Fiscal Cliff: In Your Face

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   


I've never heard it put so simply and so direct in my life.

He is right, the last thing that is going to help is a "compromise" because a little is given on each side and nothing will change. (This is something I've always thought) As well as taxing rich will add a few billion dollars, which will be spent in days......

Root cause is not being changed at all, so this really doesn't even matter.




posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Agreed! This "Fiscal cliff" nonsense ranks right up there with the "Terrorist threat" nonsense.

We really need for the majority of people to yank their heads out of their asses before we are going to make ANY progress.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   
This guy is about to give himself an aneurysm.


+7 more 
posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   
If I hear this stupid straw man argument one more time, I think I'm gonna scream, too.
"Raising taxes on the rich or wealthy will not solve the deficit."
I've heard this a hundred times already.
I never hear anybody say in response, well raising taxes on the middle class and poor people
won't solve it either.

Apparently people do not understand the premise of confiscatory tax rates.
It's not that the corporations and wealthy will actually end up paying them.

The point was that it was realized in the robber baron days that the wealthy and the large
corporations chose not to SHARE the income with their employees and those who helped
actually make the products or service.

So the federal government decided that they had to build in an incentive.
If they kept the profits for themselves then they would face confiscatory tax rates.
It was thought that rather than pay the excess profits in taxes that they would spend the
money on wages first thus lowering the profit to be subject to far lower income brackets.

That's it.

Pay it to the government or pay it to your workers, your choice.
Because this has not been the policy in decades is why you find the Waltons sitting with a combination
of a hundred billion dollar fortunes on the Forbes list, while their employees are threatening walkouts.
It's amazing we are back to the robber baron days and almost nobody noticed.

If we had this equity of income to LEGITIMATE citizens and not illegals, another trick to keep the wealth in the hands of the few, then we would have way less expenses in Welfare and Food Stamps and foreclosed housing.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   
At least he had class enough to not use profanity S&F just for that alone...but do you think people heard it this time, time will tell



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by PaperbackWriter
If I hear this stupid straw man argument one more time, I think I'm gonna scream, too.
"Raising taxes on the rich or wealthy will not solve the deficit."
I've heard this a hundred times already.
I never hear anybody say in response, well raising taxes on the middle class and poor people
won't solve it either.

Apparently people do not understand the premise of confiscatory tax rates.
It's not that the corporations and wealthy will actually end up paying them.

The point was that it was realized in the robber baron days that the wealthy and the large
corporations chose not to SHARE the income with their employees and those who helped
actually make the products or service.

So the federal government decided that they had to build in an incentive.
If they kept the profits for themselves then they would face confiscatory tax rates.
It was thought that rather than pay the excess profits in taxes that they would spend the
money on wages first thus lowering the profit to be subject to far lower income brackets.

That's it.

Pay it to the government or pay it to your workers, your choice.
Because this has not been the policy in decades is why you find the Waltons sitting with a combination
of a hundred billion dollar fortunes on the Forbes list, while their employees are threatening walkouts.
It's amazing we are back to the robber baron days and almost nobody noticed.

If we had this equity of income to LEGITIMATE citizens and not illegals, another trick to keep the wealth in the hands of the few, then we would have way less expenses in Welfare and Food Stamps and foreclosed housing.




Wow man thanks for this post.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by PaperbackWriter
If I hear this stupid straw man argument one more time, I think I'm gonna scream, too.
"Raising taxes on the rich or wealthy will not solve the deficit."
I've heard this a hundred times already.
I never hear anybody say in response, well raising taxes on the middle class and poor people
won't solve it either.

Apparently people do not understand the premise of confiscatory tax rates.
It's not that the corporations and wealthy will actually end up paying them.

The point was that it was realized in the robber baron days that the wealthy and the large
corporations chose not to SHARE the income with their employees and those who helped
actually make the products or service.

So the federal government decided that they had to build in an incentive.
If they kept the profits for themselves then they would face confiscatory tax rates.
It was thought that rather than pay the excess profits in taxes that they would spend the
money on wages first thus lowering the profit to be subject to far lower income brackets.

That's it.

Pay it to the government or pay it to your workers, your choice.
Because this has not been the policy in decades is why you find the Waltons sitting with a combination
of a hundred billion dollar fortunes on the Forbes list, while their employees are threatening walkouts.
It's amazing we are back to the robber baron days and almost nobody noticed.

If we had this equity of income to LEGITIMATE citizens and not illegals, another trick to keep the wealth in the hands of the few, then we would have way less expenses in Welfare and Food Stamps and foreclosed housing.



In the 50's and 60's we had a stronger middle class and virtually no
Deficit. This country started to slip when the supply siders took control
And started making the exact argument you are. What has prevented
Your model from working in the last thirty years pray tell?



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by kozmo
Agreed! This "Fiscal cliff" nonsense ranks right up there with the "Terrorist threat" nonsense.

We really need for the majority of people to yank their heads out of their asses before we are going to make ANY progress.


The money in your pocket is tied to the fiscal cliff "nonsense"
Stuffing your money up your ass won't ensure that it's current
value is maintained.

You wanna lose your wealth in an instant?

Give it to me, I'll handle it for you



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thepump

Originally posted by PaperbackWriter
If I hear this stupid straw man argument one more time, I think I'm gonna scream, too.
"Raising taxes on the rich or wealthy will not solve the deficit."
I've heard this a hundred times already.
I never hear anybody say in response, well raising taxes on the middle class and poor people
won't solve it either.

Apparently people do not understand the premise of confiscatory tax rates.
It's not that the corporations and wealthy will actually end up paying them.

The point was that it was realized in the robber baron days that the wealthy and the large
corporations chose not to SHARE the income with their employees and those who helped
actually make the products or service.

So the federal government decided that they had to build in an incentive.
If they kept the profits for themselves then they would face confiscatory tax rates.
It was thought that rather than pay the excess profits in taxes that they would spend the
money on wages first thus lowering the profit to be subject to far lower income brackets.

That's it.

Pay it to the government or pay it to your workers, your choice.
Because this has not been the policy in decades is why you find the Waltons sitting with a combination
of a hundred billion dollar fortunes on the Forbes list, while their employees are threatening walkouts.
It's amazing we are back to the robber baron days and almost nobody noticed.

If we had this equity of income to LEGITIMATE citizens and not illegals, another trick to keep the wealth in the hands of the few, then we would have way less expenses in Welfare and Food Stamps and foreclosed housing.



In the 50's and 60's we had a stronger middle class and virtually no
Deficit. This country started to slip when the supply siders took control
And started making the exact argument you are. What has prevented
Your model from working in the last thirty years pray tell?



Maybe it's just me, but I think you misunderstood what he is saying? The days of Robber-Barrons occured in the early part of the last century, not the 50's or 60's.

Here is after the depression, sec, safety nets and wars...after the robber-barrons and the return to robber barrons.




posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Thanks for posting this chart. We can see exactly when the tables turned and it coincided with lowering
the taxes on the upper income and corporate taxes under Ronald Reagan.

Another foolish move by the much undeservedly lauded Gipper, was to sell 30year bonds to fund his current government. Those bonds have been coming due now. Along with all the other bonds floated in the 30 intervening years.

Henry Ford was the first one who broke ranks with the robber barons of his day.
He made a product that at first no one could afford to buy. Not even his own employees.
But, by raising their wages to the point that they could afford to buy them he had a ready made
market. Those employees were also able to buy other things like homes and furniture, refrigerators.
In other words it raised a lot of boats.

To leave it up to the Federal Government to set a minimum wage versus to go with the original confiscatory
tax rates to balance the greed factor inherent in these business tycoons, has been an abject failure.
When given the option to either pay the tax or pay their employees the excess profits, they successfully lobbied Congress to the point they pay neither. Then the government is burdened by all the underemployed, as I said in
health care boondoggle now, as well as the Food Stamps and other subsidies.

Oh, I am a she, not a he, btw.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


He should have done the whole breathing thing first then he wouldn't have felt the need to make a video yelling and screaming at.... someone.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by PaperbackWriter
 


Agreed...What hasn't been mentioned in the equation yet is what also occured during the 80's...women entering the workforce, culturally echoed in movies like 9 to 5 with Dolly Pardon and Melanie Griffith in Working Girl etc. etc. So in the 80's we became a "two-income" household society...which was pitched as raising the standard of living for everyone...and the kids became "latch-key" kids, daycare took off etc. Both paretns work and double your income..right? But cost of living rose so rapidly that many now are "two income" households just to survive.
After that failed...everyone took out loans on thier homes
And we are recovering from that failure now...What is left? With the ever spiralling tornado of income toward the top? We need systematic change...and no, I don't mean Socialism...I mean a government not rigged by Robber Barons..We need to reward manufacturing and blue collar jobs here at home, global competition is fine and good, but competing with China who massively subsidies industry and employs near slave labor? That's not a level playing field. etc. etc. A return to fair tax rates for those that have benefited from bailouts and subsidies, lots can be done to level the playing field again.
edit on 28-11-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


I say let the dems own it. Let them install all the rules and taxes they want.

Then we'll see.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


I say let the dems own it. Let them install all the rules and taxes they want.

Then we'll see.


We agree there...but honestly Beez...the Dems do best when they have a sane and rational GOP to let them know when they have jumped the shark...that is what I miss most...the conservatives of old....the ones that served as a rational check to the opposition. Those conservatives have been dragged from the village and burnt at the stake as "RINOs"...Canibals run the village now. It hurts everyone....Dems and Republicans, but mostly the everyday Americans.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Another thing that amazes me, and I am surprised the screaming guy overlooked it also, is that in all this discussion you never hear from the Cabinet and what they propose cutting from their budgets.

I mean this is where the spending comes from. The myriad departments and federal bureaus.
I posted this awhile back. Every current budget should be looked at by the Secretary and be required to
find 20% in cuts.

Congress should have to roll back their salaries and do away with their pension plans and private healthcare.
They need some skin in the game. Their views on Social Security, Medicare and Obamacare might change radically.

Their budgets should also face 20% cuts to each Senator's and Representitives office and spending accounts.
No more perks. Austerity should be imposed on them first and foremost.

Every year they should face a 20% cut in government spending until they balance the budget. Bring back tariffs on goods made offshore by American companies and all imports across the board.
Raise the taxes top rate on corporations and the top 2% income bracket.

Then lets see where we stand in five years. Well back from any cliff, I'm thinking.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by PaperbackWriter
 


Rank-and-File Members:
The current salary (2011-2012) for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $174,000 per year.

Senate Leadership
Majority Party Leader - $193,400
Minority Party Leader - $193,400

House Leadership
Speaker of the House - $223,500
Majority Leader - $193,400
Minority Leader - $193,400

They recieve full Healthcare benefits..

They become Pension eligable after 5 years service and the annual pension is based on thier top 3 highest earning years.

usgovinfo.about.com...



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


I say let the dems own it. Let them install all the rules and taxes they want.

Then we'll see.


We agree there...but honestly Beez...the Dems do best when they have a sane and rational GOP to let them know when they have jumped the shark...that is what I miss most...the conservatives of old....the ones that served as a rational check to the opposition. Those conservatives have been dragged from the village and burnt at the stake as "RINOs"...Canibals run the village now. It hurts everyone....Dems and Republicans, but mostly the everyday Americans.


America is going to get a very difficult prostate exam, regardless. But I would like to see an unfettered democrat approach just so we can avoid future debates by saying, "See! Look what happens!!!"



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Thanks again, Indigo. Amazing isn't it?
Well, of course, if you can grant yourself raises at will...

I think the top salary should be about $50,000 per year then in maxes out.
Nobody I know makes that kind of salary, nor expects those kinds of retirement benefits after 5 years.
Those checks need to stop IMMEDIATELY. To all past and present Congress members.

They should be required to pay into Social Security or pay everybody back every cent they've paid into it
in a lump sum distribution and scrap the whole thing and start over.
Same with Obamacare. You voted it, you own it. That's your healthcare plan, too.

We don't need a tiered system where the kings and queens think they deserve more than their average constituents, otherwise known as "the little people".

It's outrageous.



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by PaperbackWriter
 





If I hear this stupid straw man argument one more time, I think I'm gonna scream, too. "Raising taxes on the rich or wealthy will not solve the deficit." I've heard this a hundred times already.


Hearing and understanding are two different things it is a proven fact that raising the taxes on the rich will not solve anything.

That can not be argued even tho there are plenty of people who use strawmans to defend such an asinine ideology.


When there are 50 million on SS another 50 million on Medicare which is the middle class compound that when their payroll taxes were cut, and still get the same benefits.

Then we have 50 million on Medicaid, and other 47 million same people on welfare all who are not returning anything back in to the system as income taxation.

And this is what this is about income taxes, and spending.

More people are consuming tax revenue than returning in to it which is why we have a 16 trillion dollar defict.

Between Ss,medicare,medicaid,welfare we are talking over 2.2 trillion dollars then borrowing another trillion to cover the rest.

That is a the fiscal cliff that some will never acknowledge so the premise is create a slave class that pays for SS,medicare,medicaid,welfare from a minority in this country that is less than 5 million people
edit on 28-11-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thepump
The money in your pocket is tied to the fiscal cliff "nonsense"
Stuffing your money up your ass won't ensure that it's current
value is maintained.

You wanna lose your wealth in an instant?

Give it to me, I'll handle it for you


I wish I understood exactly what your premise is!? The money in my pocket is worthless paper - assuming you understand how fiat currency works.. My wealth is derived from my skills and knowledge which may be traded for something of value - regardless of what that "Something" may be. Today, it is the paper in my pocket. Tomorrow it is likely that it will not be worth as much. But then again, paper money has been losing it's value since the day it began - we call it inflation.

What is more important to understand is that the fiscal cliff people are ranting and raving about... we fell off of that decades ago! Our unfunded liabilities are almost $100Trillion dollars!!! Read about the REAL US DEBT HERE!

Some interesting notes:
- The US would need to collect $8 TRILLION dollars annually to balance their current budget with their current liabilities.
- If the IRS confiscated 100% of the annual gross income of all of its citizens and corporations, revenue would only equal about $6.7 TRILLION in annual revenue - still a short fall of $1.3 TRILLION just to be revenue neutral versus our obligations.

So, you see, the cliff was leapt from long ago! There is ZERO chance to tax us into a balanced budget. In fact, if the government decided not to spend one penny on discretionary spending and only put the fiscal cliff tax revenue (After the tax cuts expire) towards our current obligations, it would take 87 years before we became revenue neutral again!

Summary: YOU have no wealth! I have no wealth! No one has any wealth! The whole charade is a simple game of smoke and mirrors. In short, there is absolutely NOTHING that the US government can do to right the ship - no tax plans, no budget cutting, no compromise of the two - that can change the fact that we are flat broke! The day of atonement cannot be avoided regardless of how much handwringing or scaremongering is put before the American public.

This Ponzi scheme has fully run its course. Sorry.





new topics
top topics
 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join