OK I just saw this recently, and it was a shocker to me ...
So who are the 1% - the top 1% who are supposedly responsible for creating all these "jobs" when given the right tax breaks.

1% of the top consists mainly of this.
Professional athletes, entertainers, investment and inheritance incomes, businessmen (about 20%) and corporate executives, lawyers and other self important lackeys - majority, over 40% are these.

So by giving tax breaks to the top 1%, essentially this is the overall break up. Of the lot, the corporate fatcats already are paying just 15% of their income as taxes cos they pay capital gains and not income taxes unlike working stiffs like you and me. The entertainment and athletes are stuck paying the highest in taxes, they dont have any hiding place cos they are not in the long term capital gains loophole.

So lets see, there is a small percentage of businesspeople who are job creaters and the rest are essentially job consumers who would benifit from the tax breaks to the 1%, I cant see a more worthless expense on the rest of the 99%

We give all the $ to the rich and then will give us some of it back for working for them ... like we give them 100 bucks and we have a chance to work for them to get 20 bucks back. I say abolish the capital gains garbage and tax the crap out of anyone who works for a company. Bill Gates essentially once he sold his company (going public is a sale) is an employee, not a business man. Tax the fool at the progressive rate the tax code says he should be taxed @.

PS: I had a nice one all typed out and a reboot without warning (thanks worthless fool Bill Gates) killed it. So this crude and hasty blast is all I can manage now.

Cool.
Buddha.

lol amen! By the way i read somewhere that if you make more than 970.000 a year ur in the 1%...

And WTF happened in Oakland  lol

BY WHAT RIGHT do you claim the fruits of the labor of other people? BY WHAT RIGHT do you lay claim to their effort? BY WHAT RIGHT do you place a mortgage on their life?
BY WHAT RIGHT?

A tax on income is a tax on effort and makes the taxed no better than a middle age serf. As long as people think it is ok to TAX others for their freebies and subsidies and whatnot, then we will Never break free of the oppressive system.

You have NO RIGHT to lay claim to the life energy of another, regardless of how noble your Good Works are. If said individual decides of their own uncoerced volition to Donate to your good works, then fine. Otherwise, no dice. Period.

NO ONE OWNS YOUR LIFE BAR YOU!

I think you (generic you) need to more fully learn what a Philosophy Of Liberty is. So, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I

Hell no ... why ... OK this is why ... and its a loose reasoning ...
I am a business man, and I sell stuff say, now I run here and there sending stuff and delivering and installing and what not. I end up using the roads 10X more than the average working stiff who goes to work and gets back. The roads cost $ to build and $ to maintain, and how is that reflected in the way I use it vs someone else uses it.
Sadly nowhere except income. Isolated example ... yea but valid nonetheless.
Tax based on income is the best system we have. Anything else will be even more unfair.

Fine you can hit me with mileage and consumtion tax with a higher gas tax, however that leaves a huge hole where I may not be making much more $ cos I am working for peanuts ... higher taxes for lower income hardly seems fair. Consumption based tax is inherently worng for that reason. Poor people spend more of their income, in fact some of them spend all of it, and more, credit cards etc ... those people will get killed.

Its like democracy, its the worst form of gubbamint except for all others that have been tried.

Cool.
Buddha.

Quote from: The Buddha
The roads cost $ to build and $ to maintain, and how is that reflected in the way I use it vs someone else uses it.

The more fuel you use, the more tax you pay on fuel.

Quote from: mister on October 28, 2011, 04:30:32 AM
BY WHAT RIGHT do you claim the fruits of the labor of other people? BY WHAT RIGHT do you lay claim to their effort? BY WHAT RIGHT do you place a mortgage on their life?
BY WHAT RIGHT?

A tax on income is a tax on effort and makes the taxed no better than a middle age serf. As long as people think it is ok to TAX others for their freebies and subsidies and whatnot, then we will Never break free of the oppressive system.

You have NO RIGHT to lay claim to the life energy of another, regardless of how noble your Good Works are. If said individual decides of their own uncoerced volition to Donate to your good works, then fine. Otherwise, no dice. Period.

NO ONE OWNS YOUR LIFE BAR YOU!

I think you (generic you) need to more fully learn what a Philosophy Of Liberty is. So, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I

exactly. we jack up their income tax they take it and leave. ( outsourcing ) btw that 1% has been shown to be flawed. most of the tax income comes from lower upper and middle incomes. teh 1% is the income earned, not taxes paid. even if the powers that be, jack up their taxes it wont cover THEIR rediculous spending habits. its not feasible. it will not work. my taxes already went up under obummer. still thank an across the board flat tax would work.

Quote from: pave_spectre on October 28, 2011, 04:20:36 PM

Quote from: The Buddha
The roads cost $ to build and $ to maintain, and how is that reflected in the way I use it vs someone else uses it.

The more fuel you use, the more tax you pay on fuel.

That only covers the fuel itself, not driving on public roads. That is a good argument against buying a gas guzzler though.
Cool.
Buddha.

Quote from: yamahonkawazuki on October 29, 2011, 09:12:34 PM

Quote from: mister on October 28, 2011, 04:30:32 AM
BY WHAT RIGHT do you claim the fruits of the labor of other people? BY WHAT RIGHT do you lay claim to their effort? BY WHAT RIGHT do you place a mortgage on their life?
BY WHAT RIGHT?

A tax on income is a tax on effort and makes the taxed no better than a middle age serf. As long as people think it is ok to TAX others for their freebies and subsidies and whatnot, then we will Never break free of the oppressive system.

You have NO RIGHT to lay claim to the life energy of another, regardless of how noble your Good Works are. If said individual decides of their own uncoerced volition to Donate to your good works, then fine. Otherwise, no dice. Period.

NO ONE OWNS YOUR LIFE BAR YOU!

I think you (generic you) need to more fully learn what a Philosophy Of Liberty is. So, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I

exactly. we jack up their income tax they take it and leave. ( outsourcing ) btw that 1% has been shown to be flawed. most of the tax income comes from lower upper and middle incomes. teh 1% is the income earned, not taxes paid. even if the powers that be, jack up their taxes it wont cover THEIR rediculous spending habits. its not feasible. it will not work. my taxes already went up under obummer. still thank an across the board flat tax would work.

They take it and leave - where - you can leave the US abd still need to pay taxes to the US. My point is that they cant leave either, they are mostly employees. They are not fluid world wide businessmen. They are not likely to "leave" and stay employed.
Your taxes went up under Obama or under the tea party ? flat tax works for the low income people but not the high, and definetly not the super high, it will never get past the election promise.
Cool.
Buddha.

And yamahon - you're talking about lack of health care for you, and you do understand that it is all paid for by taxes right ? You do know if they cut it any more it will get worse. You may believe that cutting will lead to a more efficient government sadly, no. Cutting will lead to a more wasteful government. They can cut all they want and still ahve a higher percentage of waste than they do now.

Say there is a soc security office, they decide to cut say 10% of what they had out. Guess what instead of the 10 employees who make 50K each per year handing out 100,000 to people who need, they hand out only 90K, so 500,000 expense and 100K benifit to 500K and 90K ... yea you may say that they can let go of 1, so it now is 450K to 90, except buildings, heat electricity and costs associated with that cannot be laid off. You actually lose a larger % to waste.

More efficient government isn't got by cutting. In fact efficient government may be an oxymoron. Yea get rid of all of em, run the country with a laptop. After all the lap top was invented by a guy (ok 100's of guys) much smarter than all the ones we have had running the country put together.

Cool.
Buddha.

Don't mess with the 1%, they will jack you up!   




Wait....what?   

Quote from: The Buddha on November 07, 2011, 03:12:37 PM
And yamahon - you're talking about lack of health care for you, and you do understand that it is all paid for by taxes right ? You do know if they cut it any more it will get worse. You may believe that cutting will lead to a more efficient government sadly, no. Cutting will lead to a more wasteful government. They can cut all they want and still ahve a higher percentage of waste than they do now.

Say there is a soc security office, they decide to cut say 10% of what they had out. Guess what instead of the 10 employees who make 50K each per year handing out 100,000 to people who need, they hand out only 90K, so 500,000 expense and 100K benifit to 500K and 90K ... yea you may say that they can let go of 1, so it now is 450K to 90, except buildings, heat electricity and costs associated with that cannot be laid off. You actually lose a larger % to waste.

More efficient government isn't got by cutting. In fact efficient government may be an oxymoron. Yea get rid of all of em, run the country with a laptop. After all the lap top was invented by a guy (ok 100's of guys) much smarter than all the ones we have had running the country put together.

Cool.
Buddha.

main thing i say is cut the waste. specially under obama. can check with the CBO, hes spent more than all others combined. and thanks to HIM. i have no disability yet. and his loons tell me the RW wants to cut benefits. hell they both do. but st barack  that choad needs to be out before he can break anythign else he touches

Hell no, the waste has not changed as a percentage of total hand out. The hand outs have increased due to recession, people aging and soc security. Congressional Budget office - is that the CBO you mean ? if so the stats are that government expenditure has increased by close to 3% of overall economy - from something like under 21% in 2006 to 23+ in 2010.
However all of that is due to more $ leaving the govt due to SS, medicare/aid and unemployment. You can feel whatever you want, the facts dont bear that out yamahon. Or atleast not the way you're reading it.

Govt waste as a percentage of govt expense is not a stat that is well published. I am however going to guess it has remained the same - as in the same number of lackeys per $ handed out or gone down slightly as in a slightly smaller number of lackeys have handed out more $. They had to hand out more $ - mandated by rules - SS, medicare/aid and unemployment.

Govt getting bigger is a direct result of entitlements. But in your case its going to help you if you had a bigger govt, not smaller.
We all want an efficient govt, sadly that isn't going to happen no matter who is in office. Smaller govt = less health care under medicare/aid and less SS and smaller military. These 3 account for 85%+ of the deficit if I remember. Cut them significantly and you can get smaller however you will lose benifits in all cases.
Cool.
Buddha.

no. am referring to the pork in obamas no addons bills hes promised  what 9k earmarks?, eliminate wasteful spending. spend like a business mgr. your business wont survive. EVER if you continually spend more than you make.

Quote from: yamahonkawazuki on November 09, 2011, 03:14:36 AM
no. am referring to the pork in obamas no addons bills hes promised  what 9k earmarks?, eliminate wasteful spending. spend like a business mgr. your business wont survive. EVER if you continually spend more than you make.

What pork in the bills he's proposed - too vague, no one has mentioned it, an in retrospect one man's project is another man's pork, and worse yet not only are the projects he is talking about going to create jobs etc etc they are needed. We have a bridge fall down from lack of maintenance think of what it will do to the economy in that region. Seriously rod repair and bridges and major construction and infrastructure projects can only be undertaken by the federal govt. Calling that "pork" is just being short sighted and politically driven. Dude you dont fix your car when your car is about to break down, you are just being stupid. That is the road construction right there. Repair when you can, replace when you need and re route when you have to.

AND - here is the biggie -

Your business will survive if you spend more than you take in - IF you are the federal govt. You will print money to cover the difference. That causes inflation. In a way inflation is good, it keeps people buying things cos there isn't the promise of it being cheaper tommorow. Deflation is awful, and now we have defation in house prices and inflation in everything else. A very natural consequence of the bubble years.

Cool.
Buddha.

im losing the crazy injun here. lemme rephrase, like i should have in teh beginning. If we ran this country like a small business. aka spending no more than we took in wed be golden. this has not happened in a VERY long time. clinton balanced a budget by neutering the military. which took us years to retool. should stock up THEN do that. not cut and hope. like he did. he blew it big time. could brign in 9/11 reference here. but will save that for later.

Once again - we dont need to run it like a small business. We need to run it like a proper country. Need $ print it not bond it and borrow it. The local govt's have to, but not the whole country.
Cool.
Buddha.

Always the same arguement... a flat tax taxes the poor more cause it takes a Higher Percentage of their income as tax.

Sure it does, it is simple maths and you will not get an argument from me there. BUT, it ignores the other side which is... a person with more money spends more money and thus pays more total tax - it might be less of a Percentage, but in total it is more.

I once thought... a flat 10% income tax and a flat 10% Goods tax. But I now think differently and would suggest a 10% Goods tax only. That way, if you do not want to pay tax you do not buy goods with a tax on it. With more money to spend, more money will be spent. That's how it goes, that is why Credit flourishes - people spending the extra money available to them. Money Flowing is what makes the economy flourish and grow. Taxing - which is, when stripped down, nothing more than Theft - SLOWS the economy.

Years ago in Aust, the govt so eager to make more money from Tax, removed all deductions on investment properties. No more could the Investor claim interest of the loan as a deduction, or repairs, or whatever, but they did have to pay tax on the extra income from those investment properties. The result was, it killed the economy overnight. It did it so thoroughly. House construction ceased virtually overnight. House sales died over night. The economy immediately ground to a halt. Within 6 months the govt revoked their previous "deduction removal" policy and the economy got back on it feet.

Also....

If I have no right to come in to your house and take $100 out of your wallet to fund my medicine or food or whatever, then no-one else has that right either, regardless if they wear fancy garments and call themselves govt. If I do it it is called Theft. When the govt does it it is still theft, no matter what Good Works it is claimed for.

Michael

He he michael - you have a compadre in the US by the name of Ron Paul - largely credited with starting the TEA party, though I dont see him as the TEA party darling anymore, anyway on his desk was a plaque that read "Dont steal, the government hates the competition".

Cool.
Buddha.

Quote from: The Buddha on November 11, 2011, 07:08:49 PM
Once again - we dont need to run it like a small business. We need to run it like a proper country. Need $ print it not bond it and borrow it. The local govt's have to, but not the whole country.
Cool.
Buddha.

doesnt hte print more money argument tho cause more havoc with inflation?

Yes inflation however affects the rich more than the poor.
Wages should keep pace with inflation, hoarded $ wont.
Asset values keep up with inflation on average, the consumables do, the durables dont sorta, and technology has the ablity to skew that.
Inflation is better than deflation which we have now.
Cool.
Buddha.