Obama: 'We Don't Believe Anybody Is Entitled to Success in This Country'

page: 7
22
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by beezzer
 


Ending Corporate Welfare would actually shrink the government. Can you qualify how increasing taxes and closing loopholes will grow the government? I think you lost your QED card with that kind of logic.


Increasing taxes would encourage government to grow. It would justify its growth. There is no time in the history of America that raising taxes caused a shrinkage in government, or government programmes.

Now closing loopholes on taxes is a different story.
I'm all for that. I actually think a flat tax with no loopholes, no exemptions, no exceptions would help our overall situation.


No one is saying increase taxes across the board.

Making it so that the middle class has less of a tax burden while the upper class has more of a tax burden would free up money in the area that drives this economy, the middle class.

This is the essence of the "middle out" concept that you're having a hard time grasping.

The difference between the top down and the middle out is that the middle actually spends their money unlike the top who just hoards it, and the last I checked hoarding money doesn't drive an economy.

The Rich Are Hoarding Cash -- and That's Not Good
edit on 6-10-2012 by xEphon because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Useyourreason
 


We have been fed "the government is corrupt and there is nothing you can do about it" syndrome. In fact they encourage people to fly their planes into the irs building, blow up other federal buildings, buy lots of guns and ammo for a rainy day.

The solution is unbeliveably simple: Learn the basics of political science and vote your consious. Unfortunately minor issues are being pushed more than major issues and that is where obfuscation comes handy. Suppress anything anti-status quo and push pro-status quo. That way everyone becomes a brainwashed sheep with limited choice of a better future.

If I had a dime for every "don't throw your vote away with small parties or independants" or "don't bother vote, its meaningless" post here and elsewhere I could have been a wealthy man by now. Just watching ron paul and gary johnson get harrassed proves my point!



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by xEphon

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by beezzer
 


Ending Corporate Welfare would actually shrink the government. Can you qualify how increasing taxes and closing loopholes will grow the government? I think you lost your QED card with that kind of logic.


Increasing taxes would encourage government to grow. It would justify its growth. There is no time in the history of America that raising taxes caused a shrinkage in government, or government programmes.

Now closing loopholes on taxes is a different story.
I'm all for that. I actually think a flat tax with no loopholes, no exemptions, no exceptions would help our overall situation.


No one is saying increase taxes across the board.

Making it so that the middle class has less of a tax burden while the upper class has more of a tax burden would free up money in the area that drives this economy, the middle class.

This is the essence of the "middle out" concept that you're having a hard time grasping.

The difference between the top down and the middle out is that the middle actually spends their money unlike the top who just hoards it, and the last I checked hoarding money doesn't drive an economy.


If you increase taxes on the wealthy, then prices for goods and services will increase propotionately and the burden will then be on the poor and middle classes to cover it.

If government can't control spending, then they will continue to raise/want to raise taxes.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by xEphon

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by beezzer
 


Ending Corporate Welfare would actually shrink the government. Can you qualify how increasing taxes and closing loopholes will grow the government? I think you lost your QED card with that kind of logic.


Increasing taxes would encourage government to grow. It would justify its growth. There is no time in the history of America that raising taxes caused a shrinkage in government, or government programmes.

Now closing loopholes on taxes is a different story.
I'm all for that. I actually think a flat tax with no loopholes, no exemptions, no exceptions would help our overall situation.


No one is saying increase taxes across the board.

Making it so that the middle class has less of a tax burden while the upper class has more of a tax burden would free up money in the area that drives this economy, the middle class.

This is the essence of the "middle out" concept that you're having a hard time grasping.

The difference between the top down and the middle out is that the middle actually spends their money unlike the top who just hoards it, and the last I checked hoarding money doesn't drive an economy.


If you increase taxes on the wealthy, then prices for goods and services will increase propotionately and the burden will then be on the poor and middle classes to cover it.



That is not true, that is a myth created by wealthy people, so people like you defend them without thinking.

America had a 90% tax rate in 1950's and people were buying houses left and right

Or JFK's 70%...

The middle class started dying in the 80's, exactly when the rich had their taxes whacked to
these current levels.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by xEphon

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by beezzer
 


Ending Corporate Welfare would actually shrink the government. Can you qualify how increasing taxes and closing loopholes will grow the government? I think you lost your QED card with that kind of logic.


Increasing taxes would encourage government to grow. It would justify its growth. There is no time in the history of America that raising taxes caused a shrinkage in government, or government programmes.

Now closing loopholes on taxes is a different story.
I'm all for that. I actually think a flat tax with no loopholes, no exemptions, no exceptions would help our overall situation.


No one is saying increase taxes across the board.

Making it so that the middle class has less of a tax burden while the upper class has more of a tax burden would free up money in the area that drives this economy, the middle class.

This is the essence of the "middle out" concept that you're having a hard time grasping.

The difference between the top down and the middle out is that the middle actually spends their money unlike the top who just hoards it, and the last I checked hoarding money doesn't drive an economy.


If you increase taxes on the wealthy, then prices for goods and services will increase propotionately and the burden will then be on the poor and middle classes to cover it.

If government can't control spending, then they will continue to raise/want to raise taxes.


Why would the cost of prices and services rise?
If more money was in the hands of the middle class, then more people would purchase those good and services.

The only reason prices would rise when coupled with an increase in demand would be to make an even greater degree in profit.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by campanionator
 


Ah you beat me to it, but you're absolutely correct.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by campanionator
 


It's called a profit margin. If a business isn't making it, they raise prices.

The left will do and say anything to justify class warfare and taking more of peoples money,



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by campanionator
 





America had a 90% tax rate in 1950's and people were buying houses left and right


Yeah it did BUT:

Medicare,Medicaid did not exist, the salaries were lower meaning SS benefits were lower, then add the fact there were less people using them.

then add the dollar was worth a lot more, and they were not importing thousands of products everyday we were exporting.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by xEphon
 


How is government taking more from the wealthy, going to put more money in MY pocket???



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by xEphon
 


How is government taking more from the wealthy, going to put more money in MY pocket???


By taxing you less.

Really, how is this a difficult concept to understand



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by xEphon
 


How is government taking more from the wealthy, going to put more money in MY pocket???


Hypocrites they say more money in their wallets grows the economy, but money in everyones wallets is evil.

Being all 3 classes.
edit on 6-10-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by campanionator
 


It's called a profit margin. If a business isn't making it, they raise prices.

The left will do and say anything to justify class warfare and taking more of peoples money,


Yet nobody is allowed to say anything when the rich take more and more our money


That is a pretty slick set up you billionaires have created


I guess the fact that gas has risen 300% in the last 12 years is because these low taxes
are forcing them to charge us more ?

The right will do or say anything to prevent rational thought, you should change the mascot from an
elephant to a magicians hat
edit on 6-10-2012 by campanionator because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by xEphon
 


How is government taking more from the wealthy, going to put more money in MY pocket???


Hypocrites they say more money in their wallets grows the economy, but money in everyones wallets is evil.

Being all 3 classes.
edit on 6-10-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


What are you even talking about.

I'm talking about more money in the middle classes pocket, which is the driving force of the economy.
When the middle class does well, everyone does well.

That's not being a hypocrite. That's stating a fact.
edit on 6-10-2012 by xEphon because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by xEphon
 


Money in everyones pockets is the driving force of the economy not just the middle class between income tax,death tax,luxury tax,property tax they are giving more back to that economy than others.

edit on 6-10-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by xEphon

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by xEphon
 


How is government taking more from the wealthy, going to put more money in MY pocket???


By taxing you less.

Really, how is this a difficult concept to understand


So its wealth distribution then.

Gotcha!



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by campanionator
 





America had a 90% tax rate in 1950's and people were buying houses left and right


Yeah it did BUT:

Medicare,Medicaid did not exist, the salaries were lower meaning SS benefits were lower, then add the fact there were less people using them.

then add the dollar was worth a lot more, and they were not importing thousands of products everyday we were exporting.


There is a big difference between 90% and 35% or even the 14% that Mitt Romney and investors pay

If we tacked on some 5% points it would not come close to 90%



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by xEphon

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by xEphon
 


How is government taking more from the wealthy, going to put more money in MY pocket???


By taxing you less.

Really, how is this a difficult concept to understand


So its wealth distribution then.

Gotcha!


Uh, go to the gas station, that is wealth distribution.



I am sad you actually think you should vote with a mind like that...



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by campanionator
 


Yeah the difference is capital gains, and pay roll taxes, and like I already said other taxes, like the death tax,luxury tax,property tax then figure in state income tax.

Those evil rich pay more cash than those who deride them that is a fact.
edit on 6-10-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by campanionator
 


Keep trying. Please defend class warfare and wealth redistribution.

Or continue with the personal insults.

Whichever. . . . . . .



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by campanionator
 


Warren Buffet has admitted he pays a smaller percentage than his secretary.

Doesn't that tell the whole story?

Or mitt romney paying 14%!

There are so many legal loopholes to avoid paying the amount you should, that percentage rate comes second in my opinion. I would settle for 50% as the highest bracket for those that make $5million or more per year. Then 40% for income a million or more, 30% for 200,000 or more, etc.

Maybe have a one time redistribution system for those that have accumulated billions and trillions in covert ways. Tax them at 60%. All of a sudden instead of raising taxes, WE GET A TAX CREDIT! lmao that would be wonderful like paradise.






top topics



 
22
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join