believer;1134117 wrote:Back then they bombed us, then we bombed them. Afterward we then sold them our wares....and now they sell us theirs. Sounds fair enough.

And now we got attacked by a small group of people and have been bombing the bejeezus out of a region for more than a decade and spending money out the ass. And we're not selling them wares nor are they selling us wares. Sounds shitty.

wkfan;1134594 wrote:Wealth of Nations was first published in 1776. The terms economics and capitalism were not even in use yet.

Times have changed......mostly things that no one would expect any author to predict.

Yes, crony capitalism has completely enveloped the country. Smith probably would envision a world wherein the most powerful and supposedly free country has it's leaders and legislation quite literally bought and paid for.

wkfan;1134594 wrote:Wealth of Nations was first published in 1776. The terms economics and capitalism were not even in use yet.

Times have changed......mostly things that no one would expect any author to predict.

I don't know that anyone is really arguing for a purely flat tax. The debate, which certainly has it's merit, is what level of taxation is optimal. It could very well be a higher marginal rate of 5-10% or even more. Could also be a LOWER rate. The disconnect that liberals are either completely ignorant of or intentionally ignore, is the economic impact (revenues) won't cover even half the deficit, and probably less than that.

I also find it intellectually dishonest that in this debate over taxing the rich more to pay for increasingly European-style socialism, no one mentions that the average European (read: non-rich) pays more taxes than in the US, and Europe actually has a flatter system of taxation (VAT's up to 19%, "FICA" 50% higher, gas like $6-$9 a gallon). In Europe they pay for their social insurance, but in the US the debate is always around how to get the wealthy and corporations to pay more of our social insurance. That's not entirely true, of course, because in Europe, like the US, they pay for much of their social programs with deficit spending.

This is interesting - govt revenues as a % of GDP. It's Wiki, but the source is supposedly the Heritage Foundation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP
US: 26.9% (note fed collections have been near historic lows recently)
Japan: 28.3%
UK: 39.0%
Germany: 40.6%
China: 17.0%
France: 44.6%
India: 17.7%
Canada: 32.2%
Spain: 37.3%
Russia: 36.9%
Australia: 30.8%


Some takeaways:
1) Obviously China and India have massive economic growth, so they have tremendous revenue growth to fuel entitlement expansions

2) In comparison with Australia, Japan and Canada, there is a 2-5pt opportunity, or @$300B-$750B. But some of that gap is due to unemployment and the economy. I'll say again I don't think the opportunity from higher taxes amounts to more than $300-$400B a year.

3) The European countries are much higher! See, PROOF taxes in the US are too low! And you would be correct. That difference is the VAT, which ranges from 18-20% in the countries I listed and explains basically all the difference. The VAT is, effectively, a sales tax which is borne equally by all consumers.

Bottom line is if you want European style socialism, you are 100% correct that we need higher taxes. But the bulk of that would have to come from a VAT, not gouging the rich. If you want European-style socialism you're going to have to pay for it yourself. And, by the way, that is not inherently awful - you SHOULD pay for your social insurance, like any insurance. And like most insurance, if you don't need to collect most people don't whine about having paid it (in other words, we can reduce and eliminate benefits for incomes above a threshold).

gut;1134605 wrote:I don't know that anyone is really arguing for a purely flat tax.

....

wkfan;1134564 wrote:The top 1% should pay the same percentage of their income as the bottom 50%.

2kool4skool;1134614 wrote:....

Yes, I read that. I should have said most, especially in the national debate, aren't arguing for a flat tax. Most recognize the value and need in progressive taxation to fund social programs. But the difference is some people seem to think the rich have bottomless pockets to fund limitless entitlements.

gut;1134617 wrote:Yes, I read that. I should have said most, especially in the national debate, aren't arguing for a flat tax. Most recognize the value and need in progressive taxation to fund social programs. But the difference is some people seem to think the rich have bottomless pockets to fund limitless entitlements.

Completely agree. Like most things(especially in politics) the correct answer lies somewhere in the middle.

dwccrew;1134553 wrote:Yes, I am worried about the welfare leaches, I stated that much. Not sure why you are repeating what I had previously stated.




I don't discount anything. How has the healthcare or education system failed anyone? Healthcare is available to anyone, the poor can receive medicaid, the elderly medicare. Education system can't teach effort, ambition and common sense. People have to want to learn, education is available to anyone who wants it, those who say otherwise are lazy and not willing to put the effort in.



I was one of the many that lost their jobs in the economic downturn. I saved enough for me to survive nearly a year (with no assistance needed from the government) until I found a new job. I didn't feel the need to get anyone's pity as it seems you believe people should do when they lose their job. Now I have a great job because I went out and busted my butt trying to find one instead of feeling sorry for myself and asking for handouts. I was capable and had the ability and I have attained a great job.



I won't be happy when they hit their limit, I'll be happy when they go out and try to take care of themselves.

I think it is vital, down right imperative to repeat that your are worried about welfare cheats. Not the person who may be using our tax system to avoid paying hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes but the guy who got an extra $20 worth of food stamps. Ok just so I understand.
How has our healthcare and education systems failed America. Neither has according to you. When we have a health system that is the most expensive in the world by far, eats up more of our GDP, has almost double the per capita cost of any other country in the world, the system has failed. Especially when scores of countries have longer life spans and lower infant mortality. And even with the cost, millions of Americans are not covered. That would be slightly improved with the passage of Obamacare, but its about to bite the dust. Many are in a situation where they are given emergency care, but not the consistent medical coverage that leads to healthy life. Education systems can re-enforce effort, ambition and reward common sense. Or they can throttle all of these. For many in our poorer schools that is the situation.
Oh God one of my favorite stereotypical characters of all time, I suffered and now everyone should. I lifted myself out of the gutter, pulled myself up by my bootstraps, everyone else should or they are worthless and weak. So you saved enough from your previous job to make to support yourself until another job came open. Great, you know its not against the law to take unemployment benefits if you qualify for them. You are college educated, you have a BBA, it is unlikely you graduated into a minimum wage job. You had an advanced education, you had a chance to acquire resources to tide you over rough times Guess what kiddo most of the people living in poverty or near it never had those chances. So enjoy your 12 hour shifts making good money at Toledo Refining and sock so more bucks away, because maybe the oil refining industry might me moving closer to the growing markets in east Asia.
You know who is living in poverty, a lot of single parents with children. 15% of the people in this country live in poverty, 22% of the children. Of course if those damned kids would stop feeling sorry for themselves and asking for handouts. Kids their age in Malaysia or Vietnam are already putting in a12 hour. Its good enough for them, its good enough for you, NIKE needs some new workers.
http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/

Al Bundy;1133813 wrote:So you want to go back to the Carter era where inflation made prices horrible for everyone?

Was that Carter's fault, Al? The reason that I ask....you claimed that the 91% tax rate didn't effect economic growth because of international reality markets being open for US exports.

So again...was the stagflation a result of Carter's policies...or was it a reflection of international conditions?

Your response will tell me whether or not you are a partisan hack...which is the case for the majority that frequent the poli boards.

isadore;1134750 wrote:I think it is vital, down right imperative to repeat that your are worried about welfare cheats. Not the person who may be using our tax system to avoid paying hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes but the guy who got an extra $20 worth of food stamps. Ok just so I understand.
How has our healthcare and education systems failed America. Neither has according to you. When we have a health system that is the most expensive in the world by far, eats up more of our GDP, has almost double the per capita cost of any other country in the world, the system has failed. Especially when scores of countries have longer life spans and lower infant mortality. And even with the cost, millions of Americans are not covered. That would be slightly improved with the passage of Obamacare, but its about to bite the dust. Many are in a situation where they are given emergency care, but not the consistent medical coverage that leads to healthy life. Education systems can re-enforce effort, ambition and reward common sense. Or they can throttle all of these. For many in our poorer schools that is the situation.
Oh God one of my favorite stereotypical characters of all time, I suffered and now everyone should. I lifted myself out of the gutter, pulled myself up by my bootstraps, everyone else should or they are worthless and weak. So you saved enough from your previous job to make to support yourself until another job came open. Great, you know its not against the law to take unemployment benefits if you qualify for them. You are college educated, you have a BBA, it is unlikely you graduated into a minimum wage job. You had an advanced education, you had a chance to acquire resources to tide you over rough times Guess what kiddo most of the people living in poverty or near it never had those chances. So enjoy your 12 hour shifts making good money at Toledo Refining and sock so more bucks away, because maybe the oil refining industry might me moving closer to the growing markets in east Asia.
You know who is living in poverty, a lot of single parents with children. 15% of the people in this country live in poverty, 22% of the children. Of course if those damned kids would stop feeling sorry for themselves and asking for handouts. Kids their age in Malaysia or Vietnam are already putting in a12 hour. Its good enough for them, its good enough for you, NIKE needs some new workers.
http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/

Do you think you could throw a paragraph or two in there, that was extremely difficult to read, maybe because of our failed education system? Again, you twist my post in an attempt to fit your argument. I refuse to try and carry on a conversation with someone who 1) can't write a coherent and flowing post and 2) isn't capable of having a civilized debate, instead choosing to twist words and outright lie.

Footwedge;1134776 wrote:Was that Carter's fault, Al? The reason that I ask....you claimed that the 91% tax rate didn't effect economic growth because of international reality markets being open for US exports.

So again...was the stagflation a result of Carter's policies...or was it a reflection of international conditions?

Your response will tell me whether or not you are a partisan hack...which is the case for the majority that frequent the poli boards.

Carter was an imbecile, but stagflation wasn't his fault. The blame falls squarely on three things, spending on war and massive new entitlements, the closing of the gold window, and the monetization of the ever expanding debt by the Federal Reserve.

dwccrew;1134827 wrote:Do you think you could throw a paragraph or two in there, that was extremely difficult to read, maybe because of our failed education system? Again, you twist my post in an attempt to fit your argument. I refuse to try and carry on a conversation with someone who 1) can't write a coherent and flowing post and 2) isn't capable of having a civilized debate, instead choosing to twist words and outright lie.

tsk, tsk, hardly a surprise that you would refuse to accept the obvious implications of your hard hearted views.

Footwedge;1134776 wrote:Was that Carter's fault, Al? The reason that I ask....you claimed that the 91% tax rate didn't effect economic growth because of international reality markets being open for US exports.

So again...was the stagflation a result of Carter's policies...or was it a reflection of international conditions?

Your response will tell me whether or not you are a partisan hack...which is the case for the majority that frequent the poli boards.

I am a democrat, so I don't know how pointing some of Carter's flaws makes me a partisan hack. To answer your question, those things were not all Carter's fault, but he wasn't a leader that could lead the country out of those problems.

isadore;1134750 wrote:I think it is vital, down right imperative to repeat that your are worried about welfare cheats. Not the person who may be using our tax system to avoid paying hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes but the guy who got an extra $20 worth of food stamps. Ok just so I understand.
How has our healthcare and education systems failed America. Neither has according to you. When we have a health system that is the most expensive in the world by far, eats up more of our GDP, has almost double the per capita cost of any other country in the world, the system has failed. Especially when scores of countries have longer life spans and lower infant mortality. And even with the cost, millions of Americans are not covered. That would be slightly improved with the passage of Obamacare, but its about to bite the dust. Many are in a situation where they are given emergency care, but not the consistent medical coverage that leads to healthy life. Education systems can re-enforce effort, ambition and reward common sense. Or they can throttle all of these. For many in our poorer schools that is the situation.
Oh God one of my favorite stereotypical characters of all time, I suffered and now everyone should. I lifted myself out of the gutter, pulled myself up by my bootstraps, everyone else should or they are worthless and weak. So you saved enough from your previous job to make to support yourself until another job came open. Great, you know its not against the law to take unemployment benefits if you qualify for them. You are college educated, you have a BBA, it is unlikely you graduated into a minimum wage job. You had an advanced education, you had a chance to acquire resources to tide you over rough times Guess what kiddo most of the people living in poverty or near it never had those chances. So enjoy your 12 hour shifts making good money at Toledo Refining and sock so more bucks away, because maybe the oil refining industry might me moving closer to the growing markets in east Asia.
You know who is living in poverty, a lot of single parents with children. 15% of the people in this country live in poverty, 22% of the children. Of course if those damned kids would stop feeling sorry for themselves and asking for handouts. Kids their age in Malaysia or Vietnam are already putting in a12 hour. Its good enough for them, its good enough for you, NIKE needs some new workers.
http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/

In other words, there are consequences for choices. Those consequences may be good or bad depending upon the choices.

Al Bundy;1136848 wrote:In other words, there are consequences for choices. Those consequences may be good or bad depending upon the choices.

Yeh these kids all screwed up being born in poverty, now they can just suffer the consequences. serves them right.

isadore;1136892 wrote:Yeh these kids all screwed up being born in poverty, now they can just suffer the consequences. serves them right.

Making poor choices isn't about rich or poor. There are rich people who do stupid things and poor people who do smart things. If 16 year olds chooses to make babies instead of using their free education that is their choice. Each of those choices has consequences to go with it. Your assumption that all poor people are stupid is very insulting to poor people who make good decisions in their lives.

Al Bundy;1137035 wrote:Making poor choices isn't about rich or poor. There are rich people who do stupid things and poor people who do smart things. If 16 year olds chooses to make babies instead of using their free education that is their choice. Each of those choices has consequences to go with it. Your assumption that all poor people are stupid is very insulting to poor people who make good decisions in their lives.

lol, the rich and the poor both make bad decisions. To compare the situation of a 16 year old rich girl who gets pregnant with that of a 16 year old poor girl. The resource and connections available to that rich girl and not to the poor girl make the comparison of situations a sad joke.