What would you do to revive the US economy?

twomad said:
Didn't recently some of the wealthest business owners say that they welcome higher taxes on themselfs just to help with the job situation in this country. KUDOS TO THOSE STAND UP AMERICAN,S
Click to expand...

Yes, the most famous is Warren Buffet. But do you know why??? because that would put all of his competition at a HUGE disadvantage. Look it up. Most of his wealth/income wouldn't be subject to this tax increase. Don't take everything that's fed to you as gospel.
 
twomad said:
Didn't recently some of the wealthest business owners say that they welcome higher taxes on themselfs just to help with the job situation in this country. KUDOS TO THOSE STAND UP AMERICAN,S
Click to expand...

Yes, and because of his statement, I recently sold half of my shares in his company since paying more taxes doesn't increase shareholder wealth!

Turtle you beat me to it!
 
Its got nothing to do with the government taking money to create jobs. Its about changing the tax structure, taking the heavy burden off the middle class (those "losers" as you put it who do most of the living, dying and spending in this country) and shifting it to the wealthier folks who can more afford it. Unless your an anarchist you understand that the government is going to need at least a certain amount of money if for nothing else defense. The synopsis of the article is that its a bad idea (if you want economic recovery) for the tax burden to be placed on those who can least afford it. If some of that burden is passed up the economic scale it will leave those in the middle class with more to spend thus stimulating the economy.

And I find it hilarious that any time an article is posted that presents the clear case that you, MM and a few others on here beliefs and ideas about the economy are total bull**** your answer is "he's an idiot"...... maybe the guy writing the article is NOT the idiot?
 
No, the guy writing the article is not an idiot. Just like Warren Buffet is not an idiot calling for higher taxes on the super rich. It's those that believe it at face value that I question. Maybe i'm jaded having lived in NYC for 25 years. NYC generates more income from taxes than probably any city in the world, but you wouldn't know it by living here. Didn't seem to help the poor very much either. Everyday I see homeless people sleeping on the street, in the subway, Ghettos the size of small towns. Crime, potholes, bridges falling apart. Why? This city generates more money than you can imagine and has been doing so for at least 200 years. By all accounts this city should be UTOPIA, the gold standard for all of the world to strive to be if higher taxes really worked.
 
Pack66Dad said:
Its got nothing to do with the government taking money to create jobs. Its about changing the tax structure, taking the heavy burden off the middle class (those "losers" as you put it who do most of the living, dying and spending in this country) and shifting it to the wealthier folks who can more afford it. Unless your an anarchist you understand that the government is going to need at least a certain amount of money if for nothing else defense. The synopsis of the article is that its a bad idea (if you want economic recovery) for the tax burden to be placed on those who can least afford it. If some of that burden is passed up the economic scale it will leave those in the middle class with more to spend thus stimulating the economy.

And I find it hilarious that any time an article is posted that presents the clear case that you, MM and a few others on here beliefs and ideas about the economy are total bull**** your answer is "he's an idiot"...... maybe the guy writing the article is NOT the idiot?
Click to expand...

How much do you want from the upper income taxpayers? The top 10% pay 70% of all income taxes. Depending on how we define "middle class" they ALL only contribute 10% of all income taxes if they are above the 50th percentile but below the 75th percentile, or 27% if they are above the 50th percentile but below the 90th percentile.

http://www.american.com/archive/200...zine-contents/guess-who-really-pays-the-taxes

Who Pays Income Taxes and How Much?

Tax Year 2009

Percentiles Ranked by AGI​

AGI Threshold on Percentiles​

Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid​

Top 1%​

$343,927​

36.73​

Top 5%​

$154,643​

58.66​

Top 10%​

$112,124​

70.47​

Top 25%​

$66,193​

87.30​

Top 50%​

$32,396​

97.75​

Bottom 50%​

<$32,396​

2.25​
Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income
Source: Internal Revenue Service


​
 
Last edited:
MonacoMike said:
"On this income, he says, he pays an 11% tax rate. (Presumably, most of the income is dividends and long-term capital gains, which carry a tax rate of 15%. And then he probably has some tax shelters that knock the rate down the rest of the way)."

The only way to get an 11% rate is to use government favors (loopholes, crony capitalism, things that don't apply to you and me) as there is no such rate for that income.


MM
Click to expand...
How accurate this info is we'll never know unless we see his tax return. I wonder what you might suggest be different...what % should he be paying? I know nobody that actually pays their bracket rate if that's what you're getting at:huh:
 
Woody said:
How accurate this info is we'll never know unless we see his tax return. I wonder what you might suggest be different...what % should he be paying? I know nobody that actually pays their bracket rate if that's what you're getting at:huh:
Click to expand...

We should be able to run a government, doing its contitutional directives, on 15% easily if all paid that rate. MM
 
Pack66Dad said:
Its got nothing to do with the government taking money to create jobs. Its about changing the tax structure, taking the heavy burden off the middle class (those "losers" as you put it who do most of the living, dying and spending in this country) and shifting it to the wealthier folks who can more afford it. Unless your an anarchist you understand that the government is going to need at least a certain amount of money if for nothing else defense. The synopsis of the article is that its a bad idea (if you want economic recovery) for the tax burden to be placed on those who can least afford it. If some of that burden is passed up the economic scale it will leave those in the middle class with more to spend thus stimulating the economy.

And I find it hilarious that any time an article is posted that presents the clear case that you, MM and a few others on here beliefs and ideas about the economy are total bull**** your answer is "he's an idiot"...... maybe the guy writing the article is NOT the idiot?
Click to expand...
My "loser" term was directed squarely at my S-I-L who milks the system and now has taught my daughter to be a "welfare" princess! I just cant imagine why you can't see my point about paying folks to have more babies! I gave you a perfect example of a direct relative, not a friend of a friends uncle! This is happening all over the country and no matter how much money you take from the rich, it will not be enough until we cut the spending and stop rewarding "losers"!! If you need help, I am the first to step up, but I am also the first to cut you off after I see an able bodied person that will not keep a job and take care of the family they created! THE SPENDING HAS TO STOP!!
 
MonacoMike said:
We should be able to run a government, doing its contitutional directives, on 15% easily if all paid that rate. MM
Click to expand...
According to the IRS, for all tax payers, the average 2009 rate was 11.06%. Your proposal would be a 44% increase :smt089. I don't think anyone is going to like you after that.:lol:
 
Woody said:
According to the IRS, for all tax payers, the average 2009 rate was 11.06%. Your proposal would be a 44% increase :smt089. I don't think anyone is going to like you after that.:lol:
Click to expand...

Really? Hell my Social Security payment ALONE was 12%.
 
Woody said:
This pertains to the subject http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...k-loans-to-small-business-fall-to-12-year-low
Click to expand...

SB lending is an interesting issue. Historically it was done by people for people, now it is done by computers for statistics. "Bankers say lending standards aren't the issue, and point to research that backs them up. In 2011, 17 percent of businesses with sales between $100,000 and $10 million applied for additional credit, but of those, only 22 percent were denied," I do not dispute this number but know personally that thousands if not millions are told not to even apply, you cannot be "denied" if you do not apply. The reserve rules also restrict the flow of capital to SB owners. We were better off when a local banker who knew the market loaned to a local business rather than these monster "to big to fail" banks who cozy up to the government to keep their competitors at bay. MM
 
Democrats don't understand THE DEBT CEILING.



Republicans don't understand THE DEBT CEILING.


Liberals don't understand THE DEBT CEILING.


Neocons don't understand THE DEBT CEILING.


Allow me to explain:

Let's say, you come home from work and find there has been a sewer backup in your neighborhood.

Your home now has sewage all the way up to your ceilings.

What do you think you should do?
Raise the ceilings or pump out the crap?

Your choice is coming next November.
Don't miss the opportunity





​
 
Only 7 posts and sprint7tw makes more sense than 42 pages of this crap.....Great job..
 
MonacoMike said:
free market, libertarian, conservatives
Click to expand...

Not sure the link makes your point.

Anyhow. . . .very few of the conservatives on this board, and certainly none campaigning for President (except perhaps Paul), can really be considered "libertarian". My libertarian views are typically labeled pinko communist.
 
comsnark said:
Not sure the link makes your point.

Anyhow. . . .very few of the conservatives on this board, and certainly none campaigning for President (except perhaps Paul), can really be considered "libertarian". My libertarian views are typically labeled pinko communist.
Click to expand...

Not really... I would categorize them as "bitter".
 
autovette said:
Only 7 posts and sprint7tw makes more sense than 42 pages of this crap.....Great job..
Click to expand...

Must agree.

I am not even sure that anyone actually talks seriously about *trimming* the budget; let alone doing any real cuts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,241
Messages
1,429,113
Members
61,122
Latest member
DddAae
Back
Top