Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-31-2012, 03:52 PM #1
Matt.is.back2011
We are all Witness
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Economic Prescription and the 1%

This will be my opinion on our President's current course of action (or lack thereof) and his rhetoric towards the wealthiest Americans in our society.

I really dislike the argument of "the rich need to pay their fair share." As if higher taxes are THE prescription to our country's issues. While I think it makes logical sense that cutting spending and higher tax revenue will reduce our nation's yearly deficit, I disagree that raising taxes, even on the super rich, in the midst of a recession is the right course of action and definitely should not be the centerpiece for our president's economic policy.

Democratic talking heads like to cite the Clintonian tax rates in conjunction with the economic growth that our country saw during that same period as evidence that higher tax rates are healthy fiscal policy. I would argue that the two are mutually exclusive of one another and that the success of the 1990's had more to do with a technological boom than any policy Washington enforced on the top income earners in this country.

I think if the President wants to gain credibility with his argument that the rich need to pay higher taxes, he needs to explain why, and no, ''fairness'' is not an acceptable explanation. There are two major issues this country is facing: high unemployment and ever-increasing national debt. Raising taxes arguablly will only solve one, of which is the latter.

To conclude, the president should focus his attention on job creation first, as the national debt will decrease as a positive by-product of such efforts.
__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 01-31-2012, 05:24 PM #2
Lazarusrat
 
 
Lazarusrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Lazarusrat owns a Planet Eclipse Lv1
Just as an FYI, and ONLY as an FYI,

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data by David S. Logan

The median AGI for the US in 2009 was $32,396... The Top 1% cut off AGI was $343,927.00

IF you taxed the Top 1% at a 90% rate (meaning the Federal Government took $0.90 for every $1 they made) they would STILL make more than 50% of the American population.
__________________
"If you prepare for the zombie apocalypse, you'll be prepared for all hazards," CDC spokesman Dave Daigle told Reuters over the phone on Thursday.
Lazarusrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 05:27 PM #3
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Baltimore
Umami works for a Paintball manufacturer
Umami supports our troops
The president cannot create jobs outside of the government. The wealthy won't create jobs if there is no demand to merit increased employment, because there is no financial benefit to doing so.

But first, let's get one thing straight - the wealthy pay the same tax rate you and I do. The tax rate on the first $50,000 they make this year is the exact same tax rate I'll pay on the first $50,000 I make.

This is probably politically incorrect to say but **** it, I don't care. They have money, the country needs it, and I don't see the super-wealthy voluntarily investing in our nation's future. I honestly don't care how it comes about, but if the wealthy were actually interested in turning around the financial crisis, institutions with wealth would be materially re-investing in THIS country. To date, the government seems to be among the few entities willing to do that.

If they are incapable of re-investing United States Dollars with at least some regard to this nation's wellbeing, I see no reason they should be afforded to grow their wealth in offshore accounts and in financial transactions that contribute only as much to the economy as the paper they're written on. Scratch that, the computer bits they're stored in.

As a side note, one of the first things we can do to advance long term prosperity in this country is reform our draconian judicial system. We imprison a huge portion of our population - not only are these people who cannot work and be taxed, they're people we have to pay to incarcerate. Letting them live and work, increasing their access to education and creating a culture where these are worthy goals - that is unquestionably in our best interests.
__________________
Yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, man.
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.

Last edited by Umami : 01-31-2012 at 05:33 PM.
Umami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 06:14 PM #4
EPAPressure
Jobs are for immigrants
 
EPAPressure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazarusrat View Post
Just as an FYI, and ONLY as an FYI,

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data by David S. Logan

The median AGI for the US in 2009 was $32,396... The Top 1% cut off AGI was $343,927.00

IF you taxed the Top 1% at a 90% rate (meaning the Federal Government took $0.90 for every $1 they made) they would STILL make more than 50% of the American population.
What's your point. Why is that even relevant? They earned it. Boo ****ing hoo, you lost the game. Sucks to be a loser.

Tax the rich so the poor can continue to pop out babies they can't afford and drive cars they can't afford. Nice logic.
__________________
"Chic-Fi-La has an awful chicken sandwich"

-Said nobody, ever.


"Originally posted by drgonzo: That doesn't make sense, the people with the most interaction and dependence on government have the most significant stakes and should have the vote if anyone. People who reject government and do not use government services should be denied the vote if anything." ^^FAIL

"Originally posted by Rebeltilldeath3: When I think geocities I think ****ty tiled background and sparkly titles. Think of a minority's myspace page."
EPAPressure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 07:33 PM #5
Umami
"That guy"
 
Umami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Baltimore
Umami works for a Paintball manufacturer
Umami supports our troops
Quote:
Originally Posted by EPAPressure View Post
Tax the rich so the poor can continue to pop out babies they can't afford and drive cars they can't afford. Nice logic.
They wouldn't be driving cars they couldn't afford if financial specialists weren't practicing predatory lending techniques on an under-educated segment of the populace. And they wouldn't pop so many babies out if they had access to consistent health care education and birth control.

But you're right, prescribing to a rigid social hierarchy and placing the blame at the feet of the unfortunate makes the world easier to think about.
__________________
Yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, man.
I am affiliated with Lurker Paintball. My opinions are my own and do not reflect those of LurkerPB.
Umami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 08:07 PM #6
Lazarusrat
 
 
Lazarusrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Lazarusrat owns a Planet Eclipse Lv1
Quote:
Originally Posted by EPAPressure View Post
What's your point. Why is that even relevant? They earned it. Boo ****ing hoo, you lost the game. Sucks to be a loser.

Tax the rich so the poor can continue to pop out babies they can't afford and drive cars they can't afford. Nice logic.
LOL... Hey man if you want to read more in to my post than what is there why stop here? You should accuse me of advocating pure socialism and a desire to reverse industrialism and return to a agrarian society as well...

But I do think its funny that you feel the need to defend the top 1% against any and all perceived threats.
__________________
"If you prepare for the zombie apocalypse, you'll be prepared for all hazards," CDC spokesman Dave Daigle told Reuters over the phone on Thursday.
Lazarusrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 09:11 PM #7
Matt.is.back2011
We are all Witness
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umami View Post
The president cannot create jobs outside of the government. The wealthy won't create jobs if there is no demand to merit increased employment, because there is no financial benefit to doing so.

But first, let's get one thing straight - the wealthy pay the same tax rate you and I do. The tax rate on the first $50,000 they make this year is the exact same tax rate I'll pay on the first $50,000 I make.

This is probably politically incorrect to say but **** it, I don't care. They have money, the country needs it, and I don't see the super-wealthy voluntarily investing in our nation's future. I honestly don't care how it comes about, but if the wealthy were actually interested in turning around the financial crisis, institutions with wealth would be materially re-investing in THIS country. To date, the government seems to be among the few entities willing to do that.

If they are incapable of re-investing United States Dollars with at least some regard to this nation's wellbeing, I see no reason they should be afforded to grow their wealth in offshore accounts and in financial transactions that contribute only as much to the economy as the paper they're written on. Scratch that, the computer bits they're stored in.

As a side note, one of the first things we can do to advance long term prosperity in this country is reform our draconian judicial system. We imprison a huge portion of our population - not only are these people who cannot work and be taxed, they're people we have to pay to incarcerate. Letting them live and work, increasing their access to education and creating a culture where these are worthy goals - that is unquestionably in our best interests.

A few things on your post.

1. The wealthy may not create 'new' jobs in the US based on demand, but if corporate tax rates and incentives were more competitive with countries like China, South America, and Mexico, companies could/would in-source current production facilities to the US to create jobs.

2. The super rich (1%) pay an effective tax rate lower than most Americans, but that does not change the fact that the president wishes to raise the income tax rate to 39%. Not only is taking money out of the economy a bad thing given today's economic climate, it also completely distracts us from the real issue here: no matter how high tax rates are, it has nothing to do with job creation in the United States, and thus should be a moot point for our president.

3. At no point in your response did I read anything that came close to an argument as to why raising taxes would benefit the US; it was more or less a rant on tax fairness. Which goes back to my original claim: liberals/democrats/progressives love to talk tax fairness, yet fail to articulate HOW raising taxes are going to help the United States. I really don't think there is a solid argument for it. Like I pointed out, pundits claim that "Clintonian tax policies resulted in the lowest unemployment in 50 years and a balanced budget," when actually I believe tax rates had little to do with either; low unemployment due to a booming tech driven economy resulted in much of the 1990's prosperity. It resulted in low unemployment, which resulted in fewer government citizens using social welfare programs, and more people paying taxes via income tax, sales tax, and property tax.

4. I have not considered the draconian angle of inprisonment of our citizens, but I would argue that 8.5% unemployment equals around 10.2 million unemployed Americans, long with another 5-10 million that are underemployed and/or stopped looking for work. To say add more workers to an already overcrowded labor market, especially ones that have criminal records, I do not believe solves our problem.
__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011

Last edited by Matt.is.back2011 : 01-31-2012 at 09:15 PM.
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 09:57 PM #8
Matt.is.back2011
We are all Witness
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukie91985
I remember in my old computer tech days, college didn't know what computer science was. I was able to get certifications without paying $40000+ to go to college and learn crap that didn't apply to my job. All the jobs for networking back then were filled fast, because it was so easy to get certified. College makes it harder for people to find a job, because you have to go through four years of expensive bullcrap to even get hired. My brother knew more than most college graduates, but the company that hired him paid him half of what he was supposed to make, simply because he did not have an associates or bachelor's degree. At least he had his own office.
Are you in the right thread??
__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 10:02 PM #9
Pail Ail (Banned)
Bill Watterson
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazarusrat View Post
Just as an FYI, and ONLY as an FYI,

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data by David S. Logan

The median AGI for the US in 2009 was $32,396... The Top 1% cut off AGI was $343,927.00

IF you taxed the Top 1% at a 90% rate (meaning the Federal Government took $0.90 for every $1 they made) they would STILL make more than 50% of the American population.
So?

What metrics do all of you for taxing the wealthy and a greater distribution of wealth use to inform your claim? Median income levels? What is it?
Pail Ail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 10:18 PM #10
SniperForce-Duffek
Delta Farce
 
SniperForce-Duffek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
SniperForce-Duffek plays in the APPA D5 division
If I was super rich, I wouldn't want to pay more taxes either, at least, not until the government learned how to spend wisely. With that said, I wouldn't be paying that extra taxe for a very, very long time.
__________________
Kick *** military apparel _ Mars Strategic

"May god have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't."
G.S.P
SniperForce-Duffek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 11:17 PM #11
tsbalr120
Goooonsberry
 
tsbalr120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Cowbutt, AR
tsbalr120 is an NCPA player
tsbalr120 is Legendary
What would stop the 1% from moving out of the US and building a big house in the Caribbean if we try to tax the **** outta them? Would they still get money from their corporations?

srs question
__________________
|NCPA: Razorbacks|
rip120
tsbalr120 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 11:21 PM #12
Pail Ail (Banned)
Bill Watterson
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsbalr120 View Post
What would stop the 1% from moving out of the US and building a big house in the Caribbean if we try to tax the **** outta them? Would they still get money from their corporations?

srs question
A few things, but before we could answer this question we need to know what you mean move out of the US. What are they moving?
Pail Ail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 11:26 PM #13
tsbalr120
Goooonsberry
 
tsbalr120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Cowbutt, AR
tsbalr120 is an NCPA player
tsbalr120 is Legendary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
A few things, but before we could answer this question we need to know what you mean move out of the US. What are they moving?
all personal items, family, that kinda stuff, I'm just wondering if they'd still get paid, I guess not if they're a CEO, unless they fly back and forth somehow, but what about pro investor?
__________________
|NCPA: Razorbacks|
rip120
tsbalr120 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 11:34 PM #14
Lazarusrat
 
 
Lazarusrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Lazarusrat owns a Planet Eclipse Lv1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
So?

What metrics do all of you for taxing the wealthy and a greater distribution of wealth use to inform your claim? Median income levels? What is it?
To be totally honest I'm not even sure what you are asking Pail.

What do I define as Median American Income? I am using the AGI of 50th percentile of the all files submitted to the IRS. Which puts 1/2 of the taxes filed higher than and 1/2 lower than this level (the biggest problem with this definition is the super poor who don't file at all don't show up, so it biases the median higher than it really is but I can live with that as the bias should be mininal).

What do I feel would be a better method of taxation? Flat tax and a National Sales Tax. The truth is people spend money purportionally* to how much they make. You make $50,000 you spend like it, you make $5,000,000 you also spend like you make $5,000,000. (*Of course you do have a lot of people who live outside their means but for the most part you get the idea)
__________________
"If you prepare for the zombie apocalypse, you'll be prepared for all hazards," CDC spokesman Dave Daigle told Reuters over the phone on Thursday.
Lazarusrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 11:36 PM #15
licence_to_kill
Bizarro World
 
licence_to_kill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: good ol' So Cal
licence_to_kill is reppin' sidebar 4 life
licence_to_kill has perfected Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
licence_to_kill has perfected Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
licence_to_kill has perfected Level 3 in PbNation Pursuit
licence_to_kill supports DLX Technology
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
So?

What metrics do all of you for taxing the wealthy and a greater distribution of wealth use to inform your claim? Median income levels? What is it?
he's obviously using median
__________________
SAN DIEGO
CHARGERS

"Most Ron Paul supporters are domestic terrorists and racist liberal nazis." - John Elway
licence_to_kill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 11:39 PM #16
Pail Ail (Banned)
Bill Watterson
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by licence_to_kill View Post
he's obviously using median
He is, but what about Umami, yourself, and others?

anyway, I've been wanting to post this:

http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=12882

"For years progressives have been pointing to the rather low median income data to suggest how poorly the American middle class is doing, as if the typical median income earner were a middle-aged family with two kids. They’re not, as the income data mixes together all sorts of different types of households.

The problem with claiming Americans are doing poorly, is that you end up weakening the case for extensive welfare benefits. For instance, what if the social benefits given to the “poor” exceeded the median income of the entire country? Wouldn’t that create a massive disincentive to work?"
Pail Ail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 11:47 PM #17
licence_to_kill
Bizarro World
 
licence_to_kill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: good ol' So Cal
licence_to_kill is reppin' sidebar 4 life
licence_to_kill has perfected Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
licence_to_kill has perfected Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
licence_to_kill has perfected Level 3 in PbNation Pursuit
licence_to_kill supports DLX Technology
Very few people favor just writing people checks. Most of the wealth distribution I'd like to see would be in the form of high quality education, high quality infrastructure, and universal health care.
__________________
SAN DIEGO
CHARGERS

"Most Ron Paul supporters are domestic terrorists and racist liberal nazis." - John Elway
licence_to_kill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 11:49 PM #18
Lazarusrat
 
 
Lazarusrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Lazarusrat owns a Planet Eclipse Lv1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pail Ail View Post
He is, but what about Umami, yourself, and others?

anyway, I've been wanting to post this:

http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=12882

"For years progressives have been pointing to the rather low median income data to suggest how poorly the American middle class is doing, as if the typical median income earner were a middle-aged family with two kids. They’re not, as the income data mixes together all sorts of different types of households.

The problem with claiming Americans are doing poorly, is that you end up weakening the case for extensive welfare benefits. For instance, what if the social benefits given to the “poor” exceeded the median income of the entire country? Wouldn’t that create a massive disincentive to work?"
I hate to say it but it already does... Lets face it we have created slaves to welfare state already. They exist and we all know it.

The only real saving grace is even if the economic benifit of welfare continues to increase it will still only provide a lower standard of living than most people would want to live at.
__________________
"If you prepare for the zombie apocalypse, you'll be prepared for all hazards," CDC spokesman Dave Daigle told Reuters over the phone on Thursday.
Lazarusrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2012, 03:49 AM #19
drgonzo
Half-cocked
 
drgonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
The real fallacy is that the 1% means just rich people and not wealthy corporations. But thankfully that messaging is changing as well. Ultimately taxing high-end income brings more of that high-end income back into the economy one way or another, either through government recapture and subsequent expenditure or through the high income earners spending it. That is the key to getting the economy moving btw, the money getting spent. Not the money getting invested, saved, etc.
__________________
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos | Droidtiles.com - NFC Tags for Android and mobile devices
drgonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2012, 09:19 AM #20
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by licence_to_kill View Post
Very few people favor just writing people checks. Most of the wealth distribution I'd like to see would be in the form of high quality education, high quality infrastructure, and universal health care.
I'm cool with the infrastructure. UHC sucks balls. High quality education sounds good, but what does that mean? Do we raise standards to a high level or do we keep them low so everyone can get through?

A third option is dividing based on performance. Throw the better performing kids into a higher echelon while the others are prepared for work in the service industry or taught a trade.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2012, 03:48 PM #21
kjjm4
Liberty or Death
 
kjjm4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Wind Ridge, PA
kjjm4 is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
kjjm4 has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
kjjm4 has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
...A third option is dividing based on performance. Throw the better performing kids into a higher echelon while the others are prepared for work in the service industry or taught a trade.
I like this idea, but I don't think it will ever fly. We have to make everybody feel special and tell them all they can go to college and grow up to be astronauts and/or the President of the United States. Otherwise we run the risk of hurting their feelings!
__________________
“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks."
-Thomas Jefferson
kjjm4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
Forum Jump