normal humans.

"Republicans don't want you to be able to eat, they just want you to give all your money to them."



What ?

If you can't eat you die.

If you die you can't work and pay.

Time to get back to work if the Democrats would get some jobs for us !!

reply to post by xuenchen

Originally posted by xuenchen

Time to get back to work if the Democrats would get some jobs for us !!

Hold on.... Democrats, IE the Government creates jobs??? I thought the entire argument of the right is that the government needed to stay the heck out of the jobs business???

Am I seeing another "have their cake and eat it too" moment here?

Just sayin'.

~Heff

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Originally posted by xuenchen

Time to get back to work if the Democrats would get some jobs for us !!

Hold on.... Democrats, IE the Government creates jobs??? I thought the entire argument of the right is that the government needed to stay the heck out of the jobs business???

Am I seeing another "have their cake and eat it too" moment here?

I believe the Young People call that a "Burn"

Us older folks call it Hypocrisy.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by campanionator

 

We do have a tax problem.

The budget was working until Bush gave unfunded tax cuts and started two new wars, without
accounting for both in the budget.

You are using it for political gain.

Give me a break.

It’s funny to me that the two groups who are crying loudest about our ALREADY UNFAIR tax system are 1) people who haven’t figured out how to make it within the system, and 2) those who wish to capitalize on the first groups misery.

What do you want; United States of France?

France's 75% millionaire tax – is it a viable option for the US?

How much do YOU think Americans should be allowed to earn before having to turn the rest over to YOU and the underachievers?

edit on 1-10-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)

I wonder how much you get paid to carry water for the elites who just robbed your country blind
four years ago?

This country had a 90% tax and we did just fine, it is 45% lower so spare me the melodrama

reply to post by seabag

How much do YOU think Americans should be allowed to earn before having to turn the rest over to YOU and the underachievers?

The wealthy should pay the same percentage as the middle class. How is it fair that the middle class is taxed on 100% of their income when the wealthy is only taxed a portion of their wealth. Like SS they are only taxed up to 107K if they make millions a year why shouldn't they be taxed on all of it?

And seeing how many of the wealthy inherited their wealth they are the real underachievers.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by CB328

 

Republicans don't want you to be able to eat, they just want you to give all your money to them.

BAHhahahaha!!

WHO wants our money?

By the way, under Bush the tax burden shifted away from the top earners toward the middle class and current republicans want to move it even more in the direction of screwing all of us normal humans.

What a load!

Obama extended the Bush tax cuts!!

And Obama is a secret communist?

What a load yourself

You guys want to screw the majority of us so you can pay tribute to the masters of the universe.

reply to post by campanionator

And Obama is a secret communist?

IT AIN’T A SECRET!!

You guys want to screw the majority of us so you can pay tribute to the masters of the universe.

Excuse me? The majority are GETTING SCREWED!! The MINORITY is attempting to suck the MAJORITY dry.

MOST people have income other than handouts from tax dollars.