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.
It's okay, I don't look down on the shortsightedness or your failures in comprehending compound interest. Most Americans don't realize they'll be caddy owners when the time comes.
As far as reading up on it, "The new proposals by this gang is to broaden the tax base by including more peoples plans into this new source of tax revenue".
The number Woody gave are the numbers that would be used if that portion started now, however they will be higher in 2018 and beyond because they are indexed for inflation.....
like it or not the fact is that its those with money that keep the rest of us going.
with a country dependent on consumer spending to the tune of 70% of gdp we need those with money to spend it. 80% of spending they say comes from 20% of the population.
while not many jobs were created we certainly dont need another round of job losses if profits get squeezed with higher taxes.
want to get less of something ,tax it. thats how it works.
we do have to strike a balance as no one wants to give up anything but we all have to give up something.
But they don't, not really. I know the theory - call it supply-side economics, trickle-down, whatever: The theory is that richer taxpayers have a upper limit on actual consumption. After they make more than that limit, their money is saved and/or invested. If the money is invested in bonds, it pays for some large capital project. If it is put in a bank account or CD, it lowers interest rates (bank has more cheap capital) without the central bank having to loosen monetary policy. If it is invested in stocks, it is another form of direct capital injection for a company which can be used for more capital investment.
With the capital investment from bonds, companies can more easily grow and build things like factories as capital is cheap. It is like someone offering you a 0.5% loan. Even if you don't need the money outright, you take it because you can generally get a better return than 0.5% from it. With these new factories comes new jobs and higher production. With higher production comes lower prices and eased inflation as the market is flooded with goods.
The Republicans love this theory because it worked wonders for Reagan in the early 80s and for some reason they think it will work for them again today.
The problem today is though, that it is no longer 1981:
- We don't have extremely high inflation (or arguably any inflation).
- We don't have a budget which can handle a massive revenue loss.
- The upper tax brackets are no longer at 70%, so you cannot essentially "transfer" anywhere near the same amount of capital from the government (tax) sector to the private (investment) sector. We already played that card.
Individuals and corporations at the top have been profiting immensely from decades of this thinking, to the point where corporations have record profits and plenty of capital to throw around, but are not hiring. Why? Let's look at it this way: When would I pay someone 20K a year to work for me to produce widgets? If, and only if, I reasonably expect to end up with more than 20K at the end of the year. If nobody is able to afford my widgets, you can give me as many tax cuts as you like, but I'm never going to hire a widgetmaker.
Ofcourse instead of acknowledging this and getting money in ordinary people's pockets, the government keeps giving money or tax breaks to corporations and rich people. This can not solve the problem.
The current problem then, can be summed up in one short sentence: People don't have any money.
But they don't, not really. I know the theory - call it supply-side economics, trickle-down, whatever: The theory is that richer taxpayers have a upper limit on actual consumption. After they make more than that limit, their money is saved and/or invested. If the money is invested in bonds, it pays for some large capital project. If it is put in a bank account or CD, it lowers interest rates (bank has more cheap capital) without the central bank having to loosen monetary policy. If it is invested in stocks, it is another form of direct capital injection for a company which can be used for more capital investment.
With the capital investment from bonds, companies can more easily grow and build things like factories as capital is cheap. It is like someone offering you a 0.5% loan. Even if you don't need the money outright, you take it because you can generally get a better return than 0.5% from it. With these new factories comes new jobs and higher production. With higher production comes lower prices and eased inflation as the market is flooded with goods.
The Republicans love this theory because it worked wonders for Reagan in the early 80s and for some reason they think it will work for them again today.
The problem today is though, that it is no longer 1981:
- We don't have extremely high inflation (or arguably any inflation).
- We don't have a budget which can handle a massive revenue loss.
- The upper tax brackets are no longer at 70%, so you cannot essentially "transfer" anywhere near the same amount of capital from the government (tax) sector to the private (investment) sector. We already played that card.
Individuals and corporations at the top have been profiting immensely from decades of this thinking, to the point where corporations have record profits and plenty of capital to throw around, but are not hiring. Why? Let's look at it this way: When would I pay someone 20K a year to work for me to produce widgets? If, and only if, I reasonably expect to end up with more than 20K at the end of the year. If nobody is able to afford my widgets, you can give me as many tax cuts as you like, but I'm never going to hire a widgetmaker.
Ofcourse instead of acknowledging this and getting money in ordinary people's pockets, the government keeps giving money or tax breaks to corporations and rich people. This can not solve the problem.
The current problem then, can be summed up in one short sentence: People don't have any money.
It does work, has been working just as they promised it would over the last 30 years and has benefiting many workers by raising the standerds of living and giving them increased purchasing power to buy things they never dreamed of owning. New factories were built, huge capitol projects for infrstructure completed and continue to be planned and funded.
They just forgot to mention it would not happen here, in the United States.
It does work, has been working just as they promised it would over the last 30 years and has benefiting many workers by raising the standerds of living and giving them increased purchasing power to buy things they never dreamed of owning. New factories were built, huge capitol projects for infrstructure completed and continue to be planned and funded.
They just forgot to mention it would not happen here, in the United States.
Very nicely done!
The United States has a system of government which has many good qualities but unfortunately has proven to vulnerable to special interest groups. And it amazes me how many people are still falling for the same tired propoganda instead of thinking for themselves.
The United States has a system of government which has many good qualities but unfortunately has proven to vulnerable to special interest groups. And it amazes me how many people are still falling for the same tired propoganda instead of thinking for themselves.
That is a fact. Special interests to control both parties. All those who are in power hold the tax hatchet to the throats of all of us. The only way to put the power back where it belongs, WITH THE PEOPLE, and prevent the favoritism which is going on (ie: General Electric) is to enact The Fair Tax or something close to it where EVERYONE pays taxes. You will never see again see a major corporation like GE pay ZERO TAXES!!! Folks, Washington is addicted to our money and think nothing of spending more and more of it. We must end withholding of income taxes, and we MUST end the ability of our representatives to benefit from this system of taxation. We must end the IRS! Under this system you only pay when you consume. Do the research. The bill (HR.25) is in committee now. There is a hearing on 07/26/2011. Call your congressman and senator and tell them you want them to support The Fair Tax.
Yet reduce mortgage interest benefits for middle class families doing their tax returns and other so called tax benefits.
They don't think that's the solution. They aren't interested in a solution. They work for the people who pay them, the wealthy. Of course they will lower taxes for the wealthy. In order for things to make more sense you need to stop pretending this is a democracy. When viewed in a different light, ie, the whole system is corrupt top to bottom and the wealthy own this whole government, things make more sense.
51
So what you are saying is bill gates was a rich man when he went into business thanks to all the PERSONAL tax breaks the Govt gave him? So goes for the rest of the rich right?Giving Bill Gates a Tax break on his Personal income would do nothing for the middle class.What do you think he will do with his new found income ?hire a new maid?maybe a new gardener?How does a tax reduction on PERSONAL INCOME HELP THE WORKING MAN?????
That is a fact. Special interests to control both parties. All those who are in power hold the tax hatchet to the throats of all of us. The only way to put the power back where it belongs, WITH THE PEOPLE, and prevent the favoritism which is going on (ie: General Electric) is to enact The Fair Tax or something close to it where EVERYONE pays taxes. You will never see again see a major corporation like GE pay ZERO TAXES!!!
Your heart is in the right place it seems but Fair Tax, which is just a national sales tax, is not the answer. The concept is pretty well eviscerated. For example, the only people who will do well under the plan are the very poor and the wealthy - the middle class, or anyone earning more than $15,000 but less than $200,000, will pay more.
Folks, Washington is addicted to our money and think nothing of spending more and more of it.
This is a popular misconception, but government spending vs. GDP has not gone up significantly over the years.
Moreover, the vast, vast majority of the Federal budget is spent on three things - the military, social security, and Medicare. The latter two are funded by FICA taxes, not income taxes, social security is solvent until 2035 (and can be easily made solvent indefinitely via raising or eliminating the maximum income to which payroll taxes apply).
The government has a revenue problem, not a spending problem. The easy solution is raising taxes on the wealthy and eliminating corporate tax loopholes. Not to some extreme level - eliminating the Bush tax cuts or returning tax rates to the Clinton era would do nearly enough for the foreseeable future.
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.
. 
Special Interests
