Comments on: Five Key Reasons to Reject Class-Warfare Tax Policy

By: tom6612

tom6612 — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 01:38:55 +0000

@s117godd (part 2) — Raygunomics specifically failed because it brutalized labor which is another way of saying it savaged domestic consumer markets and demand which is what makes it possible for business to remain viable. It was very simple to see this coming. The cons have been telegraphing their intentions ever since 1980. I’m surprised it didn’t happen sooner.

By: tom6612

tom6612 — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 01:16:07 +0000

@s117godd wrote — “Agreed sort-of: The problems that fell apart with/directly after Bush have been brewing for a long time before him (not that he did anything to prevent them)”

Yeah the problems began in 1980 when Raygun started this insane Raygunomics / Friedmanomics/supply-side BS. It was also tried down in South America and failed down there too. It has a long history of failure.

By: s117godd

s117godd — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:28:07 +0000

@tom6612
Agreed sort-of: The problems that fell apart with/directly after Bush have been brewing for a long time before him (not that he did anything to prevent them); That was a failure of economic mechanisms, no amount of tax cuts would’ve helped.
People like the narrator only side w. Republicans because they’re the traditional pro-business party. But Republicans are in it for power just as much as the next guy – to build up their feifdom in office and then retire into big pillows of cash.

By: s117godd

s117godd — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:16:34 +0000

@Fuctmentality
I don’t get what you mean. Listen again – I’m saying courts, military, and police are the only things that the consitution specifically said our government shoud be handling because they’re the first things you need to build a nation (security, law and order). I’m saying, if you want this other crap, allow the gov’t to take JUST YOUR money, build the staduim or park or whatever, but dont force the rest of us to pay for public projects that we don’t want/won’t ever use.

By: Fuctmentality

Fuctmentality — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 03:03:43 +0000

@s117godd Not so sweet, go no military, no police, & no courts & you got a deal, because truth be told the lower you are on the economic spectrum the less important these things are to you. If you want to use them, you pay for them. Good luck paying when I rob you & burn your house down to pay for my kid’s education.

By: tom6612

tom6612 — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 23:19:04 +0000

It’s obvious from the last 30 years and especially the Bush admin that republicans should be completely ignored when they talk about financial matters.

Google the phrase “IMF Says Advanced Economies Already in Depression” and you will find the Bloomberg article that shows we ended up in a depression 2 weeks after Bush left office.

By: s117godd

s117godd — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:58:23 +0000

I have a sweet, sweet idea to shut all of the welfare-state types up. How about for all public programs beside the barebones (courts, police, military), there is an opt-in system. If you want to use public schools, medicare etc., you can choose to have the gov’t take your monies and you can use those programs. The rest of us can choose not to pay the taxes, but we don’t get to use public shools, USPS, ‘free’ medicare etc. We all get to choose. Any problem with that?

By: s117godd

s117godd — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:34:06 +0000

@kyleds111
I hate it when every little prick pulls out that point like it proves everything. Yes that’s true. European countries have exorbitant tax rates, usually claiming a large fraction or a majority of their constituents’ income…
So what. What the fuck does that prove? Don’t just drop little terds like that, actually finish your thought.

By: Fuctmentality

Fuctmentality — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 21:54:23 +0000

$3.5< million is a nest egg?
Why would someone not want to make more money?
Reality shows that while GDP has gone up in the 30 years, wages are the same(at best) & poverty has risen, doesn't that stand in the way of the "the best way to help the poor" argument?
Doesn't the fact the swiss have a higher corporate tax, stand in the way of the argument that taxation outsources jobs?
Don't we already have a class warfare tax policy as the top 1% pays lower taxes than the next 9%?

By: lordhighexecutioner

lordhighexecutioner — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 02:51:57 +0000

“High income taxes encourage income”. I never knew that income taxes rose to over 100%. So if you make an additional $20,000 you’re taxed at a marginal rate of 200% so you’ll have to pay $40,000 in taxes on top of that. That means you’ll forgo the $20,000 because you know that if you get that money you’ll actually be losing $20,000! If marginal tax rates are under 100%, you will always be guaranteed of more income when you make more income.