This is no surprise. The tinfoil hat people will have a field day with this information, However, this is mostly true. I could argue bias, however it just feels like a broken record that somebody needs to nudge the needle. Just like miracle Max. I offer to solve your problems with you paying me money.
You people act surprised to see that suddenly the rich are richer! Well they pay less taxes so of course they are richer! This is the whole point behind the tax cuts for the rich!
What did you people think would happen? That the rich would actually start spending because you gave them alittle more money?
Let me give you a little illustration about your so-called tax cuts for the rich. The Democrats proposed a new solution to taxes to solve the "problem" of tax-cuts for the rich. This illustration is borrowed from someone on the radio (can't remember who). Also please keep in mind that these numbers are fictional and just for illustration purposes.
Ok, so 50,000 people buy tickets to a baseball game. 1,000 of those people bought box seats for $300. 9,000 of those people bought really good seats right near the
I think the point of giving the middle and lower-class a larger portion of the tax cuts is the fact that the money they get back could make the difference in sending their children to college, or improving their standard of living.
The money will most likely make no immediate difference in the lifestyle of the upper-class.
But those tax cuts come out of the pockets of those who are better off. Since when is that fair? This is America. We aren't (or shouldn't be at least) a communistic society. That's the whole point of capitalism.
what about 'anything that takes away the money from some people who worked for it and gives it to other people who did absolutely nothing to earn it'?? Does that sound better?
That word you keep using, I do not believe it means what you think it means.
As to the point of fair, it most certainly is. The rich benefit _far_ more from everything from trade policies to custom loopholes in tax codes to the basic protections of civilization than the middle and lower classes do. Taxes are an attempt to redress the inherent inequalities of our current laws surrounding real and intellectual property, labor rights, and the inexpensive use of public land for corporate profit.
It's fair because higher taxes on the rich ensure that those who have benefited the most from the current social structure pay the most for it. If the US was conquered by another country, the rich would lose the most. If our economy collapsed and the US dollar underwent hyperinflation the rich would lose the most. If social order broke down and everyone was free to loot and murder the rich would lose the most.
Since the rich have the most to lose, it is only fair that they pay more to ensure the safety of
Look, do you think people with a billion dollars are just like you?
No, i don't but because they have so much more money than i do it doesn't matter if they don't invest it in the same way i do.
It depends on what definition of "more" that you use. The rich will lose more measured in a dollar amount, the middle class and poor will lose more measured in a "lifestyle" sense.
Let's say i have $10,000 invested in a college fund, and hyperinflation cuts the effective value of that amount in half. A millionair
If the goal of the government (or at least one of them) is to redistribute income (or to help the less fortunate), then they should institute a program designed to meet this goal, instead of using the tax code (i.e. the revenue-generating part of the government). I would think that if the government really cared about helping individuals with need, it would increase the standard deduction for individuals to somewhere in the neighborhood of $10K-20K (so that the government doesn't tax those in need at *al
I think the point of giving the middle and lower-class a larger portion of the tax cuts is the fact that the money they get back could make the difference in sending their children to college, or improving their standard of living.
But doing the hand-outs so arbitrarily does nothing to guarantee their success. Do people in government really think they have mastered economics so well that they can change the face of society with a poiticially-motivated tax system? The current tax system is insane and is s
For some odd reason there are a few people on slashdot who disapprove of that.
No one has to go to Bangalore. Only people who are so rigidly entrenched in the idea that nothing exists outside of Information Technology are so naive. If a person finds themselve priced out of a city, there is the whole Earth to choose from. Perhaps opportuniy is merely the next town over...perhaps it's Indiana. Whichever, there will be a place where a person can find a sustainable cost of living while figuring out where t
Because otherwise there won't be anyone living close enough to actually work at said grocery store.
The grocer would find that out pretty quick and raise their wages, due to there being no choice. We have to let the prices in cities work themselves out properly. Ultimately, that'll help keep the apartments from getting to $900/month in the first place, when fewer people are willing to relocate there, when many other expenses, such as groceries, go up in price. Eventually, the people who can truly live a
"Be there. Aloha."
-- Steve McGarret, _Hawaii Five-Oh_
Here we go. (Score:1)
Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:0, Flamebait)
You people act surprised to see that suddenly the rich are richer! Well they pay less taxes so of course they are richer! This is the whole point behind the tax cuts for the rich!
What did you people think would happen? That the rich would actually start spending because you gave them alittle more money?
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:2, Insightful)
Ok, so 50,000 people buy tickets to a baseball game.
1,000 of those people bought box seats for $300.
9,000 of those people bought really good seats right near the
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:3, Insightful)
The money will most likely make no immediate difference in the lifestyle of the upper-class.
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:1)
"To each according to his needs, from each according to his ability."
Or something like that.
Jaysyn
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:2)
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:1, Flamebait)
That word you keep using, I do not believe it means what you think it means.
As to the point of fair, it most certainly is. The rich benefit _far_ more from everything from trade policies to custom loopholes in tax codes to the basic protections of civilization than the middle and lower classes do. Taxes are an attempt to redress the inherent inequalities of our current laws surrounding real and intellectual property, labor rights, and the inexpensive use of public land for corporate profit.
It's fair (Score:2)
Since the rich have the most to lose, it is only fair that they pay more to ensure the safety of
Re:It's fair (Score:2)
No, i don't but because they have so much more money than i do it doesn't matter if they don't invest it in the same way i do.
It depends on what definition of "more" that you use. The rich will lose more measured in a dollar amount, the middle class and poor will lose more measured in a "lifestyle" sense.
Let's say i have $10,000 invested in a college fund, and hyperinflation cuts the effective value of that amount in half. A millionair
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:1)
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:3, Insightful)
But doing the hand-outs so arbitrarily does nothing to guarantee their success. Do people in government really think they have mastered economics so well that they can change the face of society with a poiticially-motivated tax system? The current tax system is insane and is s
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:2)
No one has to go to Bangalore. Only people who are so rigidly entrenched in the idea that nothing exists outside of Information Technology are so naive. If a person finds themselve priced out of a city, there is the whole Earth to choose from. Perhaps opportuniy is merely the next town over...perhaps it's Indiana. Whichever, there will be a place where a person can find a sustainable cost of living while figuring out where t
Re:Why do you think Bush gave them tax cuts? (Score:2)
The grocer would find that out pretty quick and raise their wages, due to there being no choice. We have to let the prices in cities work themselves out properly. Ultimately, that'll help keep the apartments from getting to $900/month in the first place, when fewer people are willing to relocate there, when many other expenses, such as groceries, go up in price. Eventually, the people who can truly live a