Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-29-2012, 01:39 PM
 
17,400 posts, read 11,972,033 times
Reputation: 16152

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post
Sure, I agree, then why should we give them a tax cut? And why should we assume that people like Oprah should have about 10000 times as much political clout as any other citizen? The point of a CEO is not to make the country stronger, better, safer, cleaner, more just,etc. So why do them extra favors? They seem to be doing fine for themselves.

Even if Oprah were paying 40% in taxes, she would be spectacularly wealthy and successful. Cut her taxes to 13%, and how is that going to juice the economy, pay off the deficit, and create jobs?
Who is giving "them" a tax cut that nobody else gets? What extra favors do they get?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-29-2012, 01:43 PM
 
9,659 posts, read 10,225,568 times
Reputation: 3225
Well people in power can use those powers to get what they want, even if it isn't good for the public.


Remember profit is profit and those in charge are free to take as much as they want.

It's the same thing with the government, I mean sure you have a "taxed enough already" party but then you have this mass of uneducated and uninformed voters who don't think about the real issues and vote however they are manipulated to vote. The result is you have a government that is free to spend what they spend because they have already been elected and are betting on the fact that they are getting reelected. They are free to create any amount of debt and are free to charge any amount of taxes they feel that will keep getting them reelected.

It's the same story with business, they are free to use all the loopholes, take advantage of all the workers as they possibly can.

That's the nature of greed and you can do a whole lot more damage with greed if you have the resources to do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2012, 02:23 PM
 
78,385 posts, read 60,579,949 times
Reputation: 49663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix C View Post
I do not buy into the class warfare rhetoric. I know a number of very wealthy people and they do not plot how to make money by ruining the lives of their employees. They just plan on how to make more money.
If you had read the whole thread you would know that I'm pointing out that the class warfare rhetoric is just that.

This is why Ms. Winfrey is getting a free pass on laying off workers while hauling in 165million this year....

This is all going to go away, just like protests about Guantanamo bay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2012, 02:25 PM
 
78,385 posts, read 60,579,949 times
Reputation: 49663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post
I don't think anyone cares is a rich person lays off some employees, but the responses do call into question the logic of cutting taxes on said rich person to create jobs. That is now what CEOs are about. It is usually just the opposite. Jobs = Costs.
WTH man, I guess you missed the link I posted earlier in the thread to this very CD forum, ripping on a Verizon CEO who made 22mil and laid off workers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2012, 02:26 PM
 
9,659 posts, read 10,225,568 times
Reputation: 3225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
If you had read the whole thread you would know that I'm pointing out that the class warfare rhetoric is just that.

This is why Ms. Winfrey is getting a free pass on laying off workers while hauling in 165million this year....

This is all going to go away, just like protests about Guantanamo bay.
Well what does it mean not getting a free pass laying off workers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2012, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Apple Valley Calif
7,474 posts, read 22,880,812 times
Reputation: 5682
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Will Obama dare tell Oprah that "she didn't build that" ?
I think obama lost Oprah long ago. He tossed her under the bus after the election and they are no longer buds...
Like he tends to do, once you can no longer help him, you're toast...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2012, 02:54 PM
 
78,385 posts, read 60,579,949 times
Reputation: 49663
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHurricaneKid View Post
Well what does it mean not getting a free pass laying off workers?
<Points to thread about Verizon CEO>
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2012, 03:00 PM
 
9,659 posts, read 10,225,568 times
Reputation: 3225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
<Points to thread about Verizon CEO>
He laid off the people, he made money, we didn't stop him. His free pass is just as free as the person mentioned in this thread. Just because some folks complain about how certain people are greedy by firing people to make profits, doesn't mean that the person making the profit isn't getting a free pass.

These complainers don't do much, they aren't the ones to strike or ask for tax reform or make an effort to bring back jobs to this country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2012, 03:28 PM
 
Location: My little patch of Earth
6,193 posts, read 5,367,423 times
Reputation: 3059
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
I see no problem with her getting paid 165 million as long as she is taxed on 35% of it. That is still a very healty income.
She probably hasn't paid income taxes in ten years......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2012, 03:35 PM
 
29,981 posts, read 42,926,416 times
Reputation: 12828
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrench409 View Post
She probably hasn't paid income taxes in ten years......
I would suspect that is accurate for someone of her wealth. Most likely she is living of the interest of one of her private charitable trusts as those of signifcant wealth are able to create and fund.

This is what is so disingenuous about watching those like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates suggesting taxes be raised on those earning $250K or more. They live off the interest of their charitable trusts and any raise in income taxes will not affect them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:58 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top