Tax the Rich is a common thread with Donks

[Skjellyfetti]

"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

-Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, 1776

[death dealer]

Yeah, they got that way by being lazy!! Those lazy rich people! Just laying around all day picking money bags off their money tree.

And the rich people they are talking about aren't the mega rich. They are talking about me, and my ilk. The guy busting it everyday, keeping a business going, providing a good job to 15 people, and myself. Stimulating the economy the real way, with private income that is then spent in my community among suppliers, retailers, etc. You know, the guys who are riding the backs of the poor. The poor who don't pay any **** taxes. Meanwhile, I'm paying more than a third of every dollar I make to the feds, not to mention state and local taxes. And I'm not looking for a break, I'm happy to do my part. I just don't know how much more of the load I should have to carry. Maybe some of these poor folks should have to put in a buck or two, instead of nada. But I'm riding their backs.


Oh, and I know, they're poor right? They shouldn't have to contribute, they already are at their limits just getting by. Well, every able bodied soul in this nation should have some skin in the game. You can't value anything you didn't have a part in creating. It just doesn't work that way. And, with the exception of those folks struck with severe illness or mentally challenged, I never met an able bodied sound minded poor person who wasn't just about where they deserved to be based on the amount of effort they put forth to get there.

Three generations ago, my great-grandfather was a share cropper in SE Georgia. He sent his son to trade school so he could afford to send his son to college, so that his son could go to graduate school. Thus here I am. Not a one of them ever took a dollar from the govt. that they didn't work an honest hour in return. Neither have I. That's how it's supposed to work. I'm the outcome of all that hard work, and I'm proud to be. I'm raising my kids the same way. They understand, or will when old enough, that nothing of worth is given freely, or without a worthy amount of effort put in to earn it. That is what's wrong with or country all the way from the corporate board rooms down to the unemployment lines.

If you don't like it here, you can always leave.

Ditto buttfuck.

[death dealer]

"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

-Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, 1776

Ah, a favorite quote of the "tax the rich" crowd. I don't have a problem with a progressive tax. I think I have said that at least a dozen times in the past. I am actually far more liberal with govt. assistance to the poor than you might think (different thread). What I have a problem with is an unfairly progressive tax that sets what is called rich as far too low, and allows almost half of the people in this country pay basically nothing.

I make a good living, I'm not rich. But I am being portrayed as such. The vast majority of my income comes from my labor. I don't live off of dividends from stock or interest from a trust fund. I get mine from working my ass off at something not every joe blow off the street can do or is willing to do because it is hard and takes long hours of effort and expense to be able to do. I, therefore, do not feel that it is in any way shape or form a good thing that I, and I am speaking for all the individuals like me, be sanctioned for my willingness to put forth said effort by a much higher percentage of taxation simply because that effort results in a good living for me and my family. I should be rewarded and encouraged, because it is me and those like me that are going to get us out of this mess by rebuilding our economy. Punish us too much and we won't be as productive, or we'll find ways to hide our income because we are being unfairly taxed. Either way, you dampen the economic benefits we can provide. That's how it works here in the real world. Don't like it? Then you need to find a planet or reality system where the rules of human nature are different, because wishing they were here in this reality will not make it so. Neither can you force it to be so. Basically I have a problem with the characterization that I'm loafing, or getting something I don't deserve by getting a break from the burdensome taxes the Democrats want to place on me.

As to someone making 30x more than me paying less in taxes? Well that's not fair either, but that's not what this thread was really about now was it? It's about the fact that this administration and congress want to characterize myself and my peers as somehow not carrying our share of the water, and that we should be punished for our lack of committment to the common cause. That is such horseshit. That's all I'm saying. Maybe the Forbes, the Rockefellers, etc. could stand to drop a few more coins in the till, but I'm getting close to being tapped down here at my end of the upper 5%. (and I have a probelm with that as well. The very idea that I am in the top 5% of earners baffles me. I know what I make and the path I took to get here. I can tell you, I'm not special. I'm smarter than your average bear, but I use a third of my intellect to get here. I just followed a simple recipe. I worked hard. I didn't get lucky or fall backwards into some pot of gold. I just looked around me, saw a guy I thought looked like he led a pretty good life, figured out what I had to do to be like him, and did it. It wasn't easy, but is wasn't rocket science. Rocket science didn't pay as well, and was much harder to study for. But my point is, if I can do it, anyone can. And the fact that they chose not to is their problem, not mine. Tough shit for them.)

[Skjellyfetti]

As to someone making 30x more than me paying less in taxes? Well that's not fair either, but that's not what this thread was really about now was it? It's about the fact that this administration and congress want to characterize myself and my peers as somehow not carrying our share of the water, and that we should be punished for our lack of committment to the common cause. That is such horseshit. That's all I'm saying. Maybe the Forbes, the Rockefellers, etc. could stand to drop a few more coins in the till, but I'm getting close to being tapped down here at my end of the upper 5%. (and I have a probelm with that as well. The very idea that I am in the top 5% of earners baffles me. I know what I make and the path I took to get here. I can tell you, I'm not special. I'm smarter than your average bear, but I use a third of my intellect to get here. I just followed a simple recipe. I worked hard. I didn't get lucky or fall backwards into some pot of gold. I just looked around me, saw a guy I thought looked like he led a pretty good life, figured out what I had to do to be like him, and did it. It wasn't easy, but is wasn't rocket science. Rocket science didn't pay as well, and was much harder to study for. But my point is, if I can do it, anyone can. And the fact that they chose not to is their problem, not mine. Tough **** for them.)

I don't think you're rich.

When I say "tax the rich" or whatever... I'm talking about people making a lot more than you (not that I know how much you make... but, more than the average dentist).

I make a good living, I'm not rich. But I am being portrayed as such.

I didn't mean to portray you as rich if I did somehow. I don't think I was ever talking about you, though.

[quote="death dealer"As to someone making 30x more than me paying less in taxes? Well that's not fair either, but that's not what this thread was really about now was it?[/quote]

I think that's what this thread is precisely about. "Tax the Rich is a common thread with Donks"

[death dealer]

As to someone making 30x more than me paying less in taxes? Well that's not fair either, but that's not what this thread was really about now was it? It's about the fact that this administration and congress want to characterize myself and my peers as somehow not carrying our share of the water, and that we should be punished for our lack of committment to the common cause. That is such horseshit. That's all I'm saying. Maybe the Forbes, the Rockefellers, etc. could stand to drop a few more coins in the till, but I'm getting close to being tapped down here at my end of the upper 5%. (and I have a probelm with that as well. The very idea that I am in the top 5% of earners baffles me. I know what I make and the path I took to get here. I can tell you, I'm not special. I'm smarter than your average bear, but I use a third of my intellect to get here. I just followed a simple recipe. I worked hard. I didn't get lucky or fall backwards into some pot of gold. I just looked around me, saw a guy I thought looked like he led a pretty good life, figured out what I had to do to be like him, and did it. It wasn't easy, but is wasn't rocket science. Rocket science didn't pay as well, and was much harder to study for. But my point is, if I can do it, anyone can. And the fact that they chose not to is their problem, not mine. Tough **** for them.)

I don't think you're rich.

When I say "tax the rich" or whatever... I'm talking about people making a lot more than you (not that I know how much you make... but, more than the average dentist).

I make a good living, I'm not rich. But I am being portrayed as such.

I didn't mean to portray you as rich if I did somehow. I don't think I was ever talking about you, though.

[quote="death dealer"As to someone making 30x more than me paying less in taxes? Well that's not fair either, but that's not what this thread was really about now was it?

That's cool. I wasn't exactly talking about you either, as much as I was referring to the "anyone making over $250,000 a year is rich" crowd. I probably do a little better than your average dentist, but I also own a development company too. (which is making absolutely nothing right now by the way, but am I getting the equivalent tax break for doing badly as the tax bill when I do well? Hell no! How's that fair? If I have to pay more when I do well, I should get some sort of deduction when I lose money. But I'm sure Houndawg can explain to me why that is evil and stupid of me.) But my practice has been a work in progress and again, I simply looked around the country, found a guy who was doing very well for a dentist, and applied lessons learned from his example to my own, and badda bing, badda bang I'm where I'd like to be at this juncture in the game. Not necessarily content, you can always improve, but happy with my progress so far.

But again, how can it be smart fiscal policy to enact laws that dampen and even discourage me from being more aggressive, and making more investments in my business? Shouldn't they be encouraging me to spend money right now, instead of telling how much more they are going to tax me and how much less I'm gonna have to spend next year? I'd love to add on to my building and do some needed renovations. They won't necessarily make me money, in fact probably won't. But they are things I want to do. I'm just holding off because I'm waiting to see where the taxes shake out. That's money that could be working it's way though our local economy, but it's sitting in my bank account gathering dust thanks to Obama and Pelosi. That's a shame.

And again, I still think it's crazy to expect me to pay more than I already do, and not also expect the rest of the income groups below me to pick up some of the tab. Wanna talk about unsustainable? That fits the bill very nicely.

[death dealer]

I don't think you're rich.

When I say "tax the rich" or whatever... I'm talking about people making a lot more than you (not that I know how much you make... but, more than the average dentist).



I didn't mean to portray you as rich if I did somehow. I don't think I was ever talking about you, though.

That's cool. I wasn't exactly talking about you either, as much as I was referring to the "anyone making over $250,000 a year is rich" crowd. I probably do a little better than your average dentist, but I also own a development company too. (which is making absolutely nothing right now by the way, but am I getting the equivalent tax break for doing badly as the tax bill when I do well? Hell no! How's that fair? If I have to pay more when I do well, I should get some sort of deduction when I lose money. But I'm sure Houndawg can explain to me why that is evil and stupid of me.) But my practice has been a work in progress and again, I simply looked around the country, found a guy who was doing very well for a dentist, and applied lessons learned from his example to my own, and badda bing, badda bang I'm where I'd like to be at this juncture in the game. Not necessarily content, you can always improve, but happy with my progress so far.

But again, how can it be smart fiscal policy to enact laws that dampen and even discourage me from being more aggressive, and making more investments in my business? Shouldn't they be encouraging me to spend money right now, instead of telling how much more they are going to tax me and how much less I'm gonna have to spend next year? I'd love to add on to my building and do some needed renovations. They won't necessarily make me money, in fact probably won't. But they are things I want to do. I'm just holding off because I'm waiting to see where the taxes shake out. That's money that could be working it's way though our local economy, but it's sitting in my bank account gathering dust thanks to Obama and Pelosi. That's a shame.

And again, I still think it's crazy to expect me to pay more than I already do, and not also expect the rest of the income groups below me to pick up some of the tab. Wanna talk about unsustainable? That fits the bill very nicely

[clenz]

A lot of talk, not a lot of solutions thrown out there.


Put out your tax bracket you want to see.

If you make this much you pay this much, etc...

If everyone is paying 15% of their income, why is that a problem?

[Skjellyfetti]

If everyone is paying 15% of their income, why is that a problem?

15% from someone working a minimum wage job is crippling.

And I'll repost this since Adam Smith said it better than I can:
"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess....
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

[death dealer]

The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich.

OK. That sounds like a pretty good definition. If the principle expenses in your life are vanities and luxuries then you are rich. That, I think, will dramatically reduce the number of people on this adminstrations list of victims. I can tell you that I do not fall into that category. I drive an 8 year old truck, mainly because they don't make it anymore, so I can't replace it with a new one, and I love it, so I'm keeping the one I have until is falls apart. I live in a relatively modest home. It's nice, but much less than I could afford. I do travel a lot, and I drink some pretty pricey beers. Oh, and I have a lakehouse and boat, but they are paid for, so they don't really cost me much. The majority of my expenses are college funds, wedding funds, food, kids clothes, and private school tuition (and no, this isn't a luxury. I live in S.C., it's a necessity.). So cool, I don't have to pay anymore in taxes!!

[89Hen]

Agreed DD. I would define a luxury as taking an extended time off work and biking across Mexico, or something like that.

[YoUDeeMan]

Agreed DD. I would define a luxury as taking an extended time off work and biking across Mexico, or something like that.

I'm sure jellybean is earning his keep by picking fruit along the way and writing a quarterly check for the taxes.

[clenz]

If everyone is paying 15% of their income, why is that a problem?

15% from someone working a minimum wage job is crippling.

And I'll repost this since Adam Smith said it better than I can:
"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess....
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

What % wouldn't be crippling at that point?

Doing quick math for the state of Iowa:
Min. wage is $7.25x40 hoursx51 weeks (I'll say that the person gets a week off, it might be 2 I don't know)

That is $14,790 a year. That means at 15% that is $2,218.5 taken out of their pay.

That leaves $12,571.5 in net pay before any expenses. Now, I agree that is pretty damn tough to live on. However, what %, even 0%, doesn't make it really damn hard to live on making minimum wage?


What would you like to do? Raise minimum wage again? That only makes it harder for a lot of businessess, especially in the state of Iowa where a lot of the businesses are locally owned, to pay their employees that they already have...let alone add more staff.


We can't not tax those who are "poor".

Here, you like to pull quotes. Here is one for you to ponder

“You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation on. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.” - Dr. Adrian Rogers

[Gil Dobie]

Charge everyone 15%, and anyone making min wage gets a pass.

[TheDancinMonarch]

As I have said before we must first define rich. Then we can decide how much we must take to pay for our ever-increasing in size government. Is Lebron James rich? I'd say yes. But his entire new contract would only pay for .0000785% of last years DEFICIT. I don't think that taxing the "rich", whoever they may be, is going to solve the problem because there are not enough "rich" to pay the bill for the endless largesse that flows from Washington. Just do the math.

[houndawg]

That's cool. I wasn't exactly talking about you either, as much as I was referring to the "anyone making over $250,000 a year is rich" crowd. I probably do a little better than your average dentist, but I also own a development company too. (which is making absolutely nothing right now by the way, but am I getting the equivalent tax break for doing badly as the tax bill when I do well? Hell no! How's that fair? If I have to pay more when I do well, I should get some sort of deduction when I lose money. But I'm sure Houndawg can explain to me why that is evil and stupid of me.) But my practice has been a work in progress and again, I simply looked around the country, found a guy who was doing very well for a dentist, and applied lessons learned from his example to my own, and badda bing, badda bang I'm where I'd like to be at this juncture in the game. Not necessarily content, you can always improve, but happy with my progress so far.

But again, how can it be smart fiscal policy to enact laws that dampen and even discourage me from being more aggressive, and making more investments in my business? Shouldn't they be encouraging me to spend money right now, instead of telling how much more they are going to tax me and how much less I'm gonna have to spend next year? I'd love to add on to my building and do some needed renovations. They won't necessarily make me money, in fact probably won't. But they are things I want to do. I'm just holding off because I'm waiting to see where the taxes shake out. That's money that could be working it's way though our local economy, but it's sitting in my bank account gathering dust thanks to Obama and Pelosi. That's a shame.

And again, I still think it's crazy to expect me to pay more than I already do, and not also expect the rest of the income groups below me to pick up some of the tab. Wanna talk about unsustainable? That fits the bill very nicely.

Oh, that ol' houndawg, he's such a meanie.


Actually you'd be surprised at the similarities in our positions, right down to paid-for cottage on the lake. New Hampshire in our case.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

If everyone is paying 15% of their income, why is that a problem?

15% from someone working a minimum wage job is crippling.

If they dont like it, they can make more money.


Its really their choice.......anything else is just excuses.

[kalm]

Good rants DD, and if you'll refer back to my post I clearly wasn't talking about people like you or me, and I gave my full consent to cut entitlements. I simply was attacking the conk meme that the "producers are overtaxed. Well if you're a producer, than a hedge manager making in the 10's of billions annually must really be a producer. The top one percent and corporations have never enjoyed taxes this low for an extended period of time. And if the Bush tax cuts were extended, the revenue from the top 1% alone would equal $100 billion. So I'm wondering where all of the jobs and growth are that they were supposed to create?

(hint: Perpetual growth doesn't exist anywhere in nature)

As for which side is worse, that's debateable too:

Perhaps the last best hope of Democrats to pass legislation aimed at creating jobs before the November elections seemed to be crumbling in the Senate on Wednesday as Republicans signaled that they would block a bill to expand government lending programs and grant an array of tax breaks to small businesses.

“Small businesses are the engine of private sector job creation, and the president will fight against any attempts by the partisan minority to block progress on legislation that helps our economic recovery,” a spokeswoman, Amy Brundage, said.

Senator Mary L. Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana and chairwoman of the small-business committee, who is a main author of the legislation, said the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, seemed intent on denying Mr. Obama and the Democrats a chance to pump up the economy ahead of the midterm elections.

“I think Senator McConnell knows and believes this bill could actually create millions of jobs and doesn’t want to give the president and Democrats credit for doing what we do, which is standing up for the middle class,” Ms. Landrieu said.

“If Democrats don’t stand for small business, I don’t know what we stand for,” she added. “I don’t want to go into this election standing for Wall Street and big business.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/po ... 2cong.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of course if you ask most small business owners I know they will disagree with last statement. And Democrats have become really in good in the last several years of standing up for big business, just like the Republicans.

[death dealer]

kyjelly...you just don't get it...

dd id not say a word about people making lots more than him getting off...he's not worried about them...

But you have an unhealthy fixation on people making more than you....which is most of this country...

You need help...

I don't care how much people make...the taxation system that allows a good 40% plus (I forgot the exact number) to pay NOTHING is just unfair...as dd said, if you go no skin in the game...

Damn straight, the poor should be paying taxes...

The poor should be paying, in labor if they don't have money, just like my daddy did in the CCC.

Of course, Exxon should be paying too, but that's different, right, Colonel?

Both should be paying their share. You are right.

[YoUDeeMan]

And Democrats have become really in good in the last several years of standing up for big business, just like the Republicans.

What do you mean in the last few years? It has always been that way..always will be.

Your boy FDR got in bed with the wealthy...perhaps you'll recognize who benefitted from his projects for the "people".

"In making the same crossing, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was on a quest of his own. He aimed to appropriate as a tangible symbol of the New Deal, his Democratic administration’s economic recovery program, a great dam on the Colorado River conceived and launched by Republicans.

To that end he had resolved to dedicate this landmark of human achievement in person, at a ceremony scheduled for the coming day. He would speak directly to a crowd of ten thousand from a shaded podium beside the monumental work while his words were carried across the land on a nationwide radio hookup.

FDR worked long past midnight, laying down his words on yellow lined tablets in his angular longhand. This was his second full draft, the first having been unanimously panned earlier that evening by a review chorus composed of Interior Secretary Harold Ickes, Federal Reserve Chairman Marriner Eccles (whose own Utah construction company had helped build the dam)..."

- Colossus: Hoover Dam and the Making of the American Century
Michael Hiltzik

Nothing like a President's speech to the people being red marked by a Fed Reserve Chairman...whose company happened to build the dam.

[death dealer]

Good rants DD, and if you'll refer back to my post I clearly wasn't talking about people like you or me, and I gave my full consent to cut entitlements. I simply was attacking the conk meme that the "producers are overtaxed. Well if you're a producer, than a hedge manager making in the 10's of billions annually must really be a producer. The top one percent and corporations have never enjoyed taxes this low for an extended period of time. And if the Bush tax cuts were extended, the revenue from the top 1% alone would equal $100 billion. So I'm wondering where all of the jobs and growth are that they were supposed to create?

(hint: Perpetual growth doesn't exist anywhere in nature)

I've been saying this for years. I remember hearing an economist on NPR a few years ago claiming that we had entered a new era where recessions and downturns were a thing of the past. That this new growth would go on perpetually. I knew then and there that we were in for a doozy of a recession. I literally turned to my wife and said, "You just heard the first death groan of this growth cycle." I wish I had listened to myself and put all my investments into cash. I'd be rich Biotch!

[death dealer]

As for which side is worse, that's debateable too:

Perhaps the last best hope of Democrats to pass legislation aimed at creating jobs before the November elections seemed to be crumbling in the Senate on Wednesday as Republicans signaled that they would block a bill to expand government lending programs and grant an array of tax breaks to small businesses.

“Small businesses are the engine of private sector job creation, and the president will fight against any attempts by the partisan minority to block progress on legislation that helps our economic recovery,” a spokeswoman, Amy Brundage, said.

Senator Mary L. Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana and chairwoman of the small-business committee, who is a main author of the legislation, said the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, seemed intent on denying Mr. Obama and the Democrats a chance to pump up the economy ahead of the midterm elections.

“I think Senator McConnell knows and believes this bill could actually create millions of jobs and doesn’t want to give the president and Democrats credit for doing what we do, which is standing up for the middle class,” Ms. Landrieu said.

“If Democrats don’t stand for small business, I don’t know what we stand for,” she added. “I don’t want to go into this election standing for Wall Street and big business.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/po ... 2cong.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of course if you ask most small business owners I know they will disagree with last statement. And Democrats have become really in good in the last several years of standing up for big business, just like the Republicans.

I saw a similar article about this somewhere. Can't remeber where, but I remember being mad as hell about it when I read it! I'm still fuming about it. These sorry fuckers play their political games, jockeying for advantage, while the rest of the country suffers. It's Nero on a grand scale. The sad part is we elected all these jack-legged sons of bitches!