Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is the endgame of raising taxes on the poor? I keep hearing this 'skin in the game' line but what do you think that will really accomplish? Some dirt poor person barely making rent is going to change their habits because they have to fork over a few hundred or thousand a year? What habits do you think they need to change? Not everyone is CEO material, there will always be a need for menial labor. Why punish these people more just because you want the already rich to keep their money?
The actual concept is that it takes the same amount of effort to build a 100k a year business that it takes to build a 10 million dollar a year business. So why the hell would you ever want to build a 100k business? The business revenue size has to do with market size - why waste your time building a business in a small market that has limited potential when you can build a business with the same amount of effort that has more revenue potential.
I dumbed down the message - but that is the essence. If I was making a lower salary, I would do everything in my power to figure out how to make a higher salary. And people can make lots of excuses about what that is unrealistic in today's economy etc... but there are plenty of people who were down and out in this economy and have turned things around. Its really just the victim mentality and the street fighter mentality. Successful people are the ones who can get up after they have been kicked and knocked down.
The actual concept is that it takes the same amount of effort to build a 100k a year business that it takes to build a 10 million dollar a year business. So why the hell would you ever want to build a 100k business?
That would be my question. Why the hell would you not be making $60K/day? Or, do you? It would take the same effort compared to whatever you do, right?
That's exactly it - regardless of your success level or lack of success, there's always more to learn and opportunities to find to improve your situation. I'm always looking for ways to improve and learn.
That's exactly it - regardless of your success level or lack of success, there's always more to learn and opportunities to find to improve your situation. I'm always looking for ways to improve and learn.
Okay, so now we've moved from "same" to "more" because you couldn't see the idea you preached applied to yourself.
What is the endgame of raising taxes on the poor? I keep hearing this 'skin in the game' line but what do you think that will really accomplish? Some dirt poor person barely making rent is going to change their habits because they have to fork over a few hundred or thousand a year? What habits do you think they need to change? Not everyone is CEO material, there will always be a need for menial labor. Why punish these people more just because you want the already rich to keep their money?
Excellent question, and I will give you the answer.
There has been an orchetrated movement to get a voting majority of citizens into the "don't pay income tax" category. So far, it has peaked at 47%, and is down to 45% (2010 figures). When that number, exceeds 50%, those who don't pay taxes can outvote those who do pay taxes, and guess what they will be voting for? All sorts of give-away programs funded not by them (cause they don't pay income tax), but by the minority that does.
Only by making them pay taxes, and thus feel the impact of excessive levels of taxation that they might otherwise gleefully vote for, can federal spending/taxation be kept in some sort of check.
If they don't pay income tax, it is all "other people's money" (OPM), and when you are voting to spend OPM, the sky is the limit.
Excellent question, and I will give you the answer.
There has been an orchetrated movement to get a voting majority of citizens into the "don't pay income tax" category. So far, it has peaked at 47%, and is down to 45% (2010 figures). When that number, exceeds 50%, those who don't pay taxes can outvote those who do pay taxes, and guess what they will be voting for? All sorts of give-away programs funded not by them (cause they don't pay income tax), but by the minority that does.
Only by making them pay taxes, and thus feel the impact of excessive levels of taxation that they might otherwise gleefully vote for, can federal spending/taxation be kept in some sort of check.
If they don't pay income tax, it is all "other people's money" (OPM), and when you are voting to spend OPM, the sky is the limit.
What do you call people who live to work in not self-interest, but in others' interests? Besides, are you also suggesting that these people choose to earn less? Because if they didn't, they would be paying taxes, no?
What do you call people who live to work in not self-interest, but in others' interests? Besides, are you also suggesting that these people choose to earn less? Because if they didn't, they would be paying taxes, no?
I don't think even you can figure out what that means. Try again.
However, instead of trying to deny the truth I laid at your doorstep, you would be far better served accepting its truth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
