General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
teh_rapist
 
teh_rapist's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiah View Post
basically the fault of every democracy

the alternatives however aren't much better

1. United States is not a democracy. In fact, it is far less democratic than many western European countries.
2. US political system is far more sensitive than most democracies. One significant reason for this is the two-party system, which inevitably leads to knee-jerk reactions, thus making the process more sensitive.
__________________
Spare the rape - spoil the child.
Old 04-26-2011, 03:18 PM teh_rapist is offline  
Reply With Quote
#16  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Forever Domon
 
Forever Domon's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyramid View Post
the top fed income tax rate now is 35%. That's a 5%-10% cut right there.
since when do the richest people ever pay the top rate
Old 04-26-2011, 04:33 PM Forever Domon is offline  
Reply With Quote
#17  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forever Domon View Post
since when do the richest people ever pay the top rate

The richest don't, they will get the majority of their earnings through capital gains. But many do as the top federal tax rate starts at ~370k.
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
Old 04-26-2011, 04:45 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#18  

Gibonius
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forever Domon View Post
ok, the fixed percentages thing make sense. I didnt think of that aspect of it.

But would a 25-30% flat tax really be a tax cut for the rich?

You can calculate the numbers if you want, but if we want to bring in the same amount of money a flat tax will absolutely require a (substantially) increase on the majority of Americans and then a cut on the top end. Given the fact that the majority of our tax revenue comes from the top brackets, trying to make that up from the lower brackets means a BIG increase at the lower levels.

The whole thing is basically socially unconscionable.
Old 04-26-2011, 04:50 PM Gibonius is offline  
Reply With Quote
#19  

DarkHelmet
BIGHEAD BIGHEAD BIGHEAD BIGHEAD BIGHEAD BIGHEAD BIGHEAD BIGHEAD BIGHEAD BIGHEAD
 
DarkHelmet's Avatar
 
Some one has to pay for Niggers and old fucks that don't want to support themselves.
Old 04-26-2011, 04:54 PM DarkHelmet is offline  
Reply With Quote
#20  

Stereodude
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forever Domon View Post
But would a 25-30% flat tax really be a tax cut for the rich?
No, it'd be an increase (assuming you didn't allow deductions or loopholes).
Old 04-26-2011, 05:22 PM Stereodude is offline  
Reply With Quote
#21  

Stereodude
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post
You can calculate the numbers if you want, but if we want to bring in the same amount of money a flat tax will absolutely require a (substantially) increase on the majority of Americans and then a cut on the top end.
Everyone should have some skin in the game. The idea that almost 50% of the "taxpayers" in the US don't end up paying federal income taxes by the time they file and get refunds causes a serious problem since they have no interest in tax policy and are down for sacking those who actually pay income taxes so their handouts are bigger.

Robert Heinlein put it pretty well:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Heinlein
The America of my time line is a laboratory example of what can happen to democracies, what has eventually happened to all perfect democracies throughout all histories. A perfect democracy, a ‘warm body’ democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens… which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it… which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.’

‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome.
Old 04-26-2011, 05:29 PM Stereodude is offline  
Reply With Quote
#22  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Everyone should have some skin in the game. The idea that almost 50% of the "taxpayers" in the US don't end up paying federal income taxes by the time they file and get refunds causes a serious problem since they have no interest in tax policy and are down for sacking those who actually pay income taxes so their handouts are bigger.

Their handouts, called the EITC, is worth a maximum of $5,666 for a family with three or more children making less than 48k filing jointly. $5600 doesn't go very far with three kids so it's not like they are getting rich off their meager tax credit and you don't get the EITC unless you earn by working. A single person with no kids has to earn less than $13k per year to qualify and they get a whopping $450.

The average income of those not paying taxes (and supposedly living high on the hog) is $15k per year.

also, how can they both have no interest in tax policy and be for "sacking those who actually pay income taxes so that their "handouts" are larger"?

And lol, Heinlein's quote there makes the same absurd argument that you are trying to: that somehow the poorest and least powerful are actually the ones with all the power and the powerful wealthy people at the top are blameless for the state of the nation they run. It's all those poor powerless people who keep fucking things up by working their three jobs, getting their meager tax credits and occasionally voting.
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
Old 04-26-2011, 06:15 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#23  

Gibonius
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Everyone should have some skin in the game. The idea that almost 50% of the "taxpayers" in the US don't end up paying federal income taxes by the time they file and get refunds causes a serious problem since they have no interest in tax policy and are down for sacking those who actually pay income taxes so their handouts are bigger.

Robert Heinlein put it pretty well:

Frankly it's stupid to pretend that the poor have disproportionate political sway. They have almost NO voice in government, and our economic policies over the last 30 years should be pretty clear evidence of that. Our country is becoming increasingly governed for the well off, by the well off. They institute enough social programs to assuage liberal guilt, but the poor barely vote anyway and don't have the resources to make a voice for themselves.

Our most expensive entitlement programs are paying out to everyone, note. Medicare and Social Security pay out to every old fuck out there, not just poor people. And old people do vote.


Instead of trying to get blood out of turnips by finding some way to tax the poor ("getting them involved in government"), we should be focusing on increasing economic growth for the middle percentiles of our economy, rather than continuing this practice of making things better and better for the well-off.
Old 04-26-2011, 06:24 PM Gibonius is offline  
Reply With Quote
#24  

Stereodude
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
I never said the poor have a disproportionate political sway. What I said is they don't have a vested interest in gov't fiscal policy because they're not funding the system. They're collecting from the system. They will not vote for people who are going to end their handouts. On top of that, there is an orchestrated effort by some of the people in the gov't to push the amount of people collecting from the system to >50% so they're guaranteed perpetual power by creating a voting majority that is a subservient underclass of citizens who rely on the gov't to provide for them.

That was the point of the Heinlein's quote. People won't vote in the country's best interest, but in their own best interest and that will destroy a country. It's not an absurd argument. The US has a very serious spending problem. Spending across the board needs to be cut significantly, but the politicians won't seriously touch spending because they all fear for their re-election because cutting spending and reducing social programs is political suicide.

Last edited by Stereodude; 04-26-2011 at 08:40 PM..
Old 04-26-2011, 08:33 PM Stereodude is offline  
Reply With Quote
#25  

Forever Domon
 
Forever Domon's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
I never said the poor have a disproportionate political sway. What I said is they don't have a vested interest in gov't fiscal policy because they're not funding the system. They're collecting from the system. They will not vote for people who are going to end their handouts. On top of that, there is an orchestrated effort by some of the people in the gov't to push the amount of people collecting from the system to >50% so they're guaranteed perpetual power by creating a voting majority that is a subservient underclass of citizens who rely on the gov't to provide for them.

That was the point of the Heinlein's quote. People won't vote in the country's best interest, but in their own best interest and that will destroy a country. It's not an absurd argument. The US has a very serious spending problem. Spending across the board needs to be cut significantly, but the politicians won't seriously touch spending because they all fear for their re-election because cutting spending and reducing social programs is political suicide.
you think poor people vote
Old 04-26-2011, 08:41 PM Forever Domon is offline  
Reply With Quote
#26  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
There is no orchestrated effort to push people onto public assistance by those in the government. That is total glenn beck BS conspiracy theory retardation.

You know who pushes people onto public assistance? Corporations like walmart that don't pay living wages or decent benefits to their employees. Corporations that ship their former living wage jobs overseas so they can pay workers pennies. Unemployment and underemployment push people onto public assistance. Taking away teachers pay, benefits and pensions pushes them on public assistance. Necessity is what drives people to public assistance, not democrats.

And the people on public assistance DONT WANT TO BE THERE. You can make more money working for minimum wage at mcdonalds than you can on public assistance. Poor people are not living it up on the pennies in assistance we give them.

The poor are not the ones "collecting" from our system. Can we put that stupid idea to bed right now? The people with ALL THE DAMN MONEY AND POWER are the ones doing all the collecting. I don't see how that could be any more obvious. Then they turn around and blame the people with no money or power for all the woes of the nation and for some reason millions of people like you are still willing believe them.

It's real easy to think that all poor people are poor because they are lazy bums with no work ethic. Then it almost seems like the world is fair and ordered appropriately. Unfortunately the world is not fair and a lot of those poor people work harder than you do. In fact, statistically speaking, a lot of the people who go around bitching about poor people are the very poor people they are bitching about. And that's how we get people to vote against their own best interest.
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
Old 04-26-2011, 09:08 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#27  

Forever Domon
 
Forever Domon's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyramid View Post
There is no orchestrated effort to push people onto public assistance by those in the government. That is total glenn beck BS conspiracy theory retardation.

You know who pushes people onto public assistance? Corporations like walmart that don't pay living wages or decent benefits to their employees. Corporations that ship their former living wage jobs overseas so they can pay workers pennies. Unemployment and underemployment push people onto public assistance. Taking away teachers pay, benefits and pensions pushes them on public assistance. Necessity is what drives people to public assistance, not democrats.

And the people on public assistance DONT WANT TO BE THERE. You can make more money working for minimum wage at mcdonalds than you can on public assistance. Poor people are not living it up on the pennies in assistance we give them.

The poor are not the ones "collecting" from our system. Can we put that stupid idea to bed right now? The people with ALL THE DAMN MONEY AND POWER are the ones doing all the collecting. I don't see how that could be any more obvious. Then they turn around and blame the people with no money or power for all the woes of the nation and for some reason millions of people like you are still willing believe them.

It's real easy to think that all poor people are poor because they are lazy bums with no work ethic. Then it almost seems like the world is fair and ordered appropriately. Unfortunately the world is not fair and a lot of those poor people work harder than you do. In fact, statistically speaking, a lot of the people who go around bitching about poor people are the very poor people they are bitching about. And that's how we get people to vote against their own best interest.
explain all the people who choose to stay on unemployment rather than getting a job, because they job would pay less then.
Old 04-26-2011, 09:10 PM Forever Domon is offline  
Reply With Quote
#28  

Stereodude
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forever Domon View Post
you think poor people vote
They sure do when they're rounded up and bussed to the polling places and then given stuff free when they're done.
Old 04-26-2011, 09:24 PM Stereodude is offline  
Reply With Quote
#29  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forever Domon View Post
explain all the people who choose to stay on unemployment rather than getting a job, because they job would pay less then.

unemployment is insurance, not welfare. why should you be forced to waste your time and money taking a job that will not pay your bills just so someone else can feel better about you being off of the unemployment insurance that you paid into?

also, if you are getting at or near the max unemployment benefit ($400 a week IIRC) based on your previous salary, taking a much lower paying job will also reset your unemployment benefit so when you lose that mcjob you can be doubly screwed.

If you have mouths to feed that is simply unacceptable.
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street

Last edited by pyramid; 04-26-2011 at 09:58 PM..
Old 04-26-2011, 09:28 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#30  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:02 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.