A Strong Case For Tax Cuts

Started by kramarat, August 17, 2012, 07:32:43 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

kramarat

This gives a pretty good explanation of why Obama's policies are a failure, and why they will continue to fail.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-case-for-supply-side-tax-cuts-2012-08-16?siteid=YAHOOB

Foreigner

What did Obama spend all that money on trying to create demand?

When it comes to tax cuts, I'm not so sure that it's that easy. If high taxes and regulations were that bad, why is Germany doing alright then? After all we have much higher taxes and much more regulations than what you think is "high".

All I know is that your wealth distribution is out of control. This wouldn't be a problem, if the top 20% spent or invested most of their money. But I doubt they do. So you have lots of people who can't afford buying stuff, and what they can afford is mostly cheap stuff from Chinese factories. On the other hand there are rich people with tons of money in the bank, where it doesn't really do anything.

Now if you think "taxing the rich" is bad, maybe you should think of another way that motivates the rich to put their spare Billions into society. Give 'em medals according to how much money they invested in the success of America, have 'em drive in car pool lanes alone, let their paper work have higher priority with the bureaucrats... whatever privilege you want.

When I was at Six Flags in 2010, I bought a Flash Pass. Why not do the same on a larger scale?

taxed

Quote from: Foreigner on August 25, 2012, 11:19:35 AM
What did Obama spend all that money on trying to create demand?

When it comes to tax cuts, I'm not so sure that it's that easy. If high taxes and regulations were that bad, why is Germany doing alright then? After all we have much higher taxes and much more regulations than what you think is "high".

All I know is that your wealth distribution is out of control. This wouldn't be a problem, if the top 20% spent or invested most of their money. But I doubt they do. So you have lots of people who can't afford buying stuff, and what they can afford is mostly cheap stuff from Chinese factories. On the other hand there are rich people with tons of money in the bank, where it doesn't really do anything.

Now if you think "taxing the rich" is bad, maybe you should think of another way that motivates the rich to put their spare Billions into society. Give 'em medals according to how much money they invested in the success of America, have 'em drive in car pool lanes alone, let their paper work have higher priority with the bureaucrats... whatever privilege you want.

When I was at Six Flags in 2010, I bought a Flash Pass. Why not do the same on a larger scale?

We are a free country.  People can do what they wish with their own money.  They can wipe their butts with it if they want.  The more taxes stolen by the government, the closer the people are to slavery.
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

Foreigner

Quote from: taxed on August 25, 2012, 01:11:56 PM
We are a free country.  People can do what they wish with their own money.
They can wipe their butts with it if they want.  The more taxes stolen by the government, the closer the people are to slavery.

So you want no taxes at all, Mister "I'm a realist"?

How about getting rich people to contribute more by giving them privileges in return, like the Flash Pass at Six Flags?

Solar

Quote from: Foreigner on August 25, 2012, 02:53:54 PM
So you want no taxes at all, Mister "I'm a realist"?

How about getting rich people to contribute more by giving them privileges in return, like the Flash Pass at Six Flags?
I think his point is, we are a fair country, where everyone is taxed the same percentage, except the poor which pays nearly nothing other than sales and local taxes.
To tax the rich at a higher rate is not only unfair, but unconstitutional as well, though that's never been a deterrent to the left in the past.

Problem is, the left has created social programs to benefit the poor, all in an effort to create a permanent voting class of victims, they want a division in classes so they can claim hero status to destroy wealth, a wealth they believe belongs to Govt for redistribution as they personally see fit.

America has been a success, but with rising deficits and no cuts in the spending, we are headed for collapse, there is not enough wealth if you were to steal from all the rich, to make a even dent in our budget/debt.

So why attack the rich as some kind of evil greedy Scrooge?
Because it gives the Left something they can hold up and claim 'they are for the little guy', but what happens when they kill off the golden goose?
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

tbone0106

Quote from: Foreigner on August 25, 2012, 11:19:35 AM
What did Obama spend all that money on trying to create demand?

When it comes to tax cuts, I'm not so sure that it's that easy. If high taxes and regulations were that bad, why is Germany doing alright then? After all we have much higher taxes and much more regulations than what you think is "high".

All I know is that your wealth distribution is out of control. This wouldn't be a problem, if the top 20% spent or invested most of their money. But I doubt they do. So you have lots of people who can't afford buying stuff, and what they can afford is mostly cheap stuff from Chinese factories. On the other hand there are rich people with tons of money in the bank, where it doesn't really do anything.

Now if you think "taxing the rich" is bad, maybe you should think of another way that motivates the rich to put their spare Billions into society. Give 'em medals according to how much money they invested in the success of America, have 'em drive in car pool lanes alone, let their paper work have higher priority with the bureaucrats... whatever privilege you want.

When I was at Six Flags in 2010, I bought a Flash Pass. Why not do the same on a larger scale?

On a larger scale? The Flash Pass is available to anyone, from anywhere, willing to part with enough of their wealth to purchase the pass. Six Flags places no limit on how many Flash Passes they're willing to part with. How much larger do you want to make it?

We already know how to motivate the rich into investing their "spare billions into society." All we have to do is get the damned government out of the way. That's how this country was built.

Solar

Quote from: tbone0106 on August 25, 2012, 08:05:48 PM
On a larger scale? The Flash Pass is available to anyone, from anywhere, willing to part with enough of their wealth to purchase the pass. Six Flags places no limit on how many Flash Passes they're willing to part with. How much larger do you want to make it?

We already know how to motivate the rich into investing their "spare billions into society." All we have to do is get the damned government out of the way. That's how this country was built.
He seems to miss one very important equation in the formula.
What would be the benefit of sitting on all that money, when they could be making it work for them through investing in growth?

Answer: The obama administration has made it a hostile environment to make money through investing, so they are sitting on more than a trillion dollars, waiting for the penalties to be relaxed by the next administration.
And he asked how could one President make so much difference in so little time?
All this done through Executive order, something never done in the history of the US.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Foreigner

#7
Quote from: tbone0106 on August 25, 2012, 08:05:48 PM
On a larger scale? The Flash Pass is available to anyone, from anywhere, willing to part with enough of their wealth to purchase the pass. Six Flags places no limit on how many Flash Passes they're willing to part with. How much larger do you want to make it?

Haha, I don't think rich people are that much into riding roller coasters.  :laugh:

I mean the government offering privileges for rich people, for example to save them time. Here, I think this article is going in a reasonable direction:
http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703293204576106164123424314.html

If you don't like taxes, why not coming up with an alternative like that?


Quote from: tbone0106 on August 25, 2012, 08:05:48 PM
We already know how to motivate the rich into investing their "spare billions into society." All we have to do is get the damned government out of the way. That's how this country was built.

I get your point. I don't want America to be as highly taxes and regulated as Europe. But not everything your government does is the work of the devil.


Quote from: Solar on August 26, 2012, 07:49:49 AM
He seems to miss one very important equation in the formula.
What would be the benefit of sitting on all that money, when they could be making it work for them through investing in growth?

That may be true for a part of the people who are sitting on a lot of money.
But others may collect it as some kind of sport, to become richer than whoever in some ranking?
Or they don't want to risk any of it with the economy being as it is? (Which isn't the governments fault, at least not just the current or the last one's.)

JustKari

Quote from: Foreigner on August 26, 2012, 06:12:14 PM
Haha, I don't think rich people are that much into riding roller coasters.  :laugh:

I mean the government offering privileges for rich people, for example to save them time. Here, I think this article is going in a reasonable direction:
http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703293204576106164123424314.html

If you don't like taxes, why not coming up with an alternative like that?


I get your point. I don't want America to be as highly taxes and regulated as Europe. But not everything your government does is the work of the devil.


That may be true for a part of the people who are sitting on a lot of money.
But others may collect it as some kind of sport, to become richer than whoever in some ranking?
Or they don't want to risk any of it with the economy being as it is? (Which isn't the governments fault, at least not just the current or the last one's.)

I completely disagree with that last statement.  If the government is unwilling to put forth a budget, and has already shown a willingness to toss some business under the bus at the expense of their cronies, that makes businesses (the wealthy owners or shareholders) hold back on spending and hiring.  They have no clue what the government could suddenly saddle them with, or how the market might be effected by other factors.  The government's unwillingness to give America a solid expense plan leaves business unsure of the future, so they hold onto their money, as any smart person would.

Solar

Quote from: Foreigner on August 26, 2012, 06:12:14 PM

That may be true for a part of the people who are sitting on a lot of money.
But others may collect it as some kind of sport, to become richer than whoever in some ranking?
Or they don't want to risk any of it with the economy being as it is? (Which isn't the governments fault, at least not just the current or the last one's.)
Have you been living in a bubble?
Does TARP, or any of the following bailouts ring a bell?
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

kramarat

Quote from: Solar on August 26, 2012, 09:08:58 PM
Have you been living in a bubble?
Does TARP, or any of the following bailouts ring a bell?

I'm sure this is already on here somewhere, but it looks like it's time for another reminder.
I would like for someone to explain why rich people are responsible for this. Followed by explaining how raising taxes on the rich is going to stop it.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Foreigner

Quote from: kramarat on August 27, 2012, 07:47:55 AM
I'm sure this is already on here somewhere, but it looks like it's time for another reminder.
I would like for someone to explain why rich people are responsible for this. Followed by explaining how raising taxes on the rich is going to stop it.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Thanks for the link, very interesting. Also quite disturbing, though.

Rich people aren't responsible for this at all. But they are important to get it fixed. Of course before that can happen it should be made sure that the government can balance its budget.

How many of the richest people in the U.S. are actively in a debate on how to get all of this fixed? After all, it's their country, too, and I doubt it's in their interest for it to fail.

Does Romney have a real plan? If he has, are at least some of the richest Americans agreeing that his plans make sense? Seriously, I have no clue, because of course European media don't report such details.


@ Solar

I just meant that the housing bubble goes back to some politicians further in the past who wanted poor people to be able to afford their own houses etc. so they pushed policies to make credits available to them. This is where things got started that eventually lead to the financial crisis.

When it comes to bailouts, you're of course right. I actually think there shouldn't be anything that's "too big too fail". Especially not in America, where as far as I understand the principle not to concentrate power too much is a huge part of why it's already lasting more than 230 years. (Same thing is true for the way the internet works, by the way, which also was originally designed decentralized to make it more robust against attacks.)

Now that we're at this issue: Did you guys change anything about this issue or are you (Romney?) planning to do anything about this "too big too fail" problem?

Too be fair, besides bailouts the war in Iraq is accountable for a lot of your debt. That didn't get started by the Democrats. So maybe you should point fingers less and come up with solutions more.

Solar

Quote from: Foreigner on August 27, 2012, 04:17:13 PM
Thanks for the link, very interesting. Also quite disturbing, though.

Rich people aren't responsible for this at all. But they are important to get it fixed. Of course before that can happen it should be made sure that the government can balance its budget.

How many of the richest people in the U.S. are actively in a debate on how to get all of this fixed? After all, it's their country, too, and I doubt it's in their interest for it to fail.

Does Romney have a real plan? If he has, are at least some of the richest Americans agreeing that his plans make sense? Seriously, I have no clue, because of course European media don't report such details.


@ Solar

I just meant that the housing bubble goes back to some politicians further in the past who wanted poor people to be able to afford their own houses etc. so they pushed policies to make credits available to them. This is where things got started that eventually lead to the financial crisis.

When it comes to bailouts, you're of course right. I actually think there shouldn't be anything that's "too big too fail". Especially not in America, where as far as I understand the principle not to concentrate power too much is a huge part of why it's already lasting more than 230 years. (Same thing is true for the way the internet works, by the way, which also was originally designed decentralized to make it more robust against attacks.)

Now that we're at this issue: Did you guys change anything about this issue or are you (Romney?) planning to do anything about this "too big too fail" problem?

Too be fair, besides bailouts the war in Iraq is accountable for a lot of your debt. That didn't get started by the Democrats. So maybe you should point fingers less and come up with solutions more.
Ah, I see, and yes, the whole housing mess can be placed squarely in the laps of the Dems.

In hindsight, we should have never entered Iraq, in fact, there is no reason we should even be in that part of the world, we have no reason to buy oil from them, we have more than enough of our own.
Had the left not found ways to stop domestic production... well... that's in another realm where common sense exists, but not in this one.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

kramarat

Quote from: Solar on August 27, 2012, 05:36:37 PM
Ah, I see, and yes, the whole housing mess can be placed squarely in the laps of the Dems.

In hindsight, we should have never entered Iraq, in fact, there is no reason we should even be in that part of the world, we have no reason to buy oil from them, we have more than enough of our own.
Had the left not found ways to stop domestic production... well... that's in another realm where common sense exists, but not in this one.

Lets not forget, that Bush had to get congressional authorization to go to war...................that included the democrats. Although they are trying to erase that little fact.

As far as the wars go, I suspect that there's a lot we don't know. There's a reason Obama didn't immediately end the wars and close Gitmo. I think history is going to show that Bush made the right decision. We've killed a hell of a lot of terrorists, that otherwise could have made it over here.

We had to fight them somewhere. Ignoring them was never going to work.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500164_162-540376.html

Solar

Quote from: kramarat on August 28, 2012, 04:32:17 AM
Lets not forget, that Bush had to get congressional authorization to go to war...................that included the democrats. Although they are trying to erase that little fact.

As far as the wars go, I suspect that there's a lot we don't know. There's a reason Obama didn't immediately end the wars and close Gitmo. I think history is going to show that Bush made the right decision. We've killed a hell of a lot of terrorists, that otherwise could have made it over here.

We had to fight them somewhere. Ignoring them was never going to work.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500164_162-540376.html
Yes, he even had the backing of the UN, but with the amazing ability of hindsight, if we were going there and nothing was going to stop us, then you go all the way.
This war turned into a freackin PC mess then we gave billions to rebuild a desert.

Nope, knowing what we know now, should have left the animals to their own demise.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!