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.
So stronger investment growth under higher taxes. Thanks.
You are flip flopping and you dont even understand how..
one posting, tax cuts are government spending, the next posting, high taxes encourage investing, thereby eliminate taxes since the money is reinvested and not converted to income, thus not taxed.
Make up your mind on what you believe and stick with it..
Many know that high tax rates encourage things like we seen under Andrew Carnegie, where there was never an incentive to cash out and pay taxes. You get even more uber wealthy under high taxes because uber wealthy arent going to pay their dam taxes.. they will go through great lenghts to avoid them, like Buffet does..
This is another of the "not understanding economics" statements.
Even the extremely wealth do not "hoard" $'s. Their money is invested somewhere and does 2 thing. It earns interest for the owner of those $'s and those invested $'s provide an unlimited number of jobs for others through business loans, operating funds for business, research and development and many other avenues which create jobs and wealth for others.
One of the reasons for today's stagnant economy is that BO and his Dem party have tried to redistribute $'s from those who work for same to those who don't. That depresses the economy.
Want to fix it? The get rid of IRS and income tax on all levels and move to a consumption tax. Then everyone pays for what they buy, it catches all the illegal $'s such as drug income and lifts the depression off of expanding business, keeping it here in the U.S. and keeping earnings here in the U.S. instead of off-shore. Win! Win! Win! ... Well, except for those who think they should not have to work and someone else should pay their bills
The above is economic malpractice. There is no historical evidence that the current tax-rates depress the economy. In fact, the historical evidence says the opposite. If one looks at the high tax periods, 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1990s, we see high taxes coupled with high investment and large economic gains.
When we look at relatively low tax periods, such as the 2000s, we see weak economic gains.
Moreover, lorrysda claimed, "the reason we have a stagnant economy is that BO and his Dem party have tried to redistribute $'s from those who work for same to those who don't." Where, exactly, are those great redistributive programs put in place by Obama? What I see is the same programs we have had for a generation or more.
What I also see, by every economic measure, is that the economy now is far better than the economy that Mr. Obama inherited from his predecessor.
Sigh. Welcome to a modern day economy. I know this might surprise you, but just because you say nonsense like this, doesn't make it suddenly true. 1.2 trillon - 1.8 trillion will not fund the 3.9 trillion in spending.
Now....could we cut spending? Absolutely! And think we should in some areas....but theres no way we could cut it in half as you suggest. The idea is ludicrous.
Federal spending has almost doubled in the last decade.. how much better are we now than just 10 years ago? Not much..
Conservatives say a tax break is a taxpayer getting to keep more of their money.
I say a tax break is government transferring money from taxpayer A to taxpayer B.
how does allowing me to keep my money, transfer money to your pocket.. Ooh thats right, because I'll spend that money, thus creating a job that maybe one day, you'll fill if you ever decide to stop flipping burgers.
If everything is going above your head, just raise your hand. Someone will call on you.
And then you have others who just post nonsense of a web forum believing they were not only called upon, but actually what they said is true, despite the fact that they put it out there for millions to laugh at them.. Lets compare shall we
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen1110
In the business cycle with higher taxes, there was much more stronger investment growth than the business with lower taxes. I don't see how that's difficult to understand.
Which would directly dispute your notion that higher taxes would help with income and wealth inequality. you are arguing all of this and none of it makes sense..
As an individual who makes my living off investments, i can very well tell you that if you increase the tax rate I'm going to do my damnest to reinvest every dime I make, thus REDUCING the amount of tax revenues the federal government receives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen1110
Tax breaks are indeed, government spending through tax expenditures
Which is the exact opposite of what you just said in the paragraph above which is high taxes then equate to reinvestments because high taxes, if what you just said is true, means people reinvest their money rather than pay taxes on it.
All of it of course is nonsense, since the federal governments tax income runs about 18% of GDP regardless of the tax rate.. A fact you continue to ignore..
Always sounds like a funny way for the people who don't want to work to get more money.
How about getting an education, not doing drugs and getting a job distribution?
Maybe we call that "Get off your Azz" Distribution.
That's it????
Who knew it could be so easy to become wealthy ?!?!
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.
You are flip flopping and you dont even understand how..
