We won't need Larry Merchant to tell us who'll win this one.
$1.5 trillion in new taxes = $1.5 trillion less in salaries.
Anyone who thinks that the "rich" people who will pay these new taxes won't make counter moves to make sure they don't lose a penny at their end is fooling themselves.
The richest among us will (almost) always look out for their money before they look out for their fellow countrymen.
But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be brought under public scrutiny.
We won't need Larry Merchant to tell us who'll win this one.
$1.5 trillion in new taxes = $1.5 trillion less in salaries.
Anyone who thinks that the "rich" people who will pay these new taxes won't make counter moves to make sure they don't lose a penny at their end is fooling themselves.
Your statement is pure supposition. If you look at actual effective tax rates on rich folks as per yesterday's NYT, you will see that in fact rich folks are paying considerably less than they were 30 years ago. On top of that, those rates did not correlate with lesser job growth. Of course, one need only compare tax rates and employment in the clinton era vs Bush/Obama to see that you would make the exact opposite case to yours. Welcome to the wonderful world of evidence.
We won't need Larry Merchant to tell us who'll win this one.
$1.5 trillion in new taxes = $1.5 trillion less in salaries.
Anyone who thinks that the "rich" people who will pay these new taxes won't make counter moves to make sure they don't lose a penny at their end is fooling themselves.
If only this were true. The inverse, of course, would be the lowering of taxes = an equal amount in the raising of salaries. Where are the jobs that were supposed to be create due to GWB/GOP's two (that's 1,2) tax cuts in 2001 and 2003? They're in China and India. Personal income tax rates (at least at the levels here in the US) have little to do with job creation.
The rich made moves to ensure that their wealth increased after the Bush tax cuts, and did nothing to improve the economy for the rest of us. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. The rich ALWAYS look out for themselves.
Let me add that I favor a small income tax increase on some of the middle class, also.
Because rich people hire poor slobs just to be nice.
But if they have to pay taxes they will stop being nice.
Besides, 1/2 of the people don't even pay income taxes. Lets tax them first.
I strongly encourage everyone to go watch both parts of Jon Stewart's class warfare piece from last month. I know he's got some detractors on here, but they really nailed that one..
The Clinton tax hikes hit the rich and what followed was one of the best job creation periods in our history. Why didn't your simple formula work then?
If you hold that shit in isolation you are a complete moron.
Class warfare on both ends only serves as a distraction to the real problems in this country. Both parties incite this shit and pander to the bases that get worked up about this shit. We are all fucked with the way this country is going, rich or poor, and things won't get better until this blame game bullshit ends. So disgusted.
Class warfare on both ends only serves as a distraction to the real problems in this country. Both parties incite this shit and pander to the bases that get worked up about this shit. We are all fucked with the way this country is going, rich or poor, and things won't get better until this blame game bullshit ends. So disgusted.
Class warfare aside, do you think that billionaires deserve to pay less in taxes than you?
I don't recall ever saying anything either way regarding that loaded question but I think our tax code is a complete mess and favor either a flat or negative income tax. I don't think "rich" people should be paying a higher percentage because it's "fair."
The Clinton tax hikes hit the rich and what followed was one of the best job creation periods in our history. Why didn't your simple formula work then?
If you hold that shit in isolation you are a complete moron.
I'm not holding it in isolation, dipshit. My point is that Rock's formula is too simple. Why didn't you quote the sentence that proceded the isolated part you cited?
"That gap narrows and widens depending on numerous factors, and tax policy is one of them."
Got that, glibertarian hipster?
It's definitely a simple formula and does not remotely come out to a one to one ratio but given the current economic and political climate it will definitely have an effect closer to what Rock described vs. some Clinton fantasy world scenario.
We are all fucked with the way this country is going, rich or poor, and things won't get better until this blame game bullshit ends. So disgusted.
I'm not sure I fully understand this. If your country carries on the way it is, both rich and poor will suffer in exactly the same way? So, those who are currently wealthy will drop to the same standard of living as the poor, or lower? Or when you say "fucked" do you mean in relative terms?
Class warfare on both ends only serves as a distraction to the real problems in this country.
Curious to hear what you believe the "real" problems are in this country
(a growing chasm between the wealthy and the poor not being one of them?)
I definitely think that the wealth gap is a problem in this country but engaging in class warfare is not the solution to the problem. Diminishing opportunity for social mobility will kill this nation.
The real problem in our country is our political system and the thread title is a perfect example of that problem. All this shit does is shift blame here and there without addressing issues.
We are all fucked with the way this country is going, rich or poor, and things won't get better until this blame game bullshit ends. So disgusted.
I'm not sure I fully understand this. If your country carries on the way it is, both rich and poor will suffer in exactly the same way? So, those who are currently wealthy will drop to the same standard of living as the poor, or lower? Or when you say "fucked" do you mean in relative terms?
When we have riots in the streets because the average person is unable to afford food, the RICH that are able to will live in isolation and fear. I guess you could see one side as better or worse but I wouldn't call either living.
When we have riots in the streets because the average person is unable to afford food, the RICH that are able to will live in isolation and fear.
If this is where things are headed, isn't it in everyone's benefit to support a system where everyone can has the opportunity to enjoy the same quality of life?
When we have riots in the streets because the average person is unable to afford food, the RICH that are able to will live in isolation and fear.
If this is where things are headed, isn't it in everyone's benefit to support a system where everyone can has the opportunity to enjoy the same quality of life?
When we have riots in the streets because the average person is unable to afford food, the RICH that are able to will live in isolation and fear.
If this is where things are headed, isn't it in everyone's benefit to support a system where everyone can has the opportunity to enjoy the same quality of life?
Absolutely.
So how de we do it? What needs to change?
Had this thread been titled "Solve the world's problems" I probably would not have posted in it.
The real problem in our country is our political system and the thread title is a perfect example of that problem. All this shit does is shift blame here and there without addressing issues.
b/w
Brian said:
Had this thread been titled "Solve the world's problems" I probably would not have posted in it.
The real problem in our country is our political system and the thread title is a perfect example of that problem. All this shit does is shift blame here and there without addressing issues.
b/w
Brian said:
Had this thread been titled "Solve the world's problems" I probably would not have posted in it.
The real problem in our country is our political system and the thread title is a perfect example of that problem. All this shit does is shift blame here and there without addressing issues.
b/w
Brian said:
Had this thread been titled "Solve the world's problems" I probably would not have posted in it.
Yes, that was me addressing class warfare.
So we agree. "Class Warfare" gets people's attention and actually solving the problems of the world gets crickets.
Comments
$1.5 trillion in new taxes = $1.5 trillion less in salaries.
Anyone who thinks that the "rich" people who will pay these new taxes won't make counter moves to make sure they don't lose a penny at their end is fooling themselves.
But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be brought under public scrutiny.
Your statement is pure supposition. If you look at actual effective tax rates on rich folks as per yesterday's NYT, you will see that in fact rich folks are paying considerably less than they were 30 years ago. On top of that, those rates did not correlate with lesser job growth. Of course, one need only compare tax rates and employment in the clinton era vs Bush/Obama to see that you would make the exact opposite case to yours. Welcome to the wonderful world of evidence.
If only this were true. The inverse, of course, would be the lowering of taxes = an equal amount in the raising of salaries. Where are the jobs that were supposed to be create due to GWB/GOP's two (that's 1,2) tax cuts in 2001 and 2003? They're in China and India. Personal income tax rates (at least at the levels here in the US) have little to do with job creation.
The rich made moves to ensure that their wealth increased after the Bush tax cuts, and did nothing to improve the economy for the rest of us. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. The rich ALWAYS look out for themselves.
Let me add that I favor a small income tax increase on some of the middle class, also.
But if they have to pay taxes they will stop being nice.
Besides, 1/2 of the people don't even pay income taxes. Lets tax them first.
Exactly.
Class warfare aside, do you think that billionaires deserve to pay less in taxes than you?
Curious to hear what you believe the "real" problems are in this country
(a growing chasm between the wealthy and the poor not being one of them?)
I'm not sure I fully understand this. If your country carries on the way it is, both rich and poor will suffer in exactly the same way? So, those who are currently wealthy will drop to the same standard of living as the poor, or lower? Or when you say "fucked" do you mean in relative terms?
The real problem in our country is our political system and the thread title is a perfect example of that problem. All this shit does is shift blame here and there without addressing issues.
If this is where things are headed, isn't it in everyone's benefit to support a system where everyone can enjoy the same quality of life?
So how de we do it? What needs to change?
Which is why a flat tax is a bad idea. The more progressive the tax system the more it encourages social (and more importantly) income mobility.
So we agree. "Class Warfare" gets people's attention and actually solving the problems of the world gets crickets.
I think we're fucked!