No More Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthiest

canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
Mr Neutron said:
I totally disagree.



I agree about the wealth redistribution. From my perspective, government interference in the economy is to blame for most, if not all of the financial mess we find ourselves in.
Click to expand...

You dissgree that recession reduces consumption? That is the source of recession, fewer people buying fewer things produces less profit and the need for fewer things, which reduces the need for jobs. Government interference in the economy is to blame for the financial mess? From where I stand, not enough government regulation is to blame. We can look into the past and can see feudal economies and how they work - and those are a result of no regulation.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
lifegoesonbrah said:
Tax income from the upper 1% is a very small portion of the governments income, what is the point of having higher taxes on the rich besides spite?
Click to expand...
What is a "very small portion"? I don't see spite, but revenue as a reason for taxing those who most profit from our American system.
 
thedrunk

thedrunk

Active Member
The wealthy will always find a way to keep the money.

If you had a crazy amount of money, wouldn't you spend some of it to keep it all?
 
lifegoesonbrah

lifegoesonbrah

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
What is a "very small portion"? I don't see spite, but revenue as a reason for taxing those who most profit from our American system.
Click to expand...
I don't remember the exact numbers, but since the wealthy is such a small portion of the country, tax hikes on the wealthy generate an unnoticeable amount of income compared to the governments overall tax revenue. The costs of pushing away investors greatly outweighs the benefit of the extra tax revenue. Besides, as the drunk guy said above, increases in taxes will only encourage them to find and create loopholes anyways.

Seems like a lose/lose to me. bongsmilie
 
B

beenthere

New Member
abandonconflict said:
No, get your facts straight, Clinton raised taxes on the wealthiest 1.2%
Click to expand...
Kinda foolish to jump into a debate touting facts when you have no clue what you're talking about. Clinton cut capital gains taxes from 28% to 20% and gave tax breaks and incentives to businesses. This is the same tax Obama wants to raise so the "rich" will "pay their fair share" he calls his new tax plan the "Buffett rule", do your homework chief!
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
beenthere said:
Kinda foolish to jump into a debate touting facts when you have no clue what you're talking about. Clinton cut capital taxes from 28% to 20% and gave tax breaks and incentives to businesses. This is the same tax Obama wants to raise so the "rich" will "pay their fair share" he calls his new tax plan the "Buffett rule", do your homework chief!
Click to expand...
Income and capital gains taxes are distinct.
It remains bedrock however that Clinton, in a stunning reversal of former partisan behaviors, balanced the budget and then began to pay down the national debt. The national debt is the elephant in the room.
I would have liked Obama to resume Clinton's policies. Maintain a favorable capital gains structure, but undo those idiot populist "Bush tax cuts" that were just another bit of "wheee! new Mastercard" nonfinancing. cn
 
Mr Neutron

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
You dissgree that recession reduces consumption? That is the source of recession, fewer people buying fewer things produces less profit and the need for fewer things, which reduces the need for jobs. Government interference in the economy is to blame for the financial mess? From where I stand, not enough government regulation is to blame. We can look into the past and can see feudal economies and how they work - and those are a result of no regulation.
Click to expand...
No, I disagree that it's needs rather than wants that slow down.
You want more government interference, yeah, I know, I get it, you didn't have to tell me that. If you want to see what a feudal system looked like, first hand, keep doing what we've been doing and we'll all get to see what it was like, personally.
 
B

beenthere

New Member
cannabineer said:
Income and capital gains taxes are distinct.
It remains bedrock however that Clinton, in a stunning reversal of former partisan behaviors, balanced the budget and then began to pay down the national debt. The national debt is the elephant in the room.
I would have liked Obama to resume Clinton's policies. Maintain a favorable capital gains structure, but undo those idiot populist "Bush tax cuts" that were just another bit of "wheee! new Mastercard" nonfinancing. cn
Click to expand...
I take it you mean earned income taxes and capital gains taxes are distinct, but they are both considered income.
I'd like to hear your take on what policies Bill Clinton used to balance the budget, and why lowering taxes on everyone including the rich, hurts the economy.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
beenthere said:
I take it you mean earned income taxes and capital gains taxes are distinct, but they are both considered income.
I'd like to hear your take on what policies Bill Clinton used to balance the budget, and why lowering taxes on everyone including the rich, hurts the economy.
Click to expand...
Lowering taxes on everyone, rich or no, is a game to be played only once the national debt has been discharged. I do not believe in either economic extreme: either the trickle-down horsepoo of the GOPers or the unrestrained Keynesianism of the nannystaters. Jmo. cn
 
B

beenthere

New Member
cannabineer said:
Lowering taxes on everyone, rich or no, is a game to be played only once the national debt has been discharged. I do not believe in either economic extreme: either the trickle-down horsepoo of the GOPers or the unrestrained Keynesianism of the nannystaters. Jmo. cn
Click to expand...
I think you have backwards, we should never raise taxes until we quit spending money we do not have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top