Fair tax ?

[The Man]

We should, but there is also an extreme debt to address at the same time.
So it's not just what we expect as the role of government, it's having to consider the extreme financial obligations already in place when designing a tax schedule in the near future.

Budget cuts and tax hikes need to go hand in hand....coordinated so the least damage is done to society and the economy.........but getting Congress to accomplish this without conflict and controversy looks almost impossible.

Budget cuts and tax hikes need to go hand in hand....coordinated so the least damage is done to society and the economy.

IMO its just a bad time for tax hikes as growth is to slow..hikes will further slow growth.
Budget cuts can actually slow the growth a little as some of the funds cause work to happen in the private sector.
So budget cuts and tax hikes IMO not a good idea at this time as the economy hasn't taken off again yet.

 

[Stone]

We would need to start at the very beginning by getting money out of politics. Until the politicians are actually working for us, it's ALL a pipe dream.

Agreed.

 

[Tim]

As in corporate favors etc...lobbying,,is that what you mean?

Just a few ways they rape the country

 

[The Man]

IMO we need an incentive to grow ...IMO we should give those upper brackets a tax break...if they invest in fields that require multiple employees MFG is always good..as well as many services.
So in other words.....we are going to tax you 3 million this year BUT if you spend it on industry or service then we wont take it.
Buildings will need to be built..causing jobs..after they are finished the can start up the business with their new employees.
IMO anything that causes construction is the fastest jump start as the results will start being seen immediately.

 

[The Man]

Just a few ways they rape the country

Yes..bought votes essentially...not for the best interest of all

 

[Stone]

IMO its just a bad time for tax hikes as growth is to slow..hikes will further slow growth.
Budget cuts can actually slow the growth a little as some of the funds cause work to happen in the private sector.
So budget cuts and tax hikes IMO not a good idea at this time as the economy hasn't taken off again yet.

IMO its just a bad time for tax hikes as growth is to slow

This has been discussed before.
A tax cut on the middle class could promote economic growth.......but you have said....."fuck the middle class" you're only interested in the poor.....those that pay no income taxes....and then argue to tax the hell out of them.
Obviously, you're being disingenuous....( one of those big words that means 'dishonest' )

And as I proved to you with statistics, the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy created wealth accumulation for them while middle class wages declined and job creation lagged. So....I proved to you that trickle down economics did not work in stimulating the economy.
So small tax hikes on the wealthy aren't likely to be any worse off for the general economy.

So budget cuts.............. IMO not a good idea

And yet just several posts ago you argued the government spends too much.
Again, you are being disingenuous.

You've added nothing but entertainment for the adults reading this thread.
Just bizarre Bullshit

 

[Tim]

IMO we need an incentive to grow ...IMO we should give those upper brackets a tax break...if they invest in fields that require multiple employees MFG is always good..as well as many services.
So in other words.....we are going to tax you 3 million this year BUT if you spend it on industry or service then we wont take it.
Buildings will need to be built..causing jobs..after they are finished the can start up the business with their new employees.
IMO anything that causes construction is the fastest jump start as the results will start being seen immediately.

I notice time and time again you mention those in the upper tax brackets as the ones that make this country grow.
You associate those in the top 1% as the job creators...

This isn't the case. I don't see any need to give the top 1% anything as far as tax breaks. It will NOT spur growth, it will only line their pockets.

 

[Stone]

IMO we need an incentive to grow ...IMO we should give those upper brackets a tax break...if they invest in fields that require multiple employees MFG is always good..as well as many services.
So in other words.....we are going to tax you 3 million this year BUT if you spend it on industry or service then we wont take it.
Buildings will need to be built..causing jobs..after they are finished the can start up the business with their new employees.
IMO anything that causes construction is the fastest jump start as the results will start being seen immediately.

It doesn't matter what you, TM, thinks....the statistics on the economy since the economic melt down, do not support your silly claims.

Any tax cut on the wealthy at this time only enhances their wealth accumulation more than today while productive investment ( venture capital ) lags.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venture_capital

As a percentage of GDP, venture investment was 0.058% in 1994, peaked at 1.087% (nearly 19 times the 1994 level) in 2000 and ranged from 0.164% to 0.182% in 2003 and 2004. The revival of an Internet-driven environment in 2004 through 2007 helped to revive the venture capital environment. However, as a percentage of the overall private equity market, venture capital has still not reached its mid-1990s level, let alone its peak in 2000.

TM.....not only do you not know what you're talking about, you've started contradicting yourself.

 

[The Man]

I notice time and time again you mention those in the upper tax brackets as the ones that make this country grow.
You associate those in the top 1% as the job creators...

This isn't the case. I don't see any need to give the top 1% anything as far as tax breaks. It will NOT spur growth, it will only line their pockets.

It doesnt have to be just the top one percenters to get the breaks.
Give those same breaks to other brackets that will do the same...but lets face it you have to have some extra green to do it..of which most dont extra to play with.
The gripe is income inequality...yes?
By them creating jobs {with their tax dollar} is in effect spreading the wealth of sort.
material will have to be bought etc.
There are many more hours of labor involved in construction than most realize
Its not just a matter of...it took 60 guys 6 months to build such and such
All the materials also had to be manufactured...Those materials had to come from raw material...so we have mining logging..freight wear and tear on all that equipment..the list goes on....the economy picks up fast
IMO its a hell of a trade by letting them either invest the money in a field of mfg or a service or lose it in tax.

 

[Stone]

It doesnt have to be just the top one percenters to get the breaks.
Give those same breaks to other brackets that will do the same...but lets face it you have to have some extra green to do it..of which most dont extra to play with.
The gripe is income inequality...yes?
By them creating jobs {with their tax dollar} is in effect spreading the wealth of sort.
material will have to be bought etc.
There are many more hours of labor involved in construction than most realize
Its not just a matter of...it took 60 guys 6 months to build such and such
All the materials also had to be manufactured...Those materials had to come from raw material...so we have mining logging..freight wear and tear on all that equipment..the list goes on....the economy picks up fast
IMO its a hell of a trade by letting them either invest the money in a field of mfg or a service or lose it in tax.

Trickle down economics hasn't worked.
Your post is a pipe dream.

 

[The Man]

It will NOT spur growth, it will only line their pockets.

Construction spurs growth..and growth also spurs production....its win win.
I understand you dont want the rich to get any richer,
But lets face it,,,what is going to do the most good for the people...the govt spending the 5 million.
Or a private entity spending it in job creations.
If you dont want to see people getting rich....you may want to support lower tax rates as one guy is getting rich..ole uncle sam...and all his retired cousins.
Would you rather see the 5 million spend on an earmark..or job creation?
In other words moved from one rich guy to another...or for job creation.

 

[The Man]

Trickle down economics.....worked.
Your post is a ...... dream.

It can be said

 

[The Man]

And as I proved to you with statistics, the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy created wealth accumulation

Wealth inequality flattened at the tail end of bushes term.

 

[Stone]

Construction spurs growth..and growth also spurs production....its win win.
I understand you dont want the rich to get any richer,
But lets face it,,,what is going to do the most good for the people...the govt spending the 5 million.
Or a private entity spending it in job creations.
If you dont want to see people getting rich....you may want to support lower tax rates as one guy is getting rich..ole uncle sam...and all his retired cousins.
Would you rather see the 5 million spend on an earmark..or job creation?
In other words moved from one rich guy to another...or for job creation.

No matter how you spin it, the economic statistics since the economic melt down do not support or rationalize a tax cut on the wealthy.

 

[Stone]

Wealth inequality flattened at the tail end of bushes term.

Of course....the stock market crashed
But since the crash, wealth inequality grew with wealth accumulation in the 1% not only reaching record highs, it did it at record rates.


Again, you've been dishonest with the forum.

 

[Stone]

It can be said

And when you post it...it's usually meaningless

 

[The Man]

No matter how you spin it, the economic statistics since the economic melt down do not support or rationalize a tax cut on the wealthy.

No spin....why dont you go fuck off stone.
I did not say a cut...I said that it had to be invested back as mgf or services....get the fuck out of my thread if you cant read.

 

[Stone]

No spin....why dont you go fuck off stone.
I did not say a cut...I said that it had to be invested back as mgf or services....get the fuck out of my thread if you cant read.

.

You keep contradicting yourself, TM


TM posted>

I did not say a cut

.IMO we should give those upper brackets a tax break..

Semantics, eh?


Reality does not support your pipe dream.

 

[Accountable]

IMO we need an incentive to grow ...

You don't think that we already have incentive to grow? What might be our incentive to stagnate?

 

[The Man]

You don't think that we already have incentive to grow? What might be our incentive to stagnate?

We are not growing