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.
If I double my income but net no additional money, why would I want to work more to increase my income? This is the problem with a progressive tax rate. The more you increase taxes on higher incomes, the less motivated people are to make that additional income. And oftentimes obtaining that additional income will require employing another person, which means more jobs.
Marginal tax rates don't work that way.
Show me a 100% marginal tax bracket.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1
Business doesn't work without money invested in it. Trust me on this one - I work in business.
Cool story. Would you like a cookie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1
And it's not just Wall Street investors. I've got money in the market too. So do you, probably. What do you plan to do with that money when it no longer is profitable to hold it due to taxes? Depend on Social Security in your retirement? Good luck with that.
It is always profitable to hold onto money, regardless of taxes. That's the advantage of unearned income. If I hold onto $1,000, even $0.01 is considered a profit for doing nothing. Terrible, terrible argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1
Citation needed. I think most jobs today that "require" a college degree do not actually need one. And the skills of reading, writing and arithmetic used to be learned by the end of 8th grade. Nowadays many high school graduates don't seem to have these skills. There's something deeply wrong with our education system, and giving students free college won't fix it.
It absolutely will fix it. Which argument are you tackling? Our high school graduates don't have these skills because they are bled dry by crony politicians. I'll tell you exactly what is wrong with our education system; we use it to subsidize the Prison Industrial Complex. High schools in black and brown neighborhoods are sabotaged and defunded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1
The college education system is wasteful, corrupt, and broken. I see no reason to continue to fund this system. What about moving beyond an education system that hasn't changed since the ancient Greeks to a 21st century system of learning?
....or we can stop throwing in the towel and try to FIX what is broken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1
Ah, the Bandwagon Fallacy. Just because everything else is doing it doesn't mean it's correct? I thought we had grown up and didn't suffer from peer pressure anymore.
Nope, read what I wrote again. The premise of my argument was not that other countries are doing it so we should too. My argument was that tuition should be free because it creates an incentive for education AND other countries are reinforcing my hypothesis.
Good for you. I got my degree as a personal investment in myself. You get the job because of what you bring to the table. The degree is just one tool of many in your toolkit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1
You've yet to prove that it's necessary.
Education can be obtained outside of the 4 walls of a university education. I've found I've learned far more outside of college than in. And while I learned quite a bit in college, it was due to my attitude of being a lifelong learner, not due the the education itself.
That wasn't my argument, but continue with the strawman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1
You can't force people to think critically if they don't want to. And college doesn't change that one way or the other.
I'm aware of that. That's why our display of American conservatism is so self-defeating. It isn't just a college issue; our education has dipped below the OECD average across all metrics.
If I double my income but net no additional money, why would I want to work more to increase my income? This is the problem with a progressive tax rate. The more you increase taxes on higher incomes, the less motivated people are to make that additional income. And oftentimes obtaining that additional income will require employing another person, which means more jobs.
Business doesn't work without money invested in it. Trust me on this one - I work in business.
And it's not just Wall Street investors. I've got money in the market too. So do you, probably. What do you plan to do with that money when it no longer is profitable to hold it due to taxes? Depend on Social Security in your retirement? Good luck with that.
Citation needed. I think most jobs today that "require" a college degree do not actually need one. And the skills of reading, writing and arithmetic used to be learned by the end of 8th grade. Nowadays many high school graduates don't seem to have these skills. There's something deeply wrong with our education system, and giving students free college won't fix it.
The college education system is wasteful, corrupt, and broken. I see no reason to continue to fund this system. What about moving beyond an education system that hasn't changed since the ancient Greeks to a 21st century system of learning?
Ah, the Bandwagon Fallacy. Just because everything else is doing it doesn't mean it's correct? I thought we had grown up and didn't suffer from peer pressure anymore.
Education can be obtained outside of the 4 walls of a university education. I've found I've learned far more outside of college than in. And while I learned quite a bit in college, it was due to my attitude of being a lifelong learner, not due the the education itself.
You can't force people to think critically if they don't want to. And college doesn't change that one way or the other.
Free tuition is unrealistic and can be a disaster. we are ready have a lot of college degree holders who can't find jobs and a lot of jobs that don't need a college degree but require a college degree. Why? Because there are so many college degree holders. Increasing the number of college degrees would only decrees the average value of a college degree. It is wrong to assume that given more people degrees will create more jobs or raising people salaries. It doesn't. You can give A to all your students and it doesn't change a thing in the job market.
Hi education does need to change but not to become free. Higher Ed should be cheaper. It should not cost this much to get a college degree. Nor does w college degree necessarily prepare people for a career. We need students to learn more marketable skills and stop borrowing money on a privileged but worthless education.
Tomorrows good jobs are specialized skills jobs. A general liberal education isn't going to make the cut. I hope young people choose their majors and careers carefully with their financial future in mind, and not act like spoiled children waiting for adults to pay their bills.
You should introduce different form of taxation. Not rich people paying tax to government only, but every rich (income which is more than certain level) should pay tax to the poor around them. Like
Islamic religion has ZAKAT-CHARITY This can only minimize the gab between rich and poor. This will also increase the human bond, respect and love for each other.
Free tuition is unrealistic and can be a disaster. we are ready have a lot of college degree holders who can't find jobs and a lot of jobs that don't need a college degree but require a college degree. Why? Because there are so many college degree holders. Increasing the number of college degrees would only decrees the average value of a college degree. It is wrong to assume that given more people degrees will create more jobs or raising people salaries. It doesn't. You can give A to all your students and it doesn't change a thing in the job market.
Hi education does need to change but not to become free. Higher Ed should be cheaper. It should not cost this much to get a college degree. Nor does w college degree necessarily prepare people for a career. We need students to learn more marketable skills and stop borrowing money on a privileged but worthless education.
Tomorrows good jobs are specialized skills jobs. A general liberal education isn't going to make the cut. I hope young people choose their majors and careers carefully with their financial future in mind, and not act like spoiled children waiting for adults to pay their bills.
What jobs are marketable skill jobs because that tern marketable can change at any time. The same thing will happen though if a bunch of people go for those jobs like if a bunch of people get college degrees there are simply not enough jobs for everyone. Now I am not saying that what you are saying is not a good idea for many people but it is not a solution to get everyone out of poverty.
You should introduce different form of taxation. Not rich people paying tax to government only, but every rich (income which is more than certain level) should pay tax to the poor around them. Like
Islamic religion has ZAKAT-CHARITY This can only minimize the gab between rich and poor. This will also increase the human bond, respect and love for each other.
Sounds like a way to dramatically increase the friction between the rich and the poor. Helping those who are worse off than yourself should be a voluntary action, not a function of government.
Sounds like a way to dramatically increase the friction between the rich and the poor. Helping those who are worse off than yourself should be a voluntary action, not a function of government.
Shouldn't the same principle apply in the reverse? That helping the rich should be a voluntary action, not a function of government?
Which is the more dangerous-
A: forcing poor people to make rich people even richer through corporate welfare, fiat currency, fractional reserve banking, usury, and limited liabilities- to the tune of trillions,
or
B: forcing rich people to make poor people less poor- the the tune of hundreds?
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,186,228 times
Reputation: 57820
Quote:
Originally Posted by RecentGrad1
Sounds like a way to dramatically increase the friction between the rich and the poor. Helping those who are worse off than yourself should be a voluntary action, not a function of government.
Yes, and the rich are going to keep as much of their money as possible (as do we all) so if they are taxed even more to help the poor (as they are now) they will find ways to offset that. It may be laying off poor or middle class employees from their companies, more off-shoring to save money, or just spending less on other things which will also hurt the poor that work in retail and services. I have no idea what the solution is, but this is not it.
Shouldn't the same principle apply in the reverse? That helping the rich should be a voluntary action, not a function of government?
Which is the more dangerous-
A: forcing poor people to make rich people even richer through corporate welfare, fiat currency, fractional reserve banking, usury, and limited liabilities- to the tune of trillions,
or
B: forcing rich people to make poor people less poor- the the tune of hundreds?
What about cutting out both? I have no interest in corporate welfare OR personal welfare.
Cut out wealth redistribution as a function of government and not only will you see donations by the rich increase, but they'll be more effective, not funneled through by layers of bureaucracy. The US appears on the top of the "most generous nation" list every year. The problem of making the government take care of the poor is we can then ignore them, rather than taking their issues into our own hands. It's also why you don't see the poor getting out of poverty - the government has no interest in reducing its number of dependent citizens.
What about cutting out both? I have no interest in corporate welfare OR personal welfare.
Cut out wealth redistribution as a function of government and not only will you see donations by the rich increase, but they'll be more effective, not funneled through by layers of bureaucracy. The US appears on the top of the "most generous nation" list every year. The problem of making the government take care of the poor is we can then ignore them, rather than taking their issues into our own hands. It's also why you don't see the poor getting out of poverty - the government has no interest in reducing its number of dependent citizens.
I've disagreed with you in many other posts, but on this one I agree wholeheartedly.
It also bears mentioning that the US forces its citizens to support other governments. That's not right, either.
The way to do it is by empowering the lower classes to increase productivity, thereby pushing themselves up, without pulling the rich and middle class down.
1) end collective bargaining.
2) end all subsidies to all private industries.
3) slash state payroll by half and taxes accordingly.
4) limit items that could be purchased by snap debit cards to veggies, rice, beans.
5) repeal the gun ban and allow gun ownership as pet second amendment.
6) void pension benefits going forward.
This would incentivise people to produce. Productivity is what improves our quality of life.
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.
