ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

why taxing the rich doesn't work.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this May. 02 2011, 5:56 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>

>

>Water is paid for on the local level via your water utility bill which charges you based on how much water you use not how much money you have.  Again with the fail.

>Wrong and a moronic fail again moron

>
the cost of the water is based on the amount of treatment it needs to be potable, and that is directly related to the environment which is not a state issue, because one state can affect another state's water supply, so it is federal, it is EPA and they are funded by federal income tax, which the rich pay the most of and profit the most from, so the cost of your local water is protected by federal agents that are paid by federal tax dollars.

>nice try moron, but fail again, because "things are even less simple than you think"

>like they always are to people like you. 

>
Notice how in another post Rusty talks about how taxing the rich more benefits the poor, but in this post, Rusty says that the rich paying more taxes benefits the rich?  Hmmmmm

it benefits everybody

no one rich person can or should protect the environment and it is not any person's land to begin with. 

ownership of property is a basic concept.  If people can't own property, including land, then we're in serious trouble.  Guess that's why so many socialists hate sovereignty.

American history does not support your statement

America has taken land away from people constantly, forever.

it is not any one person's land, it is the United States land, what one man temporarily owns the Nation is responsible for forever.

if you see this as wrong, then you need to move. 

Yes, the government has stolen property from people - and still happens through eminent domain.  Very sad.  But still - we purchase and own property - no different than you owning your computer or car.


But your attitude is typical of standard communism - everything belongs to the group and no individual has anything.


chr33355

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1551

Report this May. 02 2011, 6:27 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>moron you asked about "Taxes" in general and raising the federal taxes on the rich will increase federal repair of interstates and increase funding to other road projects so the state and locals can either fix more or reduce your local taxes; also bus systems in some states and cities are paid for by a state income tax or local property tax of some kind ...mentioned buses as well

>if you call me a moron i can call you one too for thinking there was no such thing as a state income tax.

>nice try but another fail moron.

>
  ROADS ARE PAID FOR BY GASOLINE TAXES NOT INCOME TAXES.  Did you know that the federal government has a tax on gasoline in order to pay for interstate repairs obviously not.

things are even less simple than you think ... if gas-tax pays for roads then how come it has not gone to fixing our roads for over 30 years?

why does America have a grade of "D" for infrastructure?

just because tax money is suppose to go somewhere, doesn't mean that it actually does (lock-box and such) ... you people actually think the money goes where it is suppose to without any monitoring.

  Why doesn't gas tax money go to fix roads because politicians on both the state and federal level use that money for various pork spending projects to try and get votes.  Then when there is no money left for infrastructure they take money from the general fund.  So your solution to this problem is not to fix spending so the money goes to where it is supposted to be allocated but to give these waste full spenders more money to waste


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this May. 02 2011, 6:27 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>Water is paid for on the local level via your water utility bill which charges you based on how much water you use not how much money you have.  Again with the fail.

>Wrong and a moronic fail again moron

>
the cost of the water is based on the amount of treatment it needs to be potable, and that is directly related to the environment which is not a state issue, because one state can affect another state's water supply, so it is federal, it is EPA and they are funded by federal income tax, which the rich pay the most of and profit the most from, so the cost of your local water is protected by federal agents that are paid by federal tax dollars.

>nice try moron, but fail again, because "things are even less simple than you think"

>like they always are to people like you. 

>
Notice how in another post Rusty talks about how taxing the rich more benefits the poor, but in this post, Rusty says that the rich paying more taxes benefits the rich?  Hmmmmm

it benefits everybody

no one rich person can or should protect the environment and it is not any person's land to begin with. 

ownership of property is a basic concept.  If people can't own property, including land, then we're in serious trouble.  Guess that's why so many socialists hate sovereignty.

American history does not support your statement

America has taken land away from people constantly, forever.

it is not any one person's land, it is the United States land, what one man temporarily owns the Nation is responsible for forever.

if you see this as wrong, then you need to move. 

Yes, the government has stolen property from people - and still happens through eminent domain.  Very sad.  But still - we purchase and own property - no different than you owning your computer or car.

But your attitude is typical of standard communism - everything belongs to the group and no individual has anything.

no

my attitude is typical of great States like Texas and Alaska

both Republican states and both doing fairly well in the bad economy

see? you had no idea that Texas and Alaska openly claim mineral rights to THEIR land.

my ideas are not Communist ideas but American ideas, they are not my ideas either, they are the ideas of great men, who know what land is worth and who best cares for it. 

sorry, Texas and Alaska prove your statement wrong, the idea that a State's Land belongs to the State IS an American idea and a great one.

uggghhh - just because communist/socialist principles are being used in the USA doesn't make them American ideas.  But... That's if what the state government does - if the people want it, then that's their choice.  Just don't mandate it from the Fed level.


And we'll disagree on it being a great idea...


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this May. 02 2011, 6:32 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>stop complaining the government takes taxes out of money it gives you from taxes

>just seems like a dumb thing to say and get upset about. 

>
Well... considering how much you love taxation - especially taxing other people, I am not surprised you wrote this.... 


Invader_Wishfire

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 27518

Report this May. 03 2011, 9:16 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>(like you are probably also a closet-homosexual)

>


Image and video hosting by TinyPic


 photo spok_zps253ab564.gif

Chief Warrant Officer
Finn

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 321

Report this May. 04 2011, 10:13 am

Quote: chr33355 @ May. 02 2011, 2:43 pm

>

>1. Warren Buffet pays capital gains taxes not income taxes

>2. Actually it does as the more money you make the higher your taxes will be thus punishing you for making more money.

>3. I would believe you except we already tried a flat tax back in the 80's and guess what Congress was easily able to amendend the system over 10,000 times

>4. It is harder to cheat as now you need two people to cheat instead of just one but I can understand why they would use a 15% noncompliance rate.  And no my arguement isn't moot as the fact that FactCheck claims these numbers from the Advisory board are acurate but have no way to verify them unverifiable data is the same as made up data useless.

>


1. I know that, that's the entire point of my argument.  As I've already explained to you several times, the more money people make, the less their expenses rely on wages.  Warren Buffet's net income is mostly in the form of capital gains and not wages, hence he only pays 17.7% in income tax (that is an adjusted combined rate of capital gains tax and income tax for his gross income.)


2. No.  A flat income tax does not change no matter how much you make.  Just to be clear, I'm not referring to the existing tax code, I'm talking about instituting a new tax code that is a flat 15% income tax for all sources of revenue, not just wages.


3. If a new income tax code were to be implemented, you could include provisions that remove control the Congress just as Fair Tax.


4. The numbers are available through the I.R.S. and the Department of the Treasury.  The method is derived from the results that the Advisory board, as well as a secondary method available from other economists.  Both come up with similar results of higher than 30% sales tax, and even the FairTax's leading economist could not argue the results when assuming that not 100% of the populace would be compliant.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum