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.
Which takes a whopping 2.6% of our GDP. How will we ever survive? All that money thats used to help lower our homelessness, and malnutrition. Oh the horror.
FYI the benefits of preventing malnutrition alone are probably worth it.
I love how you guys constantly change the goal posts of raw dollars to % to budget to % of gdp to appease your agenda
over 1.3 trillion goes to social programs(ie 300 billion to medicaid, 400 billion to medicare, 500 billion to welfare/wic/foodstamps, etc) and that's not counting social security
that's a full third (33%) of the budget and well over 5% of the GDP (which averages about 14-18 trillion)
but when you guys talk about defense spending you want to use raw numbers...meanwhile less than 700 billion is the defense budget.....and if you look at % of GDP, we spend less (3.4%) than many other countries, france even spends MORE percentage of their GDP on their military, china spends 3.9% of its gdp on military.....france's defense budget is 500 million euro...while their gdp is about 1.4 trillion(((hmm....they spend a full third of their GDP on defense)))
If you bring back the rates then you bring back all the deductions.
The younger crowd seem to forget that part.
Reagan was a movie star, during that period of being in the 90% tax bracket, yet he somehow managed to buy a nice home in Pacific Palisades and a ranch in the San Fernando valley, long before buying his ranch up near Santa Barbara.
That's irrelevant. CEOs shouldn't make 2,000 times more than their employees if you care about a vibrant economy.
This is comical. Really it is...
CEO wages is a terribly insignificant and irrelevant barometer of the economy. I would bet you could take all the wages of CEO's who's company gains most of its revenue from the US and combine them you would get less than 1 billion dollars. Now compare that to a 16.77 trillion USD US GDP. Its not even one-one hundredth of a percent.
Location: When you take flak it means you are on target
7,646 posts, read 9,951,921 times
Reputation: 16466
The govt should just take all the money and property of anyone who has anything and give it to drug addicts, welfare moms and foreign dictators. Isn't that the new amerikan wasy?
Taxes do not fund the Federal Government. The Federal government is monetarily sovereign; it can pay any bill of any size at any time. It is not constrained by what it takes in via taxes.
Now that we have established that, let's dig into the true reason why progressive taxes are necessary. Progressive taxation exists to reduce income inequality and discourage excess hoarding. Since the top tax rate has been sliced by over half, CEO pay has skyrocketed. Do you think we would pay CEOs $1 million+ salaries if the top tax rates returned to 91%? Taxes are all about incentives for behavior. By reducing the top tax rate, we stopped discouraging larger and larger salaries at the top.
Contrary to the liberal myth, progressive taxation is not a prescription for wealth inequality. We cannot tax wealth through income taxes. Progressive taxation is solely about income inequality.
"Taxes do not fund the Federal Government."
Good, NOW we can eliminate taxes COMPLETELY. since the gov't DOESN'T need it.
Isnt it far better then lying in the streets wishing for death, or being so poor that you get ill over and over, or be malnourished? Its dignity....very minimal, but dignity.
It is simply not the responsibility of the state to provide this.
Charitable entities, religious institutions, the rich philanthropist, and everyday people have traditionally provided the means people don't wind up like the above. People contributed of their own free will, and there was a genuine sense of community.
Enter the government forcibly (and often wastefully) redistributing peoples money and you get the fcked up situation we have today with people wholly dependent on welfare, a middle class hating the less fortunate, and taxes that inhibit the ability to even be charitable.
It is simply not the responsibility of the state to provide this.
Charitable entities, religious institutions, the rich philanthropist, and everyday people have traditionally provided the means people don't wind up like the above. People contributed of their own free will, and there was a genuine sense of community.
Enter the government forcibly (and often wastefully) redistributing peoples money and you get the fcked up situation we have today with people wholly dependent on welfare, a middle class hating the less fortunate, and taxes that inhibit the ability to even be charitable.
There is s much charities can do and Welfare has limits.
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.
