Just an excellent way of explaining why were are screwed.
Would be nice to have that script.
Wart
That was a great video!!!
Obviously we need spending cuts, anyone who states otherwise is either ignorant or suffering from cognitive dissidence . That said, it's best not to blindly accept his figures. Trust but verify.
What's cool about that model is that 99% of the public would have to pay no taxes at all.
The economic boost of the middle-class being unleashed would cause the economy to grow so much that there would still be room for plenty more profit!
I say let's do it!
"That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E
"The economic boost of the middle-class being unleashed would cause the economy to grow so much that there would still be room for plenty more profit!"
And, once "unleashed" they could then become successful and rich and...reviled for it by those less hard working and successful than them. And then, they could be stripped of the fruits of their labor. Good plan.
Only on income above $250K -- everyone would keep every penny below $250K. I have no problem with a "maximum wage." We already have a minimum wage, so why not?Originally Posted by T2K
I totally support the Democrats' current strategy to lower taxes for the lower- and middle-clases and paying for it by sticking it to the rich. There's no good reason for anyone to be raking in over 5 TIMES as much income as the median income earner. No one's that special.
"That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E
What's cool about that model is that 99% of the public would have to pay no taxes at all.
The economic boost of the middle-class being unleashed would cause the economy to grow so much that there would still be room for plenty more profit!
I say let's do it!
Are you just playing dumb for the crowd or is this how you really are? You strip away all the wealth and the job creators are gone.
Lets look at the numbers once again shall we! The bottom 47% pays nothing in income tax, and actually gets free money from the govt, via real tax payers.
The top 1% pays 38% of all income tax. You are in favor of these socialist plans cause you are one of those with your hand out.
In High school I thought Paradise Lost meant no more Crap games!
Member Since 07/2002
So how did they do it then? How did the rich get rich? What incentive will they people who would otherwise be rich to be productive if they will not be rewarded for it?
"if you jokers can't handle Bluedog's comments you are nothing but a bunch of woosies. There's a real simple way of solving your frustration. There is a place for you to click on called "Log Out" in the upper right portion of your monitor screen while you are at this website. Just click on that and don't ever log back in here and your problems are solved." --Pogo
Proof positive that you have zero understanding of economics and in particular why the minimum wage has the opposite effect of why it was enacted.Not that i did'nt allready know that about you.
Has anyone ever asked you what it's like to be stupid?
Just curious.
History has a severe case of stuttering complicated by chronic hiccups.
It always repeats itself and it never fails that something will go horribly wrong along the way.
Direct democracy is a gang rape. Eight men vote to rape one woman and the woman has to accept it because the majority decided that it was ok. A constitutional republic on the other hand is eight men and one woman with a full mag. Think about it for a while until it hurts your head.
I laugh when I read or hear that anyone earning $250K or more is "rich".
Being around so many doctors, and having a daughter who shadowed a brain surgeon, I know that the surgeon's malpractice insurance (because he is human and not God) runs $200,000 per year. To pay taxes on that at the 28% rate he has to earn another $56,000 which now has him above that magical $250,000 rich threshold. Unfortunately he has less money than someone on welfare unless he earns more just to pay his staff, the hospital fees, his continuing education fees, and state and local taxes. I assume he would also have to earn enough money to afford even a modest house and the costs associated with that.
So a brain surgeon could actually earn enough to make people march on his house, and his actual take home after expenses would be less than someone working at a profession what doesn't require the education and brain power needed to be a brain surgeon.
Of course, the idea of tort reform to fix the medical cost issues would only be a dent in the uncontrolled spending, but my point is that earning $300,000 does not always mean one is "rich".
Imanaknut, that insurance usually isn't paid by the doctors, it's paid by their employer. But for those doctors who do pay themselves it's tax deductible as a business expense, so it wouldn't count as income either way.
To be clear though, I am absolutely NOT supportive of the idea of taking all profits/income after 250K. That would just be stupid. There would be little to no incentive to expand a business, people could simply take the rest of the year off after making a comfortable 300K, prices would go up and some rather valuable services would go away.
I'm fine with a 2-3% increase on the top tier, but it should be tempered with serious attempts at balanced budgets through spending cuts and cost savings measures.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks