|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,577 Year: 2,834/9,624 Month: 679/1,588 Week: 85/229 Day: 57/28 Hour: 3/10 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1395 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: American Budget Cuts | |||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9051 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
Bolder I have to commend you on this post and the previous one. You have made a very clear argument showing the ridiculousness of the tea party and anti-tax movement.
It is very clear that the republicans want to move to a fee based society. When everything has a fee and is privatized there is more places to make profit. Also, it is obvious that the republican, tea party groups do not view anything long term. Feeing the middle class to death is not a long term viable plan for an economy. As this continues the wealthy will be come a smaller and smaller group. It seems to me that the anti-tax people live in a fantasy world. They refuse to see the benefits they receive from taxes and also it seems a lot of them are not wealthy but are damn sure that one day they will be. They are a bunch of wannabe's. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9051 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
Just how much of the income of those who are productive do you think you and those who think like you can steal? 50%? 75%? 100%? Do you understand how a progressive income tax system works?You might want to explore the concepts of marginal and effective tax rates. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9051 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
Why would anyone buy those shares if those shares do not receive a dividend? Many companys do not pay a dividend to stock holders. Some people wise in the market feel dividends are not a good financial move by companies.
quote:404 Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9051 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
And no, most stock market activity is not "gambling". Sure it is. Every time you buy a stock you are taking a calculated risk that it will go up in value. I don't see how it can be anything else but a gamble. If it wasn't a gamble there would be a guarantee on the investment. The stock market works on the fact some stocks go up and some go down. If all stocks went up there would be no stock market. The ignorance here is staggering. You really need a basic economics class and a class on how all financial markets function. Ever hear of the commodities markets? Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9051 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
No response that buying stocks is ultimately a gamble? Nothing to say on that?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9051 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
So you are looking forward to the foundation of an aristocratic class of the idle wealthy?
The days of Georgian and Victorian England are an ideal for you? Can't wait till we bring back the workhouses and debtors prisons? So much good comes from orphanages doesn't it. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9051 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
So I take it you do.
And there comes the rhetoric. You didn't actually point out any particular stage of the process thats unfair or undesirable, you just skipped straight to bitching about people being wealthier than you. You want what they have, given to them by their parents who earned it. Wow lets look at my post and see if I was bitching.
So you are looking forward to the foundation of an aristocratic class of the idle wealthy?
Nope looks like straightforward questions to me. And not surprisingly you refused to answer any. The days of Georgian and Victorian England are an ideal for you? Can't wait till we bring back the workhouses and debtors prisons? So much good comes from orphanages doesn't it. You see societies have found that they are more stable if there is a process in place to prevent the consolidation of wealth in the hands of the few. Progressive taxation is actually a long term gain for society and the vast majority of people in a society. You see governments job is not to protect peoples wealth. Its job is to do the most good it can for the most people. I like this explanation
quote:Source Infrastructure and social programs must be paid for. Are you of the belief that everyone on social programs "should go get a job"? If so, how do people survive on minimum wage? Where do you think the handicapped and indigent or mentally ill are going to go if we cut social programs to the bone? Are you going to up your charitable giving? Or do you think they will disappear? How much more do you think you will pay for prisons and orphanages and police protection if we cut social programs? When would you say the US economy was the strongest? Post WWII through the 1970's statistically was when the economy boomed. What drove that? Government spending and investment. Should we not have built the interstate highway system? Not have improved and built the infrastructure that allowed the economy to blossom? Close down schools that don't pay for themselves? Do you know when the marginal tax rate in the US was highest? The same time period.http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php How about showing us a society that was or is stable, that allowed for the continuing concentration of wealth and a continuing and growing disparity between the rich and the poor.
you just skipped straight to bitching about people being wealthier than you. Here is the difference between people like you and people like me. All you can see is the personal effect of these issues. I do not begrudge people being wealthier than me. I don't want their money. I am sitting pretty damn good financially. Better than probably 75% of the people in this country. My concern is the long term effect of not dealing with social issues and infrastructure issues. It is called having a social conscience. Go ahead and go John Galt. In actuality it is a stupid idea, since we have a progressive tax system and there is a thing called a marginal tax rate. But then again if you are making over $250k a year there may be a slight benefit to you personally. Are you a proponent of the opt out idea? Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9051 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
Well you addressed my comments from the previous post but I guess you don't want to address the issues form the one you actually replied to.
Lets. It ain't bitching it is looking at realistic potential scenarios.
I never even hinted at the rich being a ruling class of any sort, or that they would necessarily be idle (although in theory they could if they wished).
Do you really believe that concentration of wealth will not result in a de facto ruling class if not a de jure one? Wow. Do you pay any attention to politics in this country now?
The problems of Georgian and Victorian England are easily identifiable as oppressive practices, not just because someone had a bunch of money. The monetary accumulation was a byproduct, not the cause.
Spoken as if you had firm evidence for this. This concentration of wealth allowed for the oppressive nature of the society. You do realize that the concentration of wealth is something that societies have been working against for millenia. There could be no oppressive practices if there was no concentration of wealth. Please show how it was a byproduct and not a cause.
Bankruptcy is certainly agreeable and the very idea of a "free market" goes against workhouses. Its just more bitching from you.
OK no workhouses, but we need an underclass of the working poor? Instead of government getting labor we will let corporations create more low wage jobs. Cause the priority is corporate profits, because that will allow them to create more low wage jobs. Did you know that counties that have Wal-Marts see a rise in social service costs. That's right these "wonderful" corporations can cost taxpayers even more.
quote:Source Original report Show me how the Walton's investments are improving the lives of people. Oh wait I forgot. It is all about profit, leave your social conscience at the door. All the scenarios are historical facts that were the result of the concentration of wealth. It is ridiculous to think that it cannot happen again if we allow for the concentration of wealth as you advocate.
Taxation is a necessary element of running a society with public services, but drawing too much from discretionary income has long term social and infrastructure issues as well. I vehemently disagree. Tax cuts do not spur growth. Show me an example where it does. Tax cuts consolidate wealth. The greatest periods of economic growth are periods of high government spending and high marginal tax rates. Still waiting for you to address post 265. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024