Obama's Socialist Tax Reform

[beardo]

not sure, is the process painfull?

I don't think so, not really, they could probably do it with lazers or like a circumcision

 

[DrFever]

As a corporate owner let me say one thing is it fair where the government wants you to open up a business strive and be succesful
yet on other hand hammer you with taxes an good and services ??? for instance let me say before i even pay my self the government has took 86 percent tax from me woo hoo what a great set up huh not including goods and service tax and other taxes
just cause i came up with a great idea and it took off then you wonder how come so many corperate companys decide fck this i set up a off shore account and differ my taxes makes us criminal /crooked let me tell you all one thing every person has a opportunity to make them selfs rich thats what makes our country tho you choose not to is one thing dont make it like the wealthy should cover your expenses either cause we do one way or another you chose to live your life how you deem fit
and on other hand most governments want to control you they would rather pay you welfare this way they got full control over YOU

how do i come up with this tax figures ok my company gets money 37 percent of that goes for corperate tax before i even pay my self then i decide to pay my self ok now i pay my self cut me a cheque and cut the governent another check 43 percent of my gross earnings to i get taxed litterally 2 times what a wonder full country so YES peeps i find loop holes on how to fck the government every chance i get
oh heres another good one my corperate funds sitting in a bank i also get charged having it there its ok for the banks to use 40 percent + to loan out to you but i get charged having my money there

 

[Ernst]

i suggest you look up the definitions of class envy, totalitarianism and larceny. what you propose is the epitome of all three. that any free man would believe it proper for the government to step in and confiscate what small minds might consider excess personal property is an embarrassment to those who understand the price that has been paid for the liberties we enjoy. it seems so easy for these small minds to consider all this wealth that has been created to be the rightful property of those who have failed to thrive as fully as the few.

just how often do you propose we make this economic adjustment? every five years, every ten or twenty years? i hope you realize that such a cap is not only a disgusting display base envy, but an exercise in futility as well. a few years down the road we would see a certain percentage of the citizenry increasing their wealth and the vast majority frittering it away, just as has always happened. what then, another adjustment? what you propose is born of the liberal agenda of class warfare and a moron's view of economic structure. it is the short-sighted answer that takes into account only the present, ignoring all that has been and all that is to come.

the most dangerous aspect of such an asinine idea is the power it vests in those who have made politics their vocation. while a single such adjustment would soon be rectified by the vagaries of the marketplace, the consolidation of power within government could never be undone. once such a precedent is set, it would be brought back time and again to finance the excesses and follies of the ruling class. it would allow political insiders unlimited access to the wealth of the nation and usher in a true modern age of feudalism.

I wouldn't be suggesting we think about change if what we have would insure the humans are here in 1000 years.

Oh and I am sure many would rather explode nuclear bombs than give up the extreme power they have with extreme private wealth.
I'm pointing out that we can do without extreme private wealth. The goal then would be to create a Heaven on Earth.
A place where all people are encouraged to be productive contributors.

Perhaps your anger is not for me, it is for yourself.

We ignore far more truth than we incorporate. We do not even know how to think of a better way any more.

This is called Stagnation and with the economic divide widening all the time we are moving away from unity as a society not moving towards unity.
It is called Stagnation.

These changes are not my doing but I can illuminate the possible paths ahead.

I would rather see a cap on private wealth then live in a police state.

Besides doesn't everyone want to live a good life? Since what we do now keeps a billion people struggling for their basic needs it is clear the system we have isn't worth keeping.
We could feed everyone but we don't.
We could house everyone but we don't and so on...

I can imagine a world where the finite resources are managed better.
Perhaps it's time to change course before we hit the proverbial iceberg.

Think outside the box!

 

[DrFever]

ernst there is a way called comunism just read my other thread in russia after complete down fall they still had food homes to live cause governement controlled it all gas for there cars etc schools they compared russia level of education to that of usa grade 8 in russia is like 12 + 4 in usa my Father defected from a comunist country and i for one could never tell you how life was but my father sayed its not as bad as one might think compare china and usa for instance and both economys is comunism really that bad ??? sure people goin to say yea it is but they never lived both styles so its really debatable which is better obviously way usa is goin one could say well that didnt work just look at government book no lies there
and to think usa is not comunist they are just in a diff version of comunism if you really think about it

 

[Ernst]

Well yeah.. Communism under ideal conditions is great but we humans mess it up.

So there is the human factor that is the natural force of change.

Like I said I imagine having the freedoms we have now but a cap on private wealth so that taxes are not needed.
I believe wages shouldn't be taxed and I also believe people should have medical care, retirement and housing as basic rights.
Those who desire to be in business still can under a cap on private wealth. It's when private wealth detracts from Governments ability to manage resources that the cap is needed.
That's a system I imagine working. Let those who have to live their lives for economic advantage over others have a equal opportunity to achieve.
I'm sure that shop keepers and restaurants would be thriving businesses if more people had time and money to spend.

Anyway.. What we have isn't looking to be the right things for the long run.

I welcome others to post ideas on what we should do.

Under my suggestion Taxes can be eliminated since the Government would generate profit from the sales of materials to the people.

 

[secretweapon]

In order to make 2 mil $, you need to make 2.5+ mil $. Yea it fucking blows but I would accept that as long as its helping everybody, streets, education, healthcare, highways, parks... (not banks/wall street)

 

[Charlie Ventura]

I'm pointing out that the wealthy should be grateful the people of this Country allow economic injustice.

When a child complains that they are unhappy because the toys they have are not enough and clearly what they have is more than most the only lesson, to help them grow up is to take away the toys they have so they realize how lucky they are.
So far in the USA we only take away from the very poor and the rich need their turn soon.
I cannot cry for a man who have A million dollars my friend.. Not one tear drop will fall from these eyes..


But where I see a mother sleeping with two children on the side walk of a church because they have no home I figure anyone worried that their deduction for a new vacation home and pushing for higher taxes on the poor? I say those people have too much.
This is about life after all.. Last time I checked money had no pulse.

The last time you saw a mother sleeping on the sidewalk with two children, did you offer to take her and her children in? Did you direct them to the nearest church? Did you direct them to the local Salvation Army location? Did you solicit donations from your neighbors and hand her the money? Did you do ANYTHING other than expect the government to offer the solution?

And by the way, the poor in this country don't pay income taxes. The VAST majority of income taxes are paid by the "rich." In fact, the top 5% of income earners pay over 40% of the income taxes.

In your post, you said the rich should be grateful that the poor allow for economic injustice. Really? Shouldn't it be the other way around? I mean, should the poor be grateful that the more well off can afford to contribute to charities/churches that take care of the poor? Not to mention those who pay through the nose in taxes to pay for welfare relief for the poor.

If you are saying that people in the U.S. are starving on the streets, please tell us what street you saw this on. If you cannot name the street, can you name the town in which you saw this?

 

[NoDrama]

You want to make taxes fair? 10% across the board, EVERYBODY pays 10%. Mother Theresa? You pay 10%. No deductions for ANYTHING!! You make $1 a year? 10cents is your tax! ALL corporations based in the US pay a 10% tax also, no matter where they do business. All non US based corporations pay 10% import tax on all goods and services rendered upon a US Entity. You move to Australia and do business in Australia only? As a US Citizen you will still pay 10%, in fact the only way to get out of paying the 10% is to either make zero income, die, or expatriate yourself and become a citizen of another country.

 

[Ernst]

I appreciate the reading list of books you sent. Books that present the virtues of economic injustice.
I'll have to be on guard here so expect me to simply disregard irrelevant queries.

The last time you saw a mother sleeping on the sidewalk with two children, did you offer to take her and her children in? Did you direct them to the nearest church? Did you direct them to the local Salvation Army location? Did you solicit donations from your neighbors and hand her the money? Did you do ANYTHING other than expect the government to offer the solution?

Your goal is to say that the problem is me seeing homeless people. So the first tactic is to blame me. Boring boring boring.
You know I cannot manage to interact with all the people of this Earth and do as you suggest so you want to make the one complaining the problem.

And by the way, the poor in this country don't pay income taxes. The VAST majority of income taxes are paid by the "rich." In fact, the top 5% of income earners pay over 40% of the income taxes.

I will have to rely on Google for any facts

From http://www.videojug.com/interview/the-truth-about-taxes-2

Why do poor people pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than rich people?

Some people think that lower income people pay higher taxes than higher income people. Now, higher income people can get lower tax rates by taking money in capital gains and dividends, which are currently taxed at a 15% rate. So your regular income tax rate might be as high as 35% or so. So if you're getting regular wage income, that could, in many cases, be taxed at a higher rate than dividends and capital gain, which is taxed at 15%. But overall, wealthier people pay much more of the tax burden than middle and lower income people. But the rates that lower income people may pay are going to be higher if they're getting it in regular wage income, as opposed to capital gains and dividend income.


Thanks for watching video Why do poor people pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than rich people? For more how to videos, expert advice, instructional tips, tricks, guides and tutorials on this subject, visit the topic Understanding Tax.

In your post, you said the rich should be grateful that the poor allow for economic injustice. Really? Shouldn't it be the other way around? I mean, should the poor be grateful that the more well off can afford to contribute to charities/churches that take care of the poor? Not to mention those who pay through the nose in taxes to pay for welfare relief for the poor.

If you are saying that people in the U.S. are starving on the streets, please tell us what street you saw this on. If you cannot name the street, can you name the town in which you saw this?

I'm looking on google for data. Personally I do know people who cannot afford to eat well. I understand our Seniors are at risk of having to go without food for medicine or go without medicine for food.

I am a common man so my knowledge is common knowledge and my sense is common sense.

My suggestions offer the reader a choice in thought.
I'm noticing that we the people are almost unable to think independently.
That our people are sleeping outside is true.
That our people cannot afford medical care is true.
That our people need help with getting enough to eat is true.

So have you had your fun attempting to turn the complainer into the problem?
That's really old and boring.

 

[Ernst]

Whatever "ism" that saves the planet is the one I'm interested in.

Can we support the capitalism forever? Are we now dividing into two camps world wide?
I wish I could fast forward and see.

ernst there is a way called comunism just read my other thread in russia after complete down fall they still had food homes to live cause governement controlled it all gas for there cars etc schools they compared russia level of education to that of usa grade 8 in russia is like 12 + 4 in usa my Father defected from a comunist country and i for one could never tell you how life was but my father sayed its not as bad as one might think compare china and usa for instance and both economys is comunism really that bad ??? sure people goin to say yea it is but they never lived both styles so its really debatable which is better obviously way usa is goin one could say well that didnt work just look at government book no lies there
and to think usa is not comunist they are just in a diff version of comunism if you really think about it

 

[Coolwhip]

Really Uncle Buck? Only a flaming liberal would consider the scenario of Obama allowing the wealthiest Americans to keep paying 35% of their incomes a COMPROMISE. Why you could and pretty much did say, the government is "LETTING" them keep 65% of their income, as if it's the government's money in the first place. Telling insight into the mind of a liberal, statist, lemming.

It is the governments money in the first place.

And when you factor in other taxes such as OASDI, and sales taxes the rich pay a lower marginal tax rate then the rest of us. Check it out if you don't believe me, it's true, the guys at the top have a much lower effective tax rate than the rest of us, around 16%, because the big money isn't even taxed as income, it's taxed as capital gains. But even using the numbers for income tax brackets, millionaires still have a lower effective tax rate on the margin than the rest of us.

But you are right, it wasn't a compromise, with a compromise you get something in return, Obama just gave the house away for free. Like he has done with every single piece of legislation he has signed.

 

[Rob Roy]

^^^^ Cool whip your first line above...."it is the governments money in the first place." That's an interesting perspective, do you mean that whatever they declare is theirs, belongs to them? I'm not sure I follow you on that, can you elaborate?

 

[Ernst]

It's a funny way for sure..

Private bank makes the notes and then sells it to The Government for face value plus interest. Then so we can pay the interest more money has to be printed.

So if I loan money out and charge interest I expect all the money back plus money that doesn't really exist yet?

Cam someone clear up what the American money is all about?
Is it true that the debt can never be paid off because there isn't enough money out there to do so.
Is that because when a dollar is printed and the Government physically gets it we owe like a dollar and 10 cents right away so even if the bank called the loan the minute after the loan is made that 10 cents is imaginary money and cannot be repaid since the private bank would have to mint a coin and we would have to pay interest on that too. Isn't that what American economics really is? Perpetual debt to a private bank?

It's not that money is equal to anything real like gold, it's an imaginary system controlled by a few very wealthy people.

I can stand more information.

 

[Rob Roy]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Modest Proposal: The Federal Food Reserve System[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]by Bill Walker
by Bill Walker[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
DIGG THIS[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]We can all agree that food is critical to our economy. Episodes like Katrina demonstrate the need for flexibility in our food supply. Inherently, the private sector cannot provide this flexibility. When the Invisible Hand fails, it is time for the Visible Foot of government to jam the steel tip of its boot into our doorways. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Look at the terrible waste in the private food sector. Warehouses and elevators full of food, none of which is loaned out to more than one person at a time. Now, if the methods of modern government finance were applied, all that grain and fruit could be giving liquidity to ten times the number of grocery stores![/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Now you object: "But what if everyone wants their food at the same time?" Under the old system, when a grocery store or grain elevator had insufficient reserves, it became unable to provide more food for withdrawal in a crisis. This is obviously unacceptable. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]That is why I am proud to announce the creation of the Federal Food Reserve System.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]All food-related matters will be centralized in Federally chartered Food Banks. These food banks will issue "Federal Reserve Noodles," similar to Ramen noodles except that they will have no physical existence as such. These "FRNs" will be legally good for all metabolic debts, public and private. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]All actual flour, rice, kiwi fruit etc. will be stored in Fort Knox, but never audited. This will make ample real food available for worthy charitable activities overseas. Some of the food will be given to the International Mung-bean Fund (IMF), to give credibility to its Special Dining Rights (SDRs) and other projects. More will be given to the World Food Bank to support its programs of rain forest removal in Brazil and Borneo (remember, "Only We Can Prevent Forest"). Perhaps the rest will be lent out to European gourmet speculators, perhaps not; in any case US citizens need no longer concern themselves about it. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Chef of the Federal Food Reserve will be appointed by the President. He will oversee the Food Open Market Committee (FOMC), which will use Federal Reserve Noodles to purchase real food items on the market. The FOMC will also have the power to "foodetize" past-sell-date food issued by foreign dictators, subprime mortgage food from the back of the freezer, or any other indigestible object, possibly including Twinkies (when the needed technology is developed). [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Federal Food Reserve will also regulate the Food Banks. Food Banks will be allowed to issue ten or more times as many Federal Reserve Noodles as they actually have in their reserve refrigerators. If it turns out that the "reserve" food has spoiled (become "subprime"), the Food Reserve will simply issue more FRNs to the bank in exchange for the former reserves (the subprime tranches, I mean cuts, will simply be "eaten" by the taxpayers). This will make Federal Reserve Noodles more and more plentiful as time goes on. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In fact, in times of crisis the Congress will be able to send out as many freshly cooked Federal Reserve Noodles as it takes to buy your vote, directly to your mailbox (is 300 enough? Here, take 600; heck, take all you want, they're free!) If things get bad enough, the Chef of the Federal Reserve will deliver your FRNs himself by helicopter. Soon everyone will have enough Federal Reserve Noodles to fill all their wheelbarrows. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Now, with all this purchasing and hoarding and absconding with food and food-like securities, you might wonder, "where is my next meal coming from?" But not to worry. Trust in the Chef of the Federal Food Reserve, and wait for noodles from the sky[/FONT]

 

[Chad Sexington]

You want to make taxes fair? 10% across the board, EVERYBODY pays 10%. Mother Theresa? You pay 10%. No deductions for ANYTHING!! You make $1 a year? 10cents is your tax! ALL corporations based in the US pay a 10% tax also, no matter where they do business. All non US based corporations pay 10% import tax on all goods and services rendered upon a US Entity. You move to Australia and do business in Australia only? As a US Citizen you will still pay 10%, in fact the only way to get out of paying the 10% is to either make zero income, die, or expatriate yourself and become a citizen of another country.

I agree with everything except people who are working in a foreign land still paying taxes to the US Gov.

 

[Balzac89]

How can you even compare sales tax to income tax? Who ever made this is retarded.

 

[Ernst]

Wow, on review I only allotted a small amount of mental resources for this thread. You have to admit it's been a middle-eastern north-African kind of Month.

I'll look over the thoughts and try to catch sail!

 

[Ernst]

Society should count more than profits.

 

[Carthoris]

that was completely retarded.

the tenth man can go drink his beer overseas. the places he can go to that will save him money may also serve him beer that gets him sick due to non-existent regulations, but hey, it's all about money, right?

and who cares if the person serving your beer is a child working in slave labor conditions, right?

and do you even realize the irony in the fact that the tenth man wouldn't have any wealth if the 9 others didn't have the means to buy whatever he was selling?

all in all, if you rely on this type of simplified, dumbed-down, retarded example to understand our tax system, you are fucked.

also, how does this relate to obama and his 'tax reform' being socialist?

as i recall, he brokered a compromise in which the wealthiest got to keep paying at 35%, instead of the planned 39.6%. not to mention other breaks in other taxes.

furthermore, i have kept over $2k more of my own hard-earned money over the last two years thanks to obama tax policy. why are you so against letting me keep more of my own money?

Not only is the tenth man selling things for the other 9 to buy, and paying more than his share of the taxes, one assumes he is employing the other 9 or another 'tenth man' is. That being said, I would like to talk to the PHD in Georgia that made that video and ask him what his goal was with the video. It could be considered socialist because Obama's goal was to give tax breaks to those who already didn't pay any taxes and those who didn't pay very much and none to those who paid the most taxes. The end result is redistribution of wealth, which is a pillar of socialism. Whenever you talk about the ideals of socialism to the left, they agree with them. It is calling it "Socialism" that they disagree with.

The right is just as bad. Whether someone is oppressing your economic or personal life, you are still being oppressed.

Vote Libertarian

 

[Carthoris]

Th only way to make it fair is to cap private wealth and make all wealth over say $5 million dollars the property of the Government.

So once everyone can be in the position to be equally rich then taxes will be fair for all.
Until then the poor need help because the difference between rich and poor only gets bigger each day.

So to solve this problem.. Reduce private wealth so we are all equal.
I bet the rich stop bitching about paying their taxes now.

Why stop with money, why not restrict how many significant others you can have in your life, how many children you can have, what color your house can be, what size bed you can have, what type of grass. Restricting others is taking away their freedoms - regardless if it is financial or personal life.